One who wins big after many try or one who plays big who's smarter

[Gentle_Soul]

I was arguing on this topic earlier today with some friends and we discussing about a gambler who has been gambler for a while and a few win and also one big win over a long period of time but plays with less funds like uses small money to win big and  and one who plays with serious funds and always wins big ones in a while, the question here is who is smarter.
Some persons were of the opinion that the high staker is smarter for always staking high and that his returns when he wins will always be high and cover up if he doesn't win next time.
While others say the the low staker is smarter and would not probably feel the pain of losing if he eventually does and would make more profit if he eventually wins.
So the question is who do you think is smarter and which is a more favorable way to bet.

[lodocus]

In my opinion, it’s just as illogical to chase extremely low odds with very small amounts as it is to chase almost guaranteed bets with huge sums. I prefer to take a reasonable approach.

For example, just as I don’t think buying lottery tickets is sensible, I also don’t think it’s sensible to bet my entire bankroll on the day’s favorite team at 1.10 odds. What’s sensible is managing your bankroll in a way that fits your budget and taking risks that align with that. In gambling, you don’t have to push everything to the absolute limits.

[Nwada001]

The answer is whoever is winning over all is the smarter one, which I can tell from my end that those who gamble with small money are smarter; he is spending little money over time. If he's lucky, he could easily recover what has been lost compared to the high roller who can lose all that was won in a day or two and later start chasing a big win, which could take him forever before one will be witnessed.

Anyone who is just gambling within his limit based on their worth is the smartest one and not making decisions based on what they plan or target to win.

[Charles-Tim]

So the question is who do you think is smarter and which is a more favorable way to bet.

Using small amount of money to bet since a long time ago and later win huge amount of money is the best. A good example is if you are earning $500 weekly, but you bet with $5 and losing it all the time for a long period of time, but later you win big, that is better and it means responsible gambling. Unlike earning $500 and using $400 to bet. That is irresponsible and addiction.

[Grace333]

In my opinion, it’s just as illogical to chase extremely low odds with very small amounts as it is to chase almost guaranteed bets with huge sums. I prefer to take a reasonable approach.

For example, just as I don’t think buying lottery tickets is sensible, I also don’t think it’s sensible to bet my entire bankroll on the day’s favorite team at 1.10 odds. What’s sensible is managing your bankroll in a way that fits your budget and taking risks that align with that. In gambling, you don’t have to push everything to the absolute limits.

Sure gamble isn't a game of certainty, however bankroll management is very much required. You just can't wake up one morning and deposit your entire savings all in the name of hitting the jackpot or chasing huge win. It's not logical to do something of such which is why I'll always  advise to gamble with responsible mindset with minimal risk to reward. You don't necessarily have to fight your way to experiencing what other are experiencing because it all start from your idea or perspective about gamble, in as much as it pay it still doesn't change the fact that it is a business and the business owner wouldn't want to be on the losing side so it was designed for you to lose your money but when you apply risk management you get to lose only small fraction to gamble.

[mcdouglasx]

I would bet without thinking about winning a lot, since winning a lot would imply increasing my risk of loss. The statistics don't lie. The amount of money is irrelevant if we hypothetically see it as an exercise with infinite credit. It all depends on what bets you choose, how well each person knows about reading match statistics, and how lucky each person is. So in this case, I don't think one is more intelligent than the other.

[Aanuoluwatofunmi]

I was arguing on this topic earlier today with some friends and we discussing about a gambler who has been gambler for a while and a few win and also one big win over a long period of time but plays with less funds like uses small money to win big and  and one who plays with serious funds and always wins big ones in a while, the question here is who is smarter.

I think both of them are smart in this way because one is playing game over time with lesser amount and also win more often, while the other Gambler also uses big amount of money to play and also win more than he loses, it is important that we know that the two of them also take almost seem level of risk because the would have been in lost if they don't manage to win their games and the one that stick with huge amount also have the chances of earning more bigger amount and same also will be experience be fatal when he loses.

[WhoYouCantKill]

There's no specific answer to this because different people will always have different opinions, and they'll most definitely answer that question based on their own individual opinions. But what I can say to this is that the one who is smart is the one who gambles with what they can actually afford to lose, whether the amount is big or small, it really doesn't matter. The size of a bet doesn't really determines the smartness of a gambler or an approach, that's one thing we need to understand.

[Hispo]

It would smarter for a bettor to use their experience in order to improve and start to spot value in the betting market. Even if someone starts in their journey losing money through time, their intelligence will lead them to accumulate money and wins eventually.

People tend to mix up good luck with intelligence.

Someone who just started betting and managed to score some good money could have actually no idea about betting, just some beginner's luck.
While, on the other hand, you can see someone losing money at the beginning of their journey, but managing to get consistency after a year or two.

[Gentle_Soul]

So the question is who do you think is smarter and which is a more favorable way to bet.

Using small amount of money to bet since a long time ago and later win huge amount of money is the best. A good example is if you are earning $500 weekly, but you bet with $5 and losing it all the time for a long period of time, but later you win big, that is better and it means responsible gambling. Unlike earning $500 and using $400 to bet. That is irresponsible and addiction.

Yeah this makes sense and I think this is one of the most  appropriate response to this post, but I want to ask you a question what If you already have all the money you want seated in your account and are not moved after betting a large amount.

[IsraelK]

I was arguing on this topic earlier today with some friends and we discussing about a gambler who has been gambler for a while and a few win and also one big win over a long period of time but plays with less funds like uses small money to win big and  and one who plays with serious funds and always wins big ones in a while, the question here is who is smarter.
Some persons were of the opinion that the high staker is smarter for always staking high and that his returns when he wins will always be high and cover up if he doesn't win next time.
While others say the the low staker is smarter and would not probably feel the pain of losing if he eventually does and would make more profit if he eventually wins.
So the question is who do you think is smarter and which is a more favorable way to bet.

The debate between "High Stakers" and "Low Stakers" is as old as gambling itself, and both sides have a point—but from a professional standpoint, the answer isn't about the amount you bet, but the percentage you risk. Whether you are a "High Staker" or a "Low Staker," Bitcoin-betting is the superior infrastructure for your strategy.

[xenomorfo]

I was arguing on this topic earlier today with some friends and we discussing about a gambler who has been gambler for a while and a few win and also one big win over a long period of time but plays with less funds like uses small money to win big and  and one who plays with serious funds and always wins big ones in a while, the question here is who is smarter.
Some persons were of the opinion that the high staker is smarter for always staking high and that his returns when he wins will always be high and cover up if he doesn't win next time.
While others say the the low staker is smarter and would not probably feel the pain of losing if he eventually does and would make more profit if he eventually wins.
So the question is who do you think is smarter and which is a more favorable way to bet.

I don't understand why we have this kind of discussion, if you want to play, play to have fun and don't get all these films in your head.
If you have to waste all this time deciding whether it's worth playing or not, you're missing out on the fun and just having trouble.

[Odusko]

In my opinion, it’s just as illogical to chase extremely low odds with very small amounts as it is to chase almost guaranteed bets with huge sums. I prefer to take a reasonable approach.

For example, just as I don’t think buying lottery tickets is sensible, I also don’t think it’s sensible to bet my entire bankroll on the day’s favorite team at 1.10 odds. What’s sensible is managing your bankroll in a way that fits your budget and taking risks that align with that. In gambling, you don’t have to push everything to the absolute limits.

really if you don't push everything to the limit what then is the fun in gambling because the pressure brings with it the fun in gambling and betting in a less risk and reasonable manner could take off your fun sometime because even when you win, your winning will have limited unnoticed impact on both your bankroll balance and you fun, if you are going to bet on extreme low odds, you should at least use reasonable amount of money to chase that odds since low odd is a product of it winning potentials.

[Stalker22]

You cannot really say either of them is "smarter," but the one making big bets is actually the only one who has any shot at winning.  If you are going to play a game where the odds are against you, you should really go all in and then leave quickly.  He is not smarter, though; he is just more practical about his approach.  If you hang around for a "long time" with small bets, like the other guy does, you are just giving the house more time to slowly chip away at all your money.

[uneng]

The smartest one is the gambler who plays respecting his financial limits, never going beyond. There isn't a default formula to calculate this, as limits will be different for each gambler. Therefore, both kinds of gamblers, the one who plays big and the one who place small bets, can be smart or not, depending how much they can afford to lose.

[justdimin]

I was arguing on this topic earlier today with some friends and we discussing about a gambler who has been gambler for a while and a few win and also one big win over a long period of time but plays with less funds like uses small money to win big and  and one who plays with serious funds and always wins big ones in a while, the question here is who is smarter.
Some persons were of the opinion that the high staker is smarter for always staking high and that his returns when he wins will always be high and cover up if he doesn't win next time.
While others say the the low staker is smarter and would not probably feel the pain of losing if he eventually does and would make more profit if he eventually wins.

Obviously, the one making smaller bets is smarter, because he understands how gambling works in general, and he doesn't want to lose an amount that he can't afford to lose, whereas the person who is making large bets is wasting a lot of money on their gambling activities because even if they are getting big wins once in a while, that is not going to save them from losses in the long run unless they stop while they are in profit, but if he continues, he will eventually lose more money than they might have won with a large bet.

However, it is dumb to think that someone who is making larger bets will win more because of his bet size and the one making smaller bets won't recover their losses after a big one because they have a small bet, because if someone is betting with $0.1, and they hit a 500x win, they will win $50, and they must have lost either that much, or something just above it, so they should be okay. Now, someone who hits a 500x with a $1 will get $500, but they must have lost that much as well if they have been gambling for a while, so it basically makes it the same thing.

[mirakal]

The person who bets smarter is clearly the one who only bet on the amount he can afford to lose, the one who's not chasing losses overtime. Once he hit a big win, he can recover all his previous losses and get even extra profits that he can use wisely either to invest or to finance his future business in mind.

But a person who keeps betting big and losing big, when he wins a big bet, it would not even cater to all his losses, and most likely will place another bigger bet hoping to win another huge amount, but at the end of the day, his losses are even bigger than what he had been winning from his bets.

[serjent05]

I was arguing on this topic earlier today with some friends and we discussing about a gambler who has been gambler for a while and a few win and also one big win over a long period of time but plays with less funds like uses small money to win big and  and one who plays with serious funds and always wins big ones in a while, the question here is who is smarter.

We cannot tell who is smarter from just the given detail alone.  We need the statistics, the emotional attachment, and how responsible these two are in engaging in gambling.  the one that is less attached to gambling has lower losses and is able to gambling responsibly is the one smarter.

Some persons were of the opinion that the high staker is smarter for always staking high and that his returns when he wins will always be high and cover up if he doesn't win next time.
While others say the the low staker is smarter and would not probably feel the pain of losing if he eventually does and would make more profit if he eventually wins.
So the question is who do you think is smarter and which is a more favorable way to bet.

Being smart is measured by the action and reaction of how they engage gambling, not by how big or small they wager in a single bet.

[ColdLava40]

So the question is who do you think is smarter and which is a more favorable way to bet.

The answer is already in the question.

Logically people would want to say that the person who stake big is smarter because when he makes one win, he will over up all his loss. Indeed may work but I doubt.

If we compare both kind of gambler, on a longer scale, the one playing with small money will last longer than then one who risk too much and catches just one win often.

Even a gambler should apply his wisdom in managing risk. You can risk any amount you want, but don't waste your money chasing quick gains. It will leave you with losses that can't not recovered in your long time of gambling.

[I_Anime]

I was arguing on this topic earlier today with some friends and we discussing about a gambler who has been gambler for a while and a few win and also one big win over a long period of time but plays with less funds like uses small money to win big and  and one who plays with serious funds and always wins big ones in a while, the question here is who is smarter.
Some persons were of the opinion that the high staker is smarter for always staking high and that his returns when he wins will always be high and cover up if he doesn't win next time.
While others say the the low staker is smarter and would not probably feel the pain of losing if he eventually does and would make more profit if he eventually wins.
So the question is who do you think is smarter and which is a more favorable way to bet.

Both have their advantages and disadvantages, staking big will give you advantage when come to winning big also and will increase the chances of winning big anytime you gamble . But same time increasing risk and the chances of losing big also, because you are definitely going to experience losses .

While low staking  also have its own advantages and disadvantages, in low staking the chances of winning big is low due to the low stakes and stuff , and same time chances of losing big also low , minimizing risk and stuff .