Decisions that people make in the "rescuing someone from the tracks in front of a fast approaching train" scenario cannot, in my humble opinion, be productively analyzed in the context of our ordinary lives. The situation is simply too extraordinary, and I'm not even sure "judgment" in the normal sense is a term that can be usefully applied to many folks in this situation.

Take all of your fears, drives, and insecurities, add your unreliable risk-assessing abilities (common to most humans) and an amount of adrenaline that many of us will never experience, and cram them into the space of seconds in the face of certain death, in front of an audience. I simply don't see the use of second-guessing a decision made under those circumstances.

For example, it could well be that someone "freezes" in motion, unable to discontinue the effort, compelled by adrenaline and emotion and whatever else. I've experienced this myself in far less serious situations.

Or it could be Mr. Scholz was in complete control of his faculties, and made a ordered, rational decision to keep up the effort at all costs. We'll never know.

It's fun to think about what I might do, but I have no way to relate to the actions of someone else. It's just too complicated.