Really? The advice I got from the post appeared to be:
- you need to book a win because if not you don't get to play till next week and your confidence will be shot.
- keep playing if you're up, but not if you're down (i.e. the only time you leave, really, is when you play yourself broke)
- learn to play deep poker

I disagree on almost all counts:
- if your confidence is so drastically affected by your up-and-downs per session, you need to take a break. You also need to find an objective measure as to how well you're playing, instead of being totally results-orientated.
- Your session lengths should not be determined by how much you're up or down. You need to work on dissociating the level of your play from your winnings/losses of the session, so getting sucked out on/getting lucky early in the session on doesn't affect your play for the whole night.
- An addendum: Bart Hanson on Deuce Plays speaks of a "winning/losing image" at tables. This can mean that it is sometimes more profitable to play when you're winning. Fair enough. But again, your play shouldn't depend heavily on how you're doing that session. That's what bankrolls are for.
- Yes, there's generally a lot more deep play at live tables. But OP never even hinted towards the idea that his sessions normally go: buy-in -> win -> get deep -> go busto. So it is likely to be a irrelevant prescription.

Sounds like a common human emotion or state of mind. People think differently, we all can't be perfect like you.

I find the "perfect like you" stab amusing.

Look, of course we're all affected by the swings we experience each session. But we need a goal which we strive to achieve. That goal involves finding a benchmark by which we can measure the rightness/wrongness of a given play. Results are a very bad benchmark. Calculating equities and evaluating the reasons behind the lines we choose are good benchmarks.

If we strive towards that benchmark, we become less affected by whether or not we win in a given session. Unless of course, we find ourselves objectively playing bad (in which case the solution is, stop playing bad).

Any advice which advocates that a player become more reliant on a bad benchmark (i.e.: make sure you win during a given session, because it will make you feel better) is bad advice.

I find it hard to disagree with this.

But this thread makes me wonder what's the goal here. Are we trying to turn all of us into perfect players? Or does the Live forum also have room to help recreational players get the most value from their sessions, where "value" is more than just monetary?

I start most of my sessions playing pretty tight and then opening up to the flow of the game and my opponents. Going back to that point is great if it gets me away from raising 40% of my hands and cbetting into 4 loose opponents when I miss