Topic: Big capital, small risk or small capital big risk - which is best approach? - page 6. (Read 673 times)

I prefer to bet using small capital but with big wins because my capital is limited and I am not willing to lose a lot of money in just one match. It's better for me to distribute it to several matches and get results from it, even though there is a big possibility that the match will be lost but it doesn't matter because the capital is not big and I was ready to lose it from the start.

My approach is different but mostly it belongs to small capital because it depends on my income and needs. If I've already provided for the needs of my family and I have spare money to gamble on that is where I decide how much will be my capital and mostly it is small because I am just trying my luck to see if I will win, if not then I just enjoy the game. This is better because you are not after winning because if so you'll be losing more. How much more if your capital is large?

It is better practice to not go after winning because gambling always makes you lose. This is the better way to think so that you won't be putting in huge amounts of money and after losing you'll go broke.

Small capital, big risk.
When I started gambling casino games in Stake.com, one of the popular online gambling sites here and outside the forum, I used to play small risk but most of the time all the money just went to the wager but there's really no chance of winning at all. It's like you are just playing back and forth against the house waiting for the RTP to kick in and then they will take it back again somehow.
Doing high-risk betting though made me realize you can really win but it might also take a lot of time due to the RTP chance being lower, when it kicked in, multi-wins shocked me and so I continued doing the same thing over and over. Spotting when to stop will be the only problem with high-risk betting. After winning a multi-win, will you stop or risk what you won for a chance to grow it higher, most of the time it goes the other way, a losing streak will probably happen taking all the profits and more. Discipline is the key.

I'd always pick small capital plus the big risk because I usually get the most out of my small bankroll when I play aggressively and losing doesn't feel as bad when you can easily let them go and move on compared to having a bigger bankroll.

When I used to play with a big bankroll, I had to carefully choose the games I had to play because that small risk is never small. In my experience, I lost more than I expected with these small-risk bets because it requires tens of bets before you can recover a single loss. You'll need a lot of luck to recover every loss because before you can recover your previous loss, another one comes in and then it's a matter of time until the house edge starts to take over.

I'm speaking as far as sports betting is concerned. I don't just place bets. So it doesn't matter whether the player or team I am betting on is the favorite or underdog. I bet mainly because I think the player or the team will win, regardless if a victory is expected or it will come through an upset. Although the odds is a factor, it doesn't determine where to place your bet. I won't bet for Ngannou, for example, simply because his 7.20 odds would give me a big win.

In casino games, however, I can do both. I can roll a dice with just 2% probability but I can also do it with 97% probability.

I'm the 2nd type of gambler who prefer to play with small capital and bigger risk. This is why most of the time I play slot game, a game where I can bet small amount but there is a chance to win big. Hitting big multiplier although with small bet only is more enjoyable for me than winning big amount but I have to risk big amount too. Other than slots, there are some other games that let us play with small amount but with possible of win big amount such as dice, mines, keno, plinko, etc. If you ask which one is the best between big capital small risk and small capital big risk, it is all about preferences from each gambler.

I agree with you in gambling is either win or lose and what matter ls is the amount you can afford to lose,  but sometime it's a pain in the ass to see those big loses while chasing the higher winning m,  which doesn't come as frequent as thought.

But either ways,  we win some we lose some so regardless life of a gambler,  loses depends on individual bankroll's,  also I bet I rather will have a smaller multiplier for higher rollers in most cases since that will increase my chances of winning even though the returns may be way smaller compared to using a higher multiplier.

Well, firstly it is obvious that whatever one can consider to be big or small capital depends on the personal view of each one of us. Leaving that point to one side. Whenever I try to have a relatively long session with dices I like to go with a low risk strategy and if greed kicks in, I would definetely end up wagering more money while keeping the same percentage of success.

I am not sure of that is the best strategy, though, but it works for me when I do not want sessions to be too short.
Granted, the losses can be pretty back if the session is long enough and one does not step down with the wager.  

For me, there isn't any disparity between the best approach of big capital, small risk or small capital big risk. Sincerely, the market situation at the moment could be a significant decider as to which approach is best.

If all things being equal, I would like to think that small capital with big risk is better, because I wouldn't get to loose much as compared to big capital incase the investment fails, but the reality is that one can't tell which is most profitable venture hence the best advice is to go with the flow of the market trend.

You can't really compare it like that since you're comparing a high-capital user who play with equal odds to a small-capital user who plays with high odds. Small capitals may have the chance to win big, but on the other hand, it may take a LONG time to hit that big win, comparable to the amount that someone with a huge capital used to gain a single or two wins. Heck, it might not even be a profit and just break even. Those with high capital, on the other hand, a win or two would generally have a stable W/L ratio since they don't really pursue higher odds. If they do, like those with small capitals, then they're basically the same, as I've described earlier.

I'd say small capital who aims for big payouts are better though. You'd need a lot of bets, but a bot can fix that. Can't say when you'll hit or the odds though, that's just how it is with gambling. And while I do think it's better to do this, I rarely do it simply because gambling is all about going all in. It ain't gambling if you're careful.

If you don't mind the time that it will take for you to get something significant, i suggest that you do the small risk, large bet. Though be wary that sometimes, even the smallest of risks carry the biggest of regrets. I know people whom thought that one bet is something that they can easily win an easy $$$ from, only to end up losing that huge amount just because they were overconfident on the bet and forget to analyze first before locking their predictions in.

No guts no glory!!! Regardless of which option you choose, you have to have guts. If you are chasing a high multiplier with small bets, you need a big bankroll to sustain a load of losses before the big hit comes normally. You could have a 1btc bankroll and never hit the big multi you are chasing and lose that whole bitcoin. I don't know about you but that's a pretty substantial loss IMO. Same goes for a big bet. You can bet 1btc bets at x1.01 and get nailed 5 bets in for a huge loss.

It all boils down to what you can afford to lose, either route is a gamble.

My question is, what is the real difference for you? Do you prefer to play with small capital to hope for a big hit, or are you the type who likes to bet with large capital to get a bigger hit? Or you can be more flexible, according to your betting needs. Well, you see, what you are asking in this thread, the answer is very relative depending on each gambler. Let's theorize, for example, if you gamble with only a small bankroll, what is your probability of getting a very big hit. Usually this rarely happens, unless luck is on your side.
In slot games, with a small bankroll, it will be very difficult for you to get a big hit. to get a 1x1 ratio of the capital you spend, this has become a big advantage for slot gamblers. because usually, before you get a big hit, your capital has run out first.

In soccer betting, you can win big rewards from the parlay option. If your prediction is correct, the bet you make will make a lot of money. but even then, if you are able to win it. for me the most ideal is a single bet on sports, with all the research and analysis I have done. single bet, has more potential to provide a fairly large probability of winning. I can bet with a big bankroll according to my version. The results I get are in accordance with the odds that are my option in betting.
now, what do you think. roughly, which option is the most ideal and to get a high probability based on your version. because in my opinion, it all depends on the readiness we have. also, be prepared for the risks.

It depends on the individual but reasonably, it is better to play few games and use capital on it because the chances for one game to be successful is greater than 10 or 20 games to be successful. So instead of playing numerous game at same time, it is better to reduce the games to increase the chances of winning.

And more practically, those who have won repeatedly are those who gamble on few games than those playing too much game on a bet slip especially soccer bet. It is a lesson that fewer games have the chances of winning.

Since this isn't an investment but gambling, isn't it more appropriate to use the word stake than capital, if i may go by my own take on this, it is very important to go with small stake big risk and big win, even if it's small win it's still better because the money used here is small unlike when you make use of big money and win little or none at all, loosing any amount of money you stake on bet will not be as painful as loosing the one you can't afford to loose and we win or loose not by the rate we stake on games.

You cannot align this two pairs together, honestly... Cus why?? There are actually sometimes you'll stake with a little cash capital, bearing a very little risk to the game - I mean, whatever happens, you're just certain that your stake wasn't that huge to bother you about frequent losses... I feel making huge bets on thoroughly analyzed speculations could certainly cover up traces of the usual losses - that is if it cuts! Buh, on the other hand, that's not a liverage to take too much advantage of.
So with my theory, i still believe it's safe to wager what you can lose.

Sandra 🧑‍🦰

When I gamble, I don't really look for how much my bankroll is cause for the most part it's already either accounted for, or budgeted nicely. In that regard, For the hell of it and the thrill I suppose I can pick having a small capital with big risks over big capitals with lesser risks since I find high-stakes games more enjoyable than monotonous linear ones. To me who personally mastered the art of gambling responsibly, I could easily stop and control myself soon as I lose my bankroll, and if in the unfortunate event that I do lose my bankroll I think I'll just wing it and move on. But the fact that I could get more out of my small bankroll with the caveat (which is not that really much of a caveat anyway) of having a larger risk percentage is what really keeps me going.

Sometimes using a higher amount to place a bet increases one's chance of winning because that big amount could just be used to select a few options with favourable odds, and with those odds calculating with your wager amount, you can make a tangible profit.
 
But when you use small capital to make your bet, you will start running from one option to the other looking for means to increase your winning amount with that small capital, which most times will lead one to select the wrong game, which could not have been an option from the beginning but because of the odd that it has, it has the chance of doubling their winning.
 
But whichever amount is being used, I still believe both share an equal amount of losing risk; if you bet with big capital and luck falls on your side, you win big, and if you wager with a small amount and the winning enters, you start regretting why you did not double the wager amount, and this is also the case in the aspect of losing. So I believe both also share the same value of losing, looking at it from the winning and losing perspectives.

Those who put huge money will end up targeting small odds, which will make them often win their bets, but if you are the type that gambles with huge amounts of money, it’s kind of risky to me because whenever you are losing, you will end up losing even the profits that you made previously, and at the end you will notice that your profit and loss might end up being kind of close. Using huge amounts of capital in gambling is kind of risky, and I don’t always recommend that.

It’s annoying whenever I see the amount that some people use in placing bets and the amount that they plan to win. After some people place their bet, I know it will be kind of difficult to win. Those are the types that will keep on hoping they win big one day, and they will keep on wasting money. If all the little amount they have spent is calculated, then you will discover that the money is already much.

I don’t think the two strategies are appropriate because I have the feeling that you will end up losing a lot if you use them. It’s better to use a reasonable amount of money to place a bet on the little odd, I am not saying the odd should be too small. I think it will be better than spending huge amounts of money on little odds and spending little amount expecting to win huge amounts, which they might never win.

It depends but I've done both in the past.

With large capital, small risk means choosing small odds and with the favorite team being played, there is clearly a small risk, but when we lose on a large capital bet, it will be more painful. I know that sometimes things go wrong even though the risk is small.

Small capital obviously wants to win at high odds but this is difficult to win, for example the Chelsea vs Forest match, who would have thought Forest would win? But it's luck with big risks, you can win, but it will be difficult for me to win.