primian

I think nwolf makes a point that variance could/should play into the decision. Though, I also agree with Mr. Sulsky's note on magnitude of variance is likely not as large as previously assumed. There is a value to considered when thinking about variance in gameplay.  Managing risk always costs money. 

It if takes a larger bankroll to employ a higher variance style, there is value lost in maintaining risk. Coming from a business background... that money could be used for other things and has intrinsic value of growth (like putting money is stable stocks or treasuries). So, a high variance strategy needs to generate enough EV over time that beats the additional amount of bankroll times the percentage gain I could generate doing other things (like... generating 15% returns in options trading or 10% in more passive investments). 

I'd caution the "end of day" or dinner break piece. I've always found in live tourney's there is at least 1 other guy (the guy in the pot with you) trying to make the same play. I've ended up in some real metathinking spots SB vs BB or Button vs BB where I ended up calling with 2nd pair to an odd river bluff.