Big capital, small risk or small capital big risk - which is best approach?

[Ojima-ojo]

Both approaches seem appropriate to me at times. Many gamblers think that it is better to take big risk with less capital because there will be a high chance of losing but also have a big winning chance. On the other hand, some gamblers think differently that when I have more capital, I will be able to use more capital in low odds bets and earn more profit. But overall I think it is better to gamble using small capital as there is no guarantee in gambling.

I don't know about you but there is what I have experienced a couple of times both in trading and gambling which is the multiplier effects,  and just like in trading once you adjust and increase the leverage tou chances of closing the rade on negative is increased almost over 60% but chances are that you make bigger return in profits from such market leverage.


Same with sport betting when you make multiple games selections by accumulating big odds,  your chances are that you likely may lose the bet,  but in it turn out that all the games go in your favour your return will also be huge.,  but the likely hold between the chances of taking a big winning,  or selecting a sure odd with minimal risk singles game,  your rewards may be small but chances are there that you win the bet.


So the amount you stake either effects your total winning or your remaining balance, This is why we need to have clear games analysis before we choose the bets we want to stake our capital on be it small or big capital.

[Jawhead999]

I don't feel if I'm a gambler when I use big capital to take small risk, this is why I prefer to bet small capital to take big risk. When you're win by taking small risk, you're already expecting you will win and it's not fun. The bookie, other gambler, fans and everyone else know if the favorite will win.

But when the underdog is win, you will feel excited and satisfied if you're have a good skill to predict.

[Huppercase]

Different people with different approach to gambling. Some prefer committing huge capital to high probability small odds while others prefer using small capital to target big wins. There are many reasons for each of these approaches.

While those that put huge capital win more often, their losses are usually painful. On the other hand, those that commit small capital to make huge wins rare win but when they do, they win big; their losses too are less painful. There are other advantages and disadvantages for both approaches but for the sake of this discussion, let's know which approach you think is better and why?

Gambling and luck happens once in a while and I can confidently tell you that I have seen a gambler bet $1=#920 to win $2100(#1,932,000, that's good amount in NGN) for playing sporty of 2100. I count the number of matches on his bet slip and I what I saw was astonishing, the guy predicted 21 matches both basketball and football and all went as he predicted. That's to show you how lucky some people are with gambling, so whether big amount or small amount, there are gamblers that are naturally lucky to win.

You need strategy to win any amount whether you stake high or stake low, in as much as gambling is 50/50, if you don't have good strategy on selecting games, you will win nothing. The reason why I'm saying this is that, there are people that wager high capital but lack good strategy and they lost the money before they realized and there are some people that have good strategy and with little amount, they win whatever they predict.

In addition, don't forget to risk what you can afford to lose else you will regret gambling, let your pocket speaks for you.

[sokani]

In my opinion, it’s better to have a small capital and a big risk, because if I risk a lot of capital for the sake of a 10% profit, success will not impress me. But if I win 1000% of the bet, then emotions make themselves felt. In addition, it is obvious that it is better to lose a small bet than a huge deposit. This is a kind of damage control.

This reminds of a bet slip I once saw online some years ago, the bettor placed N1,000,000 on a single bet for Barcelona to win a bottom side club, I can't really remember the name of the club but the odd was 1.1 and Barca lost the game. I don't know the person's financial strength but that loss alone can cause many persons to suffer depression. So I would rather place a bet with smaller capital and a big risk than betting a huge sum of money on a smaller odd. If I lose and no matter how painful it might be, I would find solace in the fact that my wager was a smaller amount.

[Yatsan]

Always go with the lesser risk. No matter how big or small your capital is, as long as your margin of risk is high, it would be gone in an instant especially if you won't be lucky at that moment you gamble.

I don't feel if I'm a gambler when I use big capital to take small risk, this is why I prefer to bet small capital to take big risk. When you're win by taking small risk, you're already expecting you will win and it's not fun. The bookie, other gambler, fans and everyone else know if the favorite will win.

But when the underdog is win, you will feel excited and satisfied if you're have a good skill to predict.

In some instances, it indeed works to other gamblers as well. Rhey put small amount and engage to big risk 'coz for them if it lose then they won't have any problem with it however if things would be caught off guard, then those small amounts would be huge by repitition. It won't be called with high risk if the chance of winning is more likely to happen, right? Anyway, we should work on our gambling styles for things to work better on this indusrry, including players.

[Wakate]

Different people with different approach to gambling. Some prefer committing huge capital to high probability small odds while others prefer using small capital to target big wins. There are many reasons for each of these approaches.

While those that put huge capital win more often, their losses are usually painful. On the other hand, those that commit small capital to make huge wins rare win but when they do, they win big; their losses too are less painful. There are other advantages and disadvantages for both approaches but for the sake of this discussion, let's know which approach you think is better and why?

We need to be sure of what we are doing so that we are not going to end up losing our funds. Whether we are using a big capital to earn big profits or small capital to earn big profits, we need to be prefer and make necessary analysis in what we are doing so that we are not going to lose on the particular prospect we are trying to achieve. Making money from gaming is not easy and we need work with people that have a successful story maybe that will trigger us to do better as a gambler. Gambling is profitable for those that know how to work there way out.

[summonerrk]

Different people with different approach to gambling. Some prefer committing huge capital to high probability small odds while others prefer using small capital to target big wins. There are many reasons for each of these approaches.

While those that put huge capital win more often, their losses are usually painful. On the other hand, those that commit small capital to make huge wins rare win but when they do, they win big; their losses too are less painful. There are other advantages and disadvantages for both approaches but for the sake of this discussion, let's know which approach you think is better and why?

At first glance, these two approaches are similar and it seems that they lead to the same outcome. Just in different ways. But in fact, these approaches are completely different. There is an expression in higher mathematics in probability theory such as "mathematical expectation", it means that the more events you have, the more they will tend to a fair outcome. For example, if you flip a coin twice, the chance that the result will be 50-50 is very small. The chance that the same thing will fall out twice is low. But if you flip a coin 100 times, then most likely the chances of falling out will be 50-50. That's also why it's better to have a large number of games in gambling, so that probability theory is as fair as possible to your results. Therefore, it is better to engage in gambling slowly and with small bets.

[livingfree]

It's the opposite for me. The lower the bankroll or capital you have, the lesser risk that you're taking.

Yeah, those that have huge capitals can stay to gamble for so long but do they afford to lose all of that? And that's why I think that having a smaller capital is what should be the lesser risk.

Since everyone is anticipating that they're going to lose then lose with small and affordable amount of yours. The principle of betting what you can afford to lose is what we always say because its risk is associated on how much we're willing to let go.

We share the same idea. Gambling with a small capital only results a lower risk, as having a bigger capital comes with a bigger risk too. However, the fact that almost everyone is losing from gambling, then we should be cautious to only bet for small capital, that way if we lose, at least the pain is still bearable. Than to bet all in by starting a huge capital, and expect a bigger win after, but in reality, bigger capital only enable you to suffer from huge and unbearable losses.

Yup, that's the purpose of gambling only with small amount. But we can't stop those gamblers that do gamble a lot and they've got an allocation for their gambling activities that has a huge share of their salaries or profit from somewhere else.

Especially those gambling professionals and experts that are making a living out of it, they for sure have the bigger capital. But for a newbie and for an average gambler, it's just best to stick to a plan that you'll only allot not that much.

An amount that you're not going to feel bad when you run out of your luck and you can just that, it's okay because you'll just earn it again.

[gabbie2010]

Different people with different approach to gambling. Some prefer committing huge capital to high probability small odds while others prefer using small capital to target big wins. There are many reasons for each of these approaches.

While those that put huge capital win more often, their losses are usually painful. On the other hand, those that commit small capital to make huge wins rare win but when they do, they win big; their losses too are less painful. There are other advantages and disadvantages for both approaches but for the sake of this discussion, let's know which approach you think is better and why?

I use huge capital to win small odd sure bets my accumulated odds is usually maximum odd of 4.0 , I prefer that method compared to using a small odd to win big, honestly it's very rare to see gamblers who win big with small capital method at times when I visit a betting shop I saw a lot of gamblers with a long betting slip after picking many games and an accumulated odds of between 20.0 to 100.0  I continue to imagine how is it possible to win all those games without one of the games cutting the ticket, however the better side of the method is that they placed the bet a very small amount which they can afford to lose.

[maydna]

I'm okay using small capital in gambling because it's something I can afford. If I use large capital but lose, it will make me sad because I didn't think about the risks. That would only make me suffer a big loss. Even though I feel confident with the analysis, I still won't take the risk and will use small capital. I still remember when I placed a bet with a medium capital and was confident in the results that my choice would win. But apparently, everything changed in the second half, and my choice could not withstand the counterattack from the opposing team, causing my chosen team to lose. That left me with a rather hefty loss.

I can no longer afford to place bets with large capital. I prefer to play with small capital and spread it over many bets. It could give me a lot of wins too if I can win.

[Taskford]

It's the opposite for me. The lower the bankroll or capital you have, the lesser risk that you're taking.

Yeah, those that have huge capitals can stay to gamble for so long but do they afford to lose all of that? And that's why I think that having a smaller capital is what should be the lesser risk.

Since everyone is anticipating that they're going to lose then lose with small and affordable amount of yours. The principle of betting what you can afford to lose is what we always say because its risk is associated on how much we're willing to let go.

We share the same idea. Gambling with a small capital only results a lower risk, as having a bigger capital comes with a bigger risk too. However, the fact that almost everyone is losing from gambling, then we should be cautious to only bet for small capital, that way if we lose, at least the pain is still bearable. Than to bet all in by starting a huge capital, and expect a bigger win after, but in reality, bigger capital only enable you to suffer from huge and unbearable losses.

Yup, that's the purpose of gambling only with small amount. But we can't stop those gamblers that do gamble a lot and they've got an allocation for their gambling activities that has a huge share of their salaries or profit from somewhere else.

Especially those gambling professionals and experts that are making a living out of it, they for sure have the bigger capital. But for a newbie and for an average gambler, it's just best to stick to a plan that you'll only allot not that much.

An amount that you're not going to feel bad when you run out of your luck and you can just that, it's okay because you'll just earn it again.

Each people have their own preferred bets since it always depends on their financial capabilities. Some can bet huge amount since they think this is the way where they can earn fast cash if they win or get lucky for that day.

And some cannot do anything since they have less fortune and can able to spend few chunks of money so they usually bet less and hoping to earn big. There are lots of this on gambling site but all of that is fine as long as you enjoy then all bets placed is totally worth it.

[uneng]

Personally, I've already had a hard time placing huge bets with high winning chances, so I'm definitely not going to do this anymore. Besides the risk of losing big capital in one shot being too high, you also don't enjoy your gambling session very much, because it will last for a short time only. Sometimes you just place 3 bets, profit from them and quit. It shouldn't last for more than few minutes.

It's preferable that you decrease your bet size, decrease your bankroll, playing for longer. Not that it will have a big impact on long run, as losses will inevitably knock your doir at some point, but at least you will be playing for a longer time, having more entertainment, spending less money on the process.

[Ziskinberg]

I think a huge capital is needed if you aim to win a substantial amount of money. That way, the chance of winning is better compared to starting with a small capital and aiming for a huge win. To be successful with a small capital, you need to be extremely skilled. However, most of us probably aren't very realistic when it comes to gambling. We often aim for big wins with our small capital, and that's the main reason why we sometimes get frustrated because we don't consider probability but only rely on our personal beliefs.

For me I will choose " Big capital, small risk ".

[panjul07]

Can we use below example:
> Bet $100 to win $50 (odds 1.5x) or bet $10 to win $50 (odds 5x) with the same starting bankroll, lets say $100
In this case which one is better for me? The 2nd one will be my choice because I'm not a type of gambler who like to go all in with my bankroll.
However most of the time I like to play with small bet and hunt for big multipliers, I can enjoy this strategy more than to go all in.

[Die_empty]

Different people with different approach to gambling. Some prefer committing huge capital to high probability small odds while others prefer using small capital to target big wins. There are many reasons for each of these approaches.

While those that put huge capital win more often, their losses are usually painful. On the other hand, those that commit small capital to make huge wins rare win but when they do, they win big; their losses too are less painful. There are other advantages and disadvantages for both approaches but for the sake of this discussion, let's know which approach you think is better and why?

For people who are having health issues,  small capital to target big wins will be convenient. I have heard news of people who developed severe health problems like high blood pressure and hypertension because of big losses. That is why I think that small bets will be convenient for low-risk takers. Small stakes will also be convenient for persons that are low income targeting big with small capital will also be the best option. There is no need to take loans or sell personal properties because of gambling. So there is a need to target big wins with little than to risk more than one's income. We have also had cases of persons that have luckily won big with little, so there is a need to gamble within one's means.

[bangjoe]

Can we use below example:
> Bet $100 to win $50 (odds 1.5x) or bet $10 to win $50 (odds 5x) with the same starting bankroll, lets say $100
In this case which one is better for me? The 2nd one will be my choice because I'm not a type of gambler who like to go all in with my bankroll.
However most of the time I like to play with small bet and hunt for big multipliers, I can enjoy this strategy more than to go all in.

I think a lot of people do the same thing as you, applying small bets and looking for greater multiplier, but the fact is that victory is very rarely we get, however we need to see what we bet in it, luck is the main thing In your betting.

If I, I am more dynamic because both of these methods I use on several occasions, and actually depend on the results of the calculation of opportunities that I do for the two teams that compete for example.
But indeed if you use small bets and get big profits, the pride of victory is far more beautiful than what is never imagined.

[el kaka22]

Definitely small capital small risk. I know that wasn't a choice but I feel like that is going to be the most important thing, because it means that you are not going to lose a lot. I agree that it is going to take a while before you win something meaningful and yes it is not that great and all but that's how you improve.

If you keep risking your small capital a lot then you are going to get nothing in return and constantly end up losing, if you do not risk your big capital, you are going to end up with a useless thing for your own capital. I believe that we need to end up with something that would be different and I prefer small capital small risk because of this, it means that the result will be fine for me either way.

[bayu7adi]

I often engage in both, sometimes favoring low-risk scenarios, and at other times, I'm drawn to the thrill of high-stakes risks. What makes gambling truly enticing is the willingness to take substantial risks and actually triumphing in doing so. However, when I grow weary of these losses, perhaps the only way out is to raise the stakes for a lesser risk—a way to console myself and avoid sinking into despair from continuous gambling losses. It may seem like conceding defeat, but at least it works better for me and keeps frustration at bay.

If I had to choose, I'd lean towards betting with a small stake and embracing the higher risks. I opt for the second choice when I've experienced an excessive amount of losses from the first option.

[Oilacris]

Different people with different approach to gambling. Some prefer committing huge capital to high probability small odds while others prefer using small capital to target big wins. There are many reasons for each of these approaches.

While those that put huge capital win more often, their losses are usually painful. On the other hand, those that commit small capital to make huge wins rare win but when they do, they win big; their losses too are less painful. There are other advantages and disadvantages for both approaches but for the sake of this discussion, let's know which approach you think is better and why?

On my part, then i dont mind about on how to make money but rather i do rather be doing my best on prolonging my gambling sessions on which means whether i do have big or small capital then
i do always mind on how to make it a long sessions which means that i do stick with less risky bets or not really going all in. Speaking about best approach then it would really be entirely be depending on a certain gambler because we do really have our own preference when it comes to this because not all gamblers would really be loving that low risk bets but rather they would really be that going
for those all in behavior and sees whether they are lucky or not.

We know that each person does have that different capability when it comes to finances and this is where risk management and handling will really vary but most of the time it would really be
ideal on making not yourself that too impulsive if you dont like for gambling to mess up your finances.Avoid it as much as you could because once that this thing hits
then you might be able to experience hardship when it comes to recovery.

[Kemarit]

Can we use below example:
> Bet $100 to win $50 (odds 1.5x) or bet $10 to win $50 (odds 5x) with the same starting bankroll, lets say $100
In this case which one is better for me? The 2nd one will be my choice because I'm not a type of gambler who like to go all in with my bankroll.
However most of the time I like to play with small bet and hunt for big multipliers, I can enjoy this strategy more than to go all in.

Yeah, and it just shows that there are no one size fits all strategy. Really depends on how we see the risk just like the scenario that you laid out.
And let's say you love slots like me, this can also be applicable, you can used small bankroll and just go for minimum bet and see how it goes.
Or if I have big capital, I will start with some max bets per line at least and hopefully have a good multiplier and hit the bonus run.
So there are no best approach here, most likely depends on your strategy.