Never underestimate the power of compounding..$2k to $16 million

[KTChampions]

In reality, there will be losing streaks of 5-10 bets, which can easily wipe out 10-20% of your deposit in one go.

20% is the correct number since OP mentioned it’s 2% of the bankroll. So 2% × 10 = 20%.
~

Of course that's correct. But the OP is calculating as if every bet is profitable. But this is fundamentally wrong, since with a losing streak of only 10 events (this is a very common streak at such a distance), his theoretical growth "1.0009 growth per bet" will actually turn into loss. A fairly common practice where clueless theorists, instead of getting a couple of percent profit after 10 bets, end up with a minus 20% loss  The problem is that losing streaks reduce both the deposit and the bet size, so the accumulation of profits (even with a winning strategy) occurs at a much slower pace.

[Jaycoinz]

It is easier said than done, we can easily calculate all these but things don't really go according to plan when it comes to sports betting. For you to turn 2k to 16 million you need to have a good number of winning streaks and we all know that this is something that isn't really possible, rolling over 2k to 10k is doable but we are talking about 16 million here, if we are realistic you'd see lots of impossibilities here

[Vaculin]

It is easier said than done, we can easily calculate all these but things don't really go according to plan when it comes to sports betting. For you to turn 2k to 16 million you need to have a good number of winning streaks and we all know that this is something that isn't really possible, rolling over 2k to 10k is doable but we are talking about 16 million here, if we are realistic you'd see lots of impossibilities here

Winning streak isn’t necessary to reach that level. If you can hit that percentage with the same volume stated in the OP, you’ll already be profitable. I think the computation is correct since AI made it, they’re good at math. So the real question isn’t whether the bankroll can reach millions, the question is can we maintain that winning rate?

I know it’s hard, but it’s not impossible. Are you up for the challenge?

[Russlenat]

In reality, there will be losing streaks of 5-10 bets, which can easily wipe out 10-20% of your deposit in one go.

20% is the correct number since OP mentioned it’s 2% of the bankroll. So 2% × 10 = 20%.
~

Of course that's correct. But the OP is calculating as if every bet is profitable. But this is fundamentally wrong, since with a losing streak of only 10 events (this is a very common streak at such a distance), his theoretical growth "1.0009 growth per bet" will actually turn into loss. A fairly common practice where clueless theorists, instead of getting a couple of percent profit after 10 bets, end up with a minus 20% loss   The problem is that losing streaks reduce both the deposit and the bet size, so the accumulation of profits (even with a winning strategy) occurs at a much slower pace.

It’s a wrong assumption that every bet is profitable. Of course a losing streak is still possible. Just look at the winning rate.

For example, if I have 1,000 bets and I won 550 of them, that means my win rate is 55%. With 1.90 odds, I would still end up profitable. And with proper bankroll strategy like using only 2% per bet, so even a 10-loss streak won’t drain my bankroll.

The key here is maintaining that 55% win rate most of the time in this long journey, since we’re talking about 10k bets.

remember that when losing streak is possible, the same goes with winning streak.

[STT]

Thats the key to the idea, if you ever found something which pays every time so well that you could compound the gains dont ever let go of it as its highly valuable.  Almost every other activity or investment you could make has never ending doubts and inconsistency to its performance even if its a good bet most of the time.

[mv1986]

You forgot to incorporate the RoR(Risk of Ruin) on your computation since the sequence of win to lose ratio is not always alternate.

There’s a losing streak that you should consider that might bust first your bankroll since you are compounding before you starting to win again to balance your winning rate and achieved the 55% winning percentage.

This and losing streaks set you back with your percentage based bet from your bankroll.

While I think that there are odds that are slightly off of what they should be, finding 10,000 bets that you give an edge would take an eternity. The bookmakers are pretty good at setting the odds exactly for the reason that they want you to go broke and not them

[Vaculin]

Thats the key to the idea, if you ever found something which pays every time so well that you could compound the gains dont ever let go of it as its highly valuable.  Almost every other activity or investment you could make has never ending doubts and inconsistency to its performance even if its a good bet most of the time.

That’s why I’d rather appreciate hearing from gamblers who actually have long-term experience, because they can really relate to the information I shared. Me personally, I haven’t reached 10k bets consistently yet, but I’ve tried long-term betting and I noticed that when I’m disciplined with bankroll management, I can be profitable.

So the key here is just making sure you stay at that higher win rate and keep the bets coming, the profit will follow.

[kennycryptoitalia]

we always hear  the words use proper bankroll management, and some experts say be conservative (based on what i read and hear watching videos)...., like just 2% of your bankroll per bet. this sounds boring at first, but this is supposed to be long-term. meaning if you keep winning the size of your stake slowly grows too. (isn't it interesting?)...

but let?s look at the numbers for a second.
say you make around 10,000 bets in your whole run, you start with a bankroll of $2,000, and you somehow keep a 55% win rate, which honestly is not impossible if you?re really disciplined. now think about it? with compounding, with the stake adjusting every time you grow the bankroll even a bit, how far do you think that $2,000 can go?

people usually underestimate how crazy the numbers get when you win just slightly more than you lose, but over thousands of bets.

But this math will blow your mind... ( i got help from AI on this to show the figures as its the main attraction of this post)..

Your contribution is very interesting, thank you for sharing it with us.
The fact that you can make 55% practically, correct me if I'm wrong, guarantees you that you actually have a profit and not a loss.
Below 50% you're at a loss, right? thank you

[stompix]

The question is, why stop at 16 million after 10,000 bets?

Did I ever say you have to stop? The 10k bets is just an example. If you want to go for 1 million bets, go ahead. The point is simple here bro, hit that 55% win rate. The more bets you make at that rate, the bigger your money will grow.

So, I assume you now have 160 BTC and you're telling us to copy your success rate? 
Or you just created a mathematical model and showed us how you can get rich?

Well, I have another model just as stupid as the one above, just hit the roulette on black or red 24 times in a row with $1, 16 millions!
Or, guess the 1x2 on any round of CL, the last parlay would have won you 28.432.843 for 1 dollar bet!

Why don't you check what kind of garbage the AI ​​gives you? The calculations there are completely incorrect, as if every bet is a win, which completely misrepresents the way compound interest works. In reality, there will be losing streaks of 5-10 bets, which can easily wipe out 10-20% of your deposit in one go.

Oh no!
You're also going to tell me that losing 20% of $100 is not equivalent to winning back 20% of $80?
Impossible! And here I was almost tempted to follow in the path of this scheme!
 

[xenomorfo]

In my country we have the following saying: "Paper can withstand everything".

First of all, the OP says that keeping a 55% win rate is possible if you're disciplined. That's not true when it comes to most games, and I don't believe it's affordable in sports bets either, at least long term.

In addition, it would still be a quite small win, unless you apply compounding, but compounding also exponentially increases the probability of bankruptcy.

When you write a business plan, it's just dreaming but at least you can take action through the years to at least try to correct deviations from your initial plan. But with bets, what action can you take to control the uncontrollable nature of chaos?

You are truly scientists, nothing to say, you manage to talk about percentages even in the game.
The fact that you do these calculations, however, does not take into account luck and bad luck.
If everyone could do what you say, the casinos would go bankrupt!!

[nimogsm]

It is easier said than done, we can easily calculate all these but things don't really go according to plan when it comes to sports betting. For you to turn 2k to 16 million you need to have a good number of winning streaks and we all know that this is something that isn't really possible, rolling over 2k to 10k is doable but we are talking about 16 million here, if we are realistic you'd see lots of impossibilities here

Any casino will always be in the black, and no statistics will help here, especially those mentioned in the initial post.Any loss will ruin the strategy and set the player back. I believe in x5, but going from two thousand to several million is very unlikely.And the second important factor is that I don't think the casino will allow the player's deposit to be depleted so quickly; there will definitely be reasons to suspend the account.

[Vaculin]

Your contribution is very interesting, thank you for sharing it with us.
The fact that you can make 55% practically, correct me if I'm wrong, guarantees you that you actually have a profit and not a loss.
Below 50% you're at a loss, right? thank you

Yes, as long as you stay disciplined with bankroll management. Just stick to 2% of your bankroll for every bet, win or lose.
Anything below 52.5% win rate is losing territory, anything above that is where you start making profit, assuming you’re taking around 1.90 odds on average.

So, I assume you now have 160 BTC and you're telling us to copy your success rate? 
Or you just created a mathematical model and showed us how you can get rich?

[so....] no
[Or...] yes

Well, I have another model just as stupid as the one above, just hit the roulette on black or red 24 times in a row with $1, 16 millions!
Or, guess the 1x2 on any round of CL, the last parlay would have won you 28.432.843 for 1 dollar bet!

You kinda lose the argument the moment you compare roulette to sports betting. Roulette is pure luck with a fixed house edge, no skill, no info, nothing you can use to get an edge. Sports betting isn’t like that at all. If you’re a regular gambler, you know there are variables you can study and actually improve on.

So if we’re talking about maintaining a 55% win rate, comparing it to a luck-only game doesn’t make sense. It just means you’re arguing from the wrong angle. 

[stompix]

Roulette is pure luck with a fixed house edge, no skill, no info, nothing you can use to get an edge. Sports betting isn’t like that at all. If you’re a regular gambler, you know there are variables you can study and actually improve on.

So, since you don't have the $16 million in your account, and in virtue of the above statement, should I conclude that you have no
- skill
- no ability to complete basic research
- no capacity for study
- no possibility to improve?
Is this what you're trying to say?

You kinda lose the argument

You actually lose the argument when you're starting to shout like a mad cow around here!

[Vaculin]

Roulette is pure luck with a fixed house edge, no skill, no info, nothing you can use to get an edge. Sports betting isn’t like that at all. If you’re a regular gambler, you know there are variables you can study and actually improve on.

So, since you don't have the $16 million in your account, and in virtue of the above statement, should I conclude that you have no
- skill
- no ability to complete basic research
- no capacity for study
- no possibility to improve?
Is this what you're trying to say?

Bruh, chill. Why are you insisting that I have $16 million in my account? What I showed in the OP was just a presentation, a possibility of how much your bankroll could grow if you follow specific bankroll management and hit that winning rate.

I didn’t hit those numbers. I’m not profitable. I was just showing the math. It was made for discussion, not a personal experience.

Please read it again, you probably misunderstood it.

You kinda lose the argument

You actually lose the argument when you're starting to shout like a mad cow around here!

Which part did I shout?

[stompix]

Bruh, chill. Why are you insisting that I have $16 million in my account? What I showed in the OP was just a presentation, a possibility of how much your bankroll could grow if you follow specific bankroll management and hit that winning rate.
I didn’t hit those numbers. I’m not profitable. I was just showing the math.It was made for discussion, not a personal experience.
Please read it again, you probably misunderstood it.

Nope, I didn't misunderstand anything, your arguments were that, unlike roulette, which is a pure luck gambling on sports is a thing of skill, experience and to which you can dedicate time to study and improve. Now obviously, there are two possibilities:
- gambling is indeed like that, and since you don't have the millions, it means you're not able to study, improve, research etc.
- gambling is not like that, which means you said something stupid, but it explains why you don't have the millions

It's called logic! Pretty simple stuff, no philosophical queries needed!

Which part did I shout?

Which part of  [ b][ size=15pt] do I have to explain?

[Vaculin]

It's called logic! Pretty simple stuff, no philosophical queries needed!

So what you’re saying is roulette and sports betting are the same thing?

If your answer is yes, then I’ll just stop replying to your post.

Which part did I shout?

Which part of  [ b][ size=15pt] do I have to explain?

Sorry, i will not do it again, next time I will make it smaller (5pt) so you don't see it as shout

[Ziskinberg]

I believe in x5, but going from two thousand to several million is very unlikely.

It’s hard to find a story where a bettor turns $2k into millions from regular grinding, but with parlays, you do hear stories like that.
So what OP shared might be close to impossible, but I still find it interesting, especially the math behind it.

$50 → $1.1 Million on a 15 Leg NFL Parlay

https://nxtbets.com/biggest-nfl-parlay-wins/

[uneng]

So the real question isn’t whether the bankroll can reach millions, the question is can we maintain that winning rate?

I know it’s hard, but it’s not impossible. Are you up for the challenge?

I don't think you can maintain that winning rate, because you are going to hit a long loss streak at some point, which will drain all the progress made so far. And if you try to apply a strategy like Martingale to get rid of the losses, there are potential chances you end sacrificing your whole bankroll in vain.

The scenario you brought on this thread is quite smooth and stable, while for real, outcomes in gambling are totally unstable and unpredictable, so discipline besides bankroll management aren't enough to ensure long term profit. You still need to be lucky, what is out of your personal control.

[Fivestar4everMVP]

win rate: 55%
stake: 2% of bankroll each bet
starting bankroll: $2,000
total bets: 10,000

1. expected profit per bet

if odds are 1.90, profit on a win is +0.90 per unit.

EV =
0.55 × 0.90 (profit when you win)
minus
0.45 × 1 (you lose your stake)

EV = 0.495 – 0.45
EV = +0.045 per $1 staked
so basically 4.5% edge per stake.

2. apply 2% staking with compounding

you bet 2% of your bankroll each time.

so each bet grows the roll by:

1 + (0.02 × 0.045)
= 1 + 0.0009
= 1.0009 growth per bet

3. compound it over 10,000 bets

bankroll =
2000 × (1.0009^10000)

1.0009^10000 ≈ 8080 (rounded)

final bankroll ≈
2000 × 8080
= $16,160,000+

Lols, OK, but I am going to be honest with you, no gambler with good gambling experience and in their right senses will bet based on this calculations bud, casinos are not stupid, and remember that odds of a game are not always the same, this alone has rendered this calculation absolutely useless as this makes the calculation far from reality..

You forgot that it's possible to that you will win a match with odd of 1.90 for example which automatically ups your stake for the next bet, and that next bet could be a game that comes with odds of 2.3 for example, and you end up losing it, what this means is that the money you lost on this game may potentially be higher than the profit you made from the previous game you won..
And you also did not consider the fact that long losing streak may happen which could take your winning ratio down below 50% before you start building it up again, and before you know it, you might be out of bankroll, the long and short of the matter is that, there is no practical way to guarantee profit from sports betting, it still comes down to who is luckiest.

[Porfirii]

In my country we have the following saying: "Paper can withstand everything".

First of all, the OP says that keeping a 55% win rate is possible if you're disciplined. That's not true when it comes to most games, and I don't believe it's affordable in sports bets either, at least long term.

In addition, it would still be a quite small win, unless you apply compounding, but compounding also exponentially increases the probability of bankruptcy.

When you write a business plan, it's just dreaming but at least you can take action through the years to at least try to correct deviations from your initial plan. But with bets, what action can you take to control the uncontrollable nature of chaos?

You are truly scientists, nothing to say, you manage to talk about percentages even in the game.
The fact that you do these calculations, however, does not take into account luck and bad luck.
If everyone could do what you say, the casinos would go bankrupt!!

Hey xenomorfo, I think that you misunderstood my post. Unlike the OP, what I mean is that what is possible in theory isn't feasible in real world. So, in fact, no, I mean quite the opposite to people being able to apply that system and making casinos go bankrupt.