I can try!

Perhaps this concept is easier to digest if we 'zoom out' a little bit and focus more on how appealing it is to move up multiple spots in the payout structure and the idea of risk vs reward.

Let's say we're playing a tournament w/ three people left. We have two potential payout structures, 50-30-20 (top heavy) and 40-30-20 (flat). If we bust now, we are guaranteed 20% of the prize pool regardless of the payout structure we use.

If we move up one spot in either structure we 'acquire' 10% more of the prize pool than we are currently entitled to (10%).

If we secure this pay jump (2nd place) and then move up (win the tournament) we acquire another 20% (50-30) of the prize pool in the more top-heavy structure and 10% (40-30) more of the prize pool in the flat structure.

Put simply, the top-heavy payout structure is going to allow us to take on risk (see, the threshold for making a +$EV play is lower) because the 'penalty' for busting third isn't as severe when accumulating chips makes it more likely we secure this 20% difference between 1st and 2nd (we get 1st place more often).

However, in the flat payout structure, since we acquire the same (or ~the same) % of the prize pool moving from [current position] to [current position + 1] as we do when we move from [current position + 1] to [current position + 2] the importance of securing the immediate ladder increases in priority since there is less reward (more risk, higher threshold to make a +$EV play) in this structure in moving up two places and securing 1st place.

Hope this helps!

100% of the time in both cases, even with the price it's not going to be close to +$EV versus what I perceive to be their 4b jamming range pre or 2b jamming range on the flop after peeling the 3b in this spot