OK, you're risk-averse on this issue. That is a choice, but not the only way to look at the world. This kind of thing is generally dealt with in a discipline called utility theory - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UtilityI know it is well possible to do better with the TJ but it is the uncertainty that bothers me.
Consider the following choice.
Option 1: You play a 2-hour gig for a flat $50 fee. No matter how many people come in, you get the same money.
Option 2: You play a 2-hour gig for tips or 'the door', no guarantee. Based on past experience, you believe that there's a probability of around 25% that you'll make less than $25, 25% probability you'll make between $25 and $50, 25% probability you'll make between $50 and $100, and 25% probability you'll make over $100.
Questions (binary option):
1. Which option do you prefer if you have a choice of either? (1/2)
2. Would you flatly refuse Option 2 if it was the only possibility. (Y/N)
3. Do you argue that anybody taking Option 2 is 'prostituting' themselves? (Y/N)
Agreed. Even if I'm in a band taking a flat fee, set breaks, especially long ones, are frequently the kiss of death if you're trying to hold a crowd. I still say that, no matter who is doing the actual payout, it's the paying audience that is paying you. When they stop coming, you're SOL.If you take a break they all leave. Most bands take one break.