[slapdash]

My first instinct was that these were both clear calls, but having thought
about it, I think it's much closer, and I think it's probably right to call on the
QQ hand but fold the 1010 hand (assuming it was close enough to the next
prize level that you could be reasonably confident of getting there).

Looking at the prize structure, by the time you reach the next prize level
about 50% of the prize pool will have been allocated. About 25% of the
prize pool goes to the final table.

Without looking at the specific hands, the strategic question is to what extent
you should pass up good "pot odds" situations to guarantee making the next
prize level. It's fairly clear that by folding these hands, you increase your
chance of making the next level, at the expense of crippling your chances
of making the final table, and probably also of getting any of the more
serious prizes short of the final table. Maybe you'd be "giving up" on about
the top 40% of the prize pool.

You get about an extra $22 for making the next prize level. Of course, by
"playing to win", you don't give up altogether on that, but you reduce your
chance of getting it. Maybe you cost yourself $11 of that $22 on average,
if playing to win will mean you only get there half the time.

Since the serious prize money is about 40% of the prize pool, if your chance
of getting one of those positions (assuming you play to win) is roughly
proportional to your chip stack, then you "own" about $4 (40% of a $10
buy-in) of the serious money for each multiple of a starting stack you have.

In the QQ hand, Morls had about 5.5 starting stacks, so he was "entitled
to" about $22 of the serious prize money. So he'd probably expect to do
better in the long run by going for it.

But in the 1010 hand, he only had about 1.5 starting stacks, so he was
"entitled to" only about $6 of the serious prize money. So in that case he
probably had more to gain on average by hanging on for the next level.

Of course, this is just a very rough calculation.