Double when you win, or double when you lose?

[Altryist]

 You can try doubling every time you lose, but an important condition for this should be that the odds are not less than 2, then it will make sense. And by the way, I have been adhering to this for a long time, my average odds are almost always around 2, and if you are a good enough bettor that most of your bets are winning, then you will already be in profit. The difficulty of doubling when losing is only that if you get into a losing streak, a fairly long streak, then this can drive you into a dead end, I probably would not do this, because it is unnecessary nerves.

[ralle14]

I tend to avoid both betting styles to prolong my sessions, but from what I recall, doubling up while winning gave me better results. It's not something i'd recommend, still it's a nice way of maximizing your win streaks once you feel you're on a heater.

The other one only speeds up the losing process because it's easy to be in a losing streak and drain your bankroll before you reach your 10th consecutive loss.

[_act_]

According to your topic title, that a gambler sould doubles the amount of money he is using to gamble as he is losing or winning? Be it either or any way, that is a very bad strategy that the person will regret. They are not strateges to win more than lose. Just know that you have very little chance to win while gambling. You should not be fooled that there is any strategies that can be used to win more. They will only result to more loss.

[summonerrk]

Bankroll management with a fixed amount can feel boring sometimes, that’s why we get tempted to switch it up and try different betting styles. Not quite Martingale, but upping the stakes occasionally definitely adds more thrill.

Between the two options, which one do you think actually delivers more wins than losses in the long run for you?

Raising bets after a loss is a martingale strategy, even if we do not multiply the bet by two, as is customary in the classic raising strategy.
Many players do not understand that the bet grows exponentially and will reach very high values, at which the deposit will end very quickly and the desired expected result with the payout will never come, if, for example, we are talking about playing Black Red.
It would be better then to at least change the multiplier to 10% of the bet increase or to 20, but I think that even a multiplier of half the bet (1.5) is already too much.

[Gozie51]

Bankroll management with a fixed amount can feel boring sometimes, that’s why we get tempted to switch it up and try different betting styles. Not quite Martingale, but upping the stakes occasionally definitely adds more thrill.

Between the two options, which one do you think actually delivers more wins than losses in the long run for you?

It might feel boring though like you said but if you have been on a losing streak then you will consider taking it gradually. I believe if you are winning then everything will be going fine and the unnecessary risk could also come out fine to your favour but if you are losing, the reverse will be the case. Taking risk is going sometimes when you see reason for it, maybe an opportunity you consider to be very good. But to always try to up the bet because you are losing and you try to chase profit, it can be more dangerous.

[Kemarit]

Bankroll management with a fixed amount can feel boring sometimes, that’s why we get tempted to switch it up and try different betting styles. Not quite Martingale, but upping the stakes occasionally definitely adds more thrill.

Between the two options, which one do you think actually delivers more wins than losses in the long run for you?

It might feel boring though like you said but if you have been on a losing streak then you will consider taking it gradually. I believe if you are winning then everything will be going fine and the unnecessary risk could also come out fine to your favour but if you are losing, the reverse will be the case. Taking risk is going sometimes when you see reason for it, maybe an opportunity you consider to be very good. But to always try to up the bet because you are losing and you try to chase profit, it can be more dangerous.

It's very hard though if you are in a losing streak, your decision is clouded and so there is a chance that you want to double up. But then again, risk multiplies if you that because if you lose the next time then what?

So I will tend to agree with the majority not but of this strategy is bad. So it might be better to just fight that monotonous kind of play, but at least your chance to recover might be good as compare to doubling when you lose or when you win.

[shield132]

Bankroll management with a fixed amount can feel boring sometimes, that’s why we get tempted to switch it up and try different betting styles. Not quite Martingale, but upping the stakes occasionally definitely adds more thrill.

Between the two options, which one do you think actually delivers more wins than losses in the long run for you?

That's actually one of the best question that someone can ask about the martingale strategy. My first strategy and I believe that everyone's basic human instinct suggests that all of us double when we lose. I and everyone who has tried it, we all failed. So, I decided to do the opposite and double after winning. One of the best thing about this is that it allows you to capitalize on a winning streak and you win a lot, especially if you double the third time and win again but in the end, it doesn't increase or decrease your chances and it gives you a similar result of basic martingale strategy. I'd only try any kind of strategy for fun and not for seeking a profit.

[YOSHIE]

Between the two options, which one do you think actually delivers more wins than losses in the long run for you?

Gambling is difficult to say about more benefits, everyone has different experiences in gambling, especially in double money, if I personally, of course the victory is better to be multiplied, which is certain that the two options have a risk.

I think you can try for both, of course you will have a new sensation for yourself, I think it's better, because your experience with other people's experiences in different gambling.

[slapper]

Anyone can double. But can you identify why you're doing it?

Because they eliminate illusion, fixed bankroll systems annoy us. No story. No comeback arc. No dopamine spikes. That is why they work, though. They are designed to avoid drama. Starting boosting stakes (after a win or a loss) you bring back narratives. Storylines feel alive. But storylines are expensive

Martingale is just emotional recursion in disguise: “Let me fix this fast”. But saying "double after a win" makes you cocky because it means you think that variance will suddenly respect your progress. Neither is wrong. But neither respects reality as it is. In real-life bankroll growth, particularly in modern gambling culture where simulation, tilt culture, and ego trading are all overlapping. What you don’t do consistently is as important as what you do

[Oshosondy]

I think you can try for both, of course you will have a new sensation for yourself, I think it's better, because your experience with other people's experiences in different gambling.

He should not do what he will regret is what I can say here. Anyone that go for what the OP posted is only looking for money from gambling and that is not good at all. All what he explained will only make him be exposed to riskier gambling and in a way he can lose more. It is not good to double the money after winning or losing. The best is to gamble responsibly by using amount of money to gamble and not increase it.

[Muba20]

In terms of betting, I think that one cannot always place bets considering the bankroll. Although someone wants to do that, it will certainly be boring. On the other hand, those who want to use Martingale are also not safe because there is a chance of big losing. I just think that one cannot increase money in gambling with any specific strategy. There must be a lot of dependence on luck. However, if someone manages gambling from a controlled manner and takes risks from time to time according to convenience, then there will be a possibility of getting big wins.

[Sticky Bomb]

I am not a fan of this but let's assume that I was going to do this with the money that I know that I can afford to lose, it will be to double on my win. Double down on my loss will make my losses increase if I para venture should lose that amount again. But if I should lose when I double on my wins, the loss will be small. I don't know if this makes sense but it is the way I have rationalized it.

I support this, since if I must double, then it's not with my money, but with the casino wins. I'm not a fan of these strategies too because to me it looks as though I'm approaching the casino as a source of income, rather than a casual and fun thing. I would also mention that doubling while you're losing just means chasing your losses and we know it gets very ugly when you chase it and don't catch it. And most times the gambler chases in vain, leading to heavier financial loss.

[dimonstration]

Bankroll management with a fixed amount can feel boring sometimes, that’s why we get tempted to switch it up and try different betting styles. Not quite Martingale, but upping the stakes occasionally definitely adds more thrill.

Between the two options, which one do you think actually delivers more wins than losses in the long run for you?

I hate doubling my bets regardless when I win or lose. Just increase your betting with certain percentage such as 20% so that you can minimize risk in case of losing streak.

I usually increase my bets regardless size when I’m winning since I want to ride on my winning streak instead of doing it losing streak which my bankroll is already depleted from loses.

[philipma1957]

Bankroll management with a fixed amount can feel boring sometimes, that’s why we get tempted to switch it up and try different betting styles. Not quite Martingale, but upping the stakes occasionally definitely adds more thrill.

Between the two options, which one do you think actually delivers more wins than losses in the long run for you?

I think 2x the bet win you win is a bad move

and 2x the bet when you lose is a worse move.


The way to make betting more exciting  is very much like sex. You have to master the art of edging which involves stopping in the middle of the heated action waiting a bit and then get back to it. 

[rachael9385]

Bankroll management with a fixed amount can feel boring sometimes, that’s why we get tempted to switch it up and try different betting styles. Not quite Martingale, but upping the stakes occasionally definitely adds more thrill.

Between the two options, which one do you think actually delivers more wins than losses in the long run for you?

Bankroll management is boring but you always have to do it to avoid too much losses.doubling when you win will also lead to losses, the chances of winning continuously in gambling is very low this is why it's advised to take your Profit after getting a lucky win. Doubling up your stake might lead to a quick loss of everything you have won including your capital if you are not being careful. Doubling when you lose is the worst, you are doing it out of desperation to recover, that emotional instability might make you throw all you have away.

[Oilacris]

Bankroll management with a fixed amount can feel boring sometimes, that’s why we get tempted to switch it up and try different betting styles. Not quite Martingale, but upping the stakes occasionally definitely adds more thrill.

Between the two options, which one do you think actually delivers more wins than losses in the long run for you?

Double when you win- This is usually happening on your last drop of your bankroll on which at the moment that you've been down -90% and you've been able to hit up some win with that last 10% funds then you would definitely be thinking on doubling it at the moment that you do win just because the primary thing that comes into your mind is on having that recovery until you do break even. You are the ones will be making out such choices because if we double out when we do lose then its just that simply martingale method and thats what most people been commonly used if we do speak about strategies. There are just that those times that you do make up some switches in regarding about strategies on which it will be basing up on what are the ways or methods that you do find yourself having that kind of entertainment. The key on here is that no matter what are the ways on handling your bankroll, never ever tend to make out even more deposits once you do lose.

[danherbias07]

I rarely double the amount of bets. In playing slots, I bet only $0.1, and I will stick with that until the end. But there are games with a minimum of $0.2, so I try to avoid them. For me, it's better if I can prolong the battle against the algorithm and have that chance to hit the big multiplier as it goes on.

Luckily, I did hit a lot of big multipliers playing around different slots with a minimum of $0.1 per roll, and when I double my capital, I will definitely go out. If ever it goes further than that, then I will probably just leave some balance and play again at the same initial bet. Not increasing and trying to be greedy.

[Sandra_hakeem]

Bankroll management with a fixed amount can feel boring sometimes, that’s why we get tempted to switch it up and try different betting styles. Not quite Martingale, but upping the stakes occasionally definitely adds more thrill.

That's Martingale!!! The whole idea behind what you just explained is the concept of operation in that popular, but garbage strategy. I don't really get the thrill in preparing your mind to lose even more, when you're already losing.

Between the two options, which one do you think actually delivers more wins than losses in the long run for you?

Neither of them. The cheat code is simple to follow and it ain't rocket science; If you want to minimize your potential losses, reduce the frequency at which you gamble/the amount with which you gamble with on a single ticket.
If you look at it realistically, you'd see that either ways, the casinos are winning big from you... On top of that, you have to struggle through the anxiety level, emotional control and everything just to keep up. 95% of time you get under pressure to do something, and It ends in a disaster.

[traderethereum]

You should know that trying to double your winning is not easy. Many gamblers try that but most of them losing their money and some of them lose all of their money. You should aware of this and not doing the same because if you already win, you need to realize that is the time to take a breath by stop gamble for a while.

If you choose to continue gambling, you must accept the risk and will not regret if that is happen to you. Double your bet when you lose is also not a good choice because your chance to lose big will be wide open. You need to be wise treating gambling so you will not lose too big, more than you can afford.

[gunhell16]

Bankroll management with a fixed amount can feel boring sometimes, that’s why we get tempted to switch it up and try different betting styles. Not quite Martingale, but upping the stakes occasionally definitely adds more thrill.

Between the two options, which one do you think actually delivers more wins than losses in the long run for you?

I don't do that method because I'm more prone to losing quickly, so it's still better to just gamble without thinking or expecting anything because for sure in the end the result
will not be good. Especially in the field of gambling, we usually lose.

If the majority of others often lose by other methods, then it's even more likely that way. Then it seems like it's stressful when done that way,
in my opinion and that's just my opinion on the matter.