Being a newly-minted CFI-G, and having directly witnessed a fatal "auger" prior to this at a contest, running to the wreck only to see there was nothing I could do for the decapitated pilot (tree trunk/canopy did this), in my post-traumatic state of mind I do have a pretty clear idea of what I would tell my student.

I would want my student to consider all available factors. I would want them to understand, and experience, what it really means to circle low. I would want them to understand the different sight picture vs. circling up high, and how it can induce the illusions of flying faster than they really are. And I would want them to realize the risk vs. the alternatives.

And if they are close to an airport (as was the case at the contest), I would want them to seriously consider if it is really worth circling in the airport pattern at 300 feet to save a few minutes for a relight, vs. the potential for disaster due to an unforeseeable tail gust or distraction.

And if they find themselves, for whatever reason, over inhospitable terrain, then yes maybe a low-altitude save could be worth considering. Of course again it is a matter of judgment. Hopefully he got it when practicing with the XC flight instructor.

A low-altitude save should be a rare occurrence and my student should be able to handle it competently after they become cross-country proficient. But it should never become a habit. If it is, then something is off in their judgment.

The above fatal pilot (a highly-experienced record holder) had a clear angle on final to land right next to the tow plane. Instead he threw that opportunity away to initiate a turn, down low towards a tree line, after crossing the runway threshold. He did not make it to 180 degrees into the turn before stalling and dropping the left wing, auguring into the tree line.

Yes it really does matter how a sailplane pilot thinks. And he really should be thinking about the mess he leaves behind when he doesn't.