My brother is a pretty good player, but he is quick to 'chop'. In fact I mock him all the time for it, but it really depends on what your comfort level is. At a certain point it is not desirable to take exchange risk for reward. Inevitably whenever you wish to get out of the game, you are going to have to take a discounted rate. In poker, if the final 2 guys chop due to the highly top-heavy prize structure, you are obviously going to take some sort of discount.
In fact, poker tournaments in general have the concept of chip devaluation, which is fairly similar to how money works in real life.
Also, diversification is a decent passive strategy, but not one that you'd take if you were intent on making substantial gains.
As Warren Buffet says, "no one ever got rich on their seventh best bet."
The question is, could you stop working and retain your sanity? I wonder about people who achieve success too early in life--they have many years ahead of them and much to learn, and wealth in some ways may be a hindrance.
I made my first million when I was 22, and though it didn't keep me from working ever again, it basically paid for all of the things I needed. Anything beyond that has been incremental gains. It's a lifestyle changing amount of money.
do 8-10% and you're talking serious money for no work.
I know people that tell me they can not live on less than 100,000 a year. If i could I would send them to ethiopoia, one way.
But anyway you should always produce (See pg essays). So the thing about money is not to solve the problem now, but to be able to have enough resources so you can have more freedom on deciding what to work on. If I am lucky, I should be able to work until I die.
I'm a swing for the fences type of guy, but I'd have a hard time passing up any offer that hit my minimum number. That's why I think investors should let founders of companies take money off the table at a certain point. It gives them more desire to go for the big score, knowing that even if they fail, they're still set.