Well 2G the answer to your question of "what is the percieced benefit" for taking these type of risks, is just that, LIFE. Some of us are not content to just float around or live life in complete perceived safety. We are not afraid to take a calculate, repeat calculated risk when necessary to acomplish a greater goal. Yes it may only be a spot or two higher on the back page of the contest results, or it may be making it ten more miles in a 1-26 on a diamond goal flight. Those "goals" may be miniscule or meaningless within other peoples paradigm. But its the guy in the cockpit who chooses whats meaningfull or whats worth the "risk".

As to the consequences of those choices, everyone has to pay the piper. I worry less about the guy who is stretching his experience level in an intelligent fashion, than I do about the guy who floats around at the home field who hasnt learned a single new aspect of the sport in the last ten years of his flying primarily due to not wanting to stretch out of a confort zone. We all know countless guys who have never ever gone xc or made an outlanding.That guy who refuses to grow has in my opinion a higher potential for disaster, he hasnt had to make critical decisions in decades and when confronted with an unexpected event he's frozen. I've seen that a few times also myself with disasterous results.

My earlier post also has bearing on this, being what is perceived as a "huge risk" by one person due to his experience, is NOT a huge risk to someone else with experience and focussed mental acumen.

Everyone sets there own personal minimums. Mine change according to the conditions but also according to time. Early in the season or after having any long hiatus from flying ( in my case my mark is 4 weeks out of the cockpit), I fly very conservatively untill I get a handfull of flights under my belt. As I get sharper and more re-atuned to my bird, my minimums change and I push them out further. Similarly early in a flight, two hours or less when I am still amped up, and fresh, I will push if it is required. As the day gets longer and especially after an arduous period of decision making in flight, or late in a long flight I do one of two things. I actually shout at myself to wake up, think, get sharp, in order to remind myself that here is where I could get in trouble. If I am not responding, and I feel I am not totally mentally alert, i completely real it in, fly in total conservative mode, no low saves, no risky decisions, take what I have and be content with it.

The issue you brought up was " is it worth it?" Yes but only for the few whose life is centered totally around a soaring goal. That is why there are so few really great champions. Theres only a few willing to do the work required to get good enough to minimize rhe percieved risks thru experience and talent. Theres only a few who master the skills needed to minimize risk. Do great soaring pilots get killed? Yes. Is it pilot error 99% of the time? Yes. Is there a logical reason for each death? Yes. Should others who desire to be great at any "speed/mechanical" sport" give up their goals and fly in perfect percieved safety? Hell no.

Those that do real it in and who do not knowledgably push into becoming better at all things including low saves never ever find out how good they ever could have been. Those that do never reach their full potential. Do they stay alive? Maybe yes maybe no, but have they lived? Depending on their goals, if they are one of the few of the "driven" temperment, then the answer may be, not really.

For those who are not of this temperment, its an entirely different perspective and that is great, ok, fullfilling. They due to who they are, and how they are wired, have a different set of minimums. I would never ever attempt to place my minimums on anyone else. When teaching I teach total conservative flying and my students hear that, experience that, and I exemplify that. However when on my own and according to my level of experience, I fly my standards. The important factor here is understanding who your audience is.. Many times we argue over different perspectives on these topics because we are coming from different experience levels and different overall goals.
Dan