Thinking about fundamental theorem of poker

[esbesb]

OK, so we know we want our opponents to make mistakes. And we want those mistakes to be as big as possible, such that we will happily accept the risk of getting sucked out on if our opponent is willing to call a large enough bet.

But when, if ever, is the situation such that we would rather forfeit the opponent making a mistake (because it would be such a small mistake) in exchange for just taking down the pot? In other words (assuming you are sufficiently bankrolled and this is not a tournament situation) is it ever better to just go ahead and take down the pot with a larger bet even if you know that if you make a smaller bet, your opponent will make a tiny little mistake by calling without odds? When, if ever, would you knowingly forfeit a tiny +EV situation in a sufficiently bankrolled ring game? If there is such a situation (and I'm not sure there is), how tiny does the +EV have to be?
I don't think the concept of reverse implied odds really applies here, because for the hypothetical to work I have to know what my opponent has.