risk vs. reward, playing styles, keys to sucess in poker

appologies for the lengthy post but i dont feel like making 3 topics for 3 different things and skipping back and forth to read feedback

risk vs. reward/playing styles

3 allin preflop before you act (not including you)
holding AA
if aces hold 50% of the time and the pot is 3:1 greater risk (losing 1/2 the time) greater reward (4x stack at best)
risky play: go allin - you have better chance of winning then anyone else
safe play: fold - you are not a favorite to win the hand in the end.

risky playing on implied odds
similar to chasing a strait or flush draw - greater risk greater reward
risk: losing pot if u miss your draw (something like 1/3 for open end strait and 4 to a flush on the flop)
reward: winning the pot + what you can get your opponent to call (implied odds i believe)

safe playing on best made hand
similar to betting out a strait or flush draw - less risk less reward
risk: losing pot if they hit draw + what you call to keep them honest
reward: winning what they are willing to call to see flop/turn/river

i see it as risky players play to win and safer players play to place. the people who win the WSOP usually play very agressivly which is usually along the lines of greater risk greater reward.

The people who tend to play safely like someone who would fold thier AA in the 3 way allin situation tend to be more consistant like dan harrington not saying he would do so, merely saying that they are not the favorite to win the hand and are likly to fold to a coinflip that puts their chips at a unncessary risk just to elimante competition or an unncessary 2x+ up. the people who you see regularly at the final tables of the WSOP tend to be the people who wont put their chips in unless they are sure they have their opponent pinned and are not huge risk takers and have less fluxuations in their chipstack which is most likely reason behind consistancy because they tend to plan for the long run.

the risky players however are the ones with big flucuations in their stacks and like calling coin flips to knock someone out or increase their stack to bigstack bully
go big or go home attitude morals.
sort of people who play it by ear or in the moment with less concern for the long run and dont really think of the consequences of their actions, i guess more wreckless you could say

the past few years of the WSOP you havnt seen the same person win twice in a row which has a lot to due with luck ie winning coin flips and key pots

personally i think these two styles of play overall (not preflop post flop etc.) have two different places. because of the format of play

risky - cash game
busting is no big deal you can just rebuy
implied odds are a big ie. you call a 4$ raise preflop with 22 knowing they have JJ or better knowing that if you hit your set you will be able to clean them out.

risky - charecteristics
requires some good luck and discepline (making your set, or knowing when not to chase)
likes to see flops
less consistant
harder to push around due to willingness to gamble
larger fluctuations in stack/bankroll win/lose $ at fast pace.

safe - tournament play
playing for the long run
win/lose at slower pace
survive fairly easily

safe - charecteristics
seeing their goal of making it into the money
requiring less luck due to the less risk they allow themselves to get involved in
usually pretty consistant
less fluctuation in stack/bankroll win/lose $ at slower pace
easier to bully and push around
dependant on best made hand or more/better outs
plays select hands

my playing style is usually safer playing on best made hands and only playing a select amount of starting hands and usually pushing pretty hard with TPTK and a coordinated board like 2 of any suit or any possible draws if not i usually try and let them hit something to get good implied odds and will occasionally make an off color play like raising with drawing cards in mid/late pos.

personally i think both are effective in certain situations. playing safe when lady luck is not with you, and risky when she is on your nuts. i think that both styles are winning styles you just have to know when to switch gears from safe/risky passive/agressive. but i believe that if someone with a risky style can make it past the survival stage of a tournament they will do extremly well in the chip accumulation stage and then their placing in the tournament is dependant on wether they did well enough during the accumlation stage and their run of cards during the final table. i believe that if the safe players can survive the chip accumulation stage they are also very effective. where safety pays off agression and risk tends to lose. where agression and risk taking pays off is where safety tends to loose. the final stage of knocking players out at the last few tables or final table is mostly a luck based wether you were destined to lose where someone just had better cards (KK unfortunate enough to run into AA) and your ability to adapt to the environment like overly risky or to safe.

sucess in poker is based on:
-how well you play your style
-how quick and willing you are to switch gears
-knowing how to switch things up
-knowing how to keep your opponents guessing
-knowing when to lay it down
-taking advantage of position
-using information and observation of other players
-making the correct play betting out draws or calling with draws with bad -pot odds and implied odds
-knowing how to get the best implied odds without getting out drawn
-but still letting them hit their cards
-getting your money in when you are ahead.

am newer to poker and trying to find leaks in my thought process any comments or other views on any of these thinkings would be greatly appreciated thx red