Firstly if playing sub optimally and not maximising your profits makes you happier then do what you like.
Very few people actually play poker to maximise winnings (they often think they do but often there's much more going on).
However just be aware that this booking wins mentatilty is pretty poor thinking from a poker playing perspective.
Basically you are saying that despite playing not as well as you could and subsequently not winning as much as you could you feel happier.
I find this a bit odd really, i'd struggle to feel happy about not playing my best and effectively cheating myself.
If losing sessions upsets you i think the best solution is to master this mental aspect of the game rather than taking
the easy option of just becoming a dead seat for the last hour of play.
From a practical point of view realise that it will cost you because
i) as you know the last hour of the game is often the best time to play as people play badly trying to get unstuck.
ii) When you sit out to book a win this is the nut worse time to sit out (sit out/leave when you're losing not winning). If you're winning in a game liklihood is you are playing well and
if you're winning others are losing - and if they are losing they are prob playing badly or will start to play badly.
The argument of punting it with k5 etc when you're losing because you're happiness will be increased if you get even is dangerous and fishy thinking.
True if you lose £3k or £3.5k it prob feels about the same at the time. However when the dust has settled and you realise you
have actually lost an unneccessary £500 (£500 that you will have to work x hours to get back) you should feel worse.
Like i said to a certain extent i understand your sentiments, they are natural - it's how most people think - but most people aren't good at poker -
most people think about these things incorrectly.
The logical conclusion of this thought process for you is next time you get AA just shove all in pre that way you'll win the pot more often and
get drawn out on less.
So basically if it makes you happy fine do it - you play for whatever reasons you like but if you want to be the best player you can be it's probably
not the mentality to take.
Pretty much this and the vast majority of what Keys said, so if I gave my thoughts I'd just be repeating, so I will just talk around the sides.
I am not entirely convinced that becoming comfortable with £3k losses is a good thing if you want to avoid a gambling problem. The internet makes it a lot easier to retain composure. When I played a lot of cash, if I lost £2k and could look at my tracker and see it was just run bad, I felt a lot better if I lost £2k and should have lost £4k. I still felt pretty bad mind.
When in a big hole, I inevitably feel worse than when flying, and I inevitably play worse. Given edges are much smaller these days that could easily be the difference between playing+EV and -EV. I have never checked the full gory details, but am sure I'd be better off now if I had never played any of those late sessions in a hole rooting around for a game to get me out. I have lost that from my game long ago, and am a lot more chilled now. Though I can't snap leave a tournament, I can certainly resist joining any new ones.
I find it psychologically much easier to lose £1k online, than a real £1k live, even though I am reasonably intelligent and know they have the same value. No idea why this is, but it is definitely there. I'd be interested if any live-pros felt the opposite.
I made a change with my general punting a few years ago. There was a time when I went to the races and generally put £100 on each race. So many times I felt miserable leaving the track. I knew I wasn't break even just punting every race because I was there, but still did this. I had a lightbulb moment and just dropped it to £20. When I beat the bookies it really does feel nearly as good as when I put £100 down, but I pretty much never feel miserable when leaving.
In addition, I have a betfair account and a smart phone, but still prefer to bet at the bookies when at the races. Again I think this is psychological, if a £100 appeared in my betfair account, I wouldn't notice it amongst the poker swings, but going up to collect the cash is always going to be much more pleasurable. Horribly -EV decision to bet with the bookies, though probably not as bad as it once was.
Talking about non optimal poker. I had a monkey on my back from live £1k tournaments until very recently. Think I had played 30+ without a cash (there was a 300 euro omaha rebuy that I guess I could have counted as £1k, but at the time I played it I didn't realise the streak would last and I felt I was cheating to reclassify it as £1k in arrears). I had previously busted a couple of big ones very near the bubble when playing aggressively.
When I played the ante only event at the WSOP, I lost a flip late on and was stuck with 8k chips on the absolute bubble. I was on the BB and the structure was brutal; there was over 4000 in the middle and multiple limpers (to limp you had to pay an additional 100 on top of the 400 you had already put in each hand). I looked down and saw AQ off. For info this event played weird and there was way more limp reraising than in a normal holdem event so AQ isn't necessarily the best hand here. Despite this I know I would have shoved if it was a £500 tournament and shoved this in any online tournament. I just flicked in my 100.
Got so much hEV from that fold and the removal of that monkey.
I think I could probably create an ICM argument for just limping anyway, based around the high frequency of limp reraising and the presence of a couple of big stacks who were always priced in with their T9 suited, but the reality is, I didn't play it this way for ICM reasons!