Actually, if you look further, the scheme is a bit similar where all decisions are ultimately in our own hands whether to continue to the end or stop halfway.
And, if you look even further, all games of chance relay in the same principle: the higher the risk, the higher the potential profit. On the other hand, it is no different from investments, where the higher returns are often linked to higher risks (like in venture capital).
So, if you look for similarities, you'll find out that this is not something specific between cashing out early in sports and in crash games, but common in all random-based disciplines. The difference is that in some of them you can't finish early. But we could make the analogy even with Bitcoin: hodl forever and risk a decline with no future recovery, or secure profits by selling when the price is good enough?
It's just that I don't want to equate the aspects related to investing with gambling because for me it can't be equated so I will skip this part because there will definitely be no agreement because for me gambling and investing are different and opposite things.
No for the soccer problem sometimes there is a certainty especially when the bet we place is certain to get a profit according to the odds such as when the club we support is comfortably ahead and definitely not overtaken then the choice is clear to leave the bet until the end, different from the crash because in the end the crash is uncertain and we don't know where the numbers stop so even though there are similarities there are still some things that make a difference in the end so this will only be the same in general in gambling but when talking more specifically the difference will be seen.