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

[OsaiEmma]

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.

Wait, I thought gambling is all about luck, is there smarts now in it. I don't think the question should be who's smarter, but rather, who's more lucky. IMO d person who wins immediately is luckier, cause if u win immediately, ur basically having a good headstart, and u are having no loss at all.

So I don't think any is smarter but one is certainly more lucky than the other

[Outhue]

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 one who plays with serious money is the one I am worried about, one mistake or wrong bet and this person goes broke, unless he is a son of a president or a governor of a country, it's smarter to risk only what you can on gambling and this is why I believe that the person who risk small money to win big money is smarter.

They are both lucky it is, but what about they days that they won't be lucky? The one who risked small money won't lose control, or start having mood swings, because he risked only what he can afford to lose but the other person who likes risking a lot of money will collapse and start feeling the pain, if they can't handle the feeling they will start thinking about how to recover his loses.

[taufik123]

I don't think either one is smarter because they are both losing money in the long run as the one who plays with big money usually it does not end well and also for the people who have lost a lot of money and then comes and win big, this big win does not cover all the loses they have occured to him so far. So in this scenario I don't think either of these persons is very smart to say the minimum. The only smart one for me is the one who hits a multimillion dollar win and immediately quit forever after it.

Those who quit when winning at the right moment or at the beginning of a big win, it was the best decision, but it was a very rare piece of luck.
Some casinos also implement a fair RTP and have been audited by the relevant official authority if the casino is legal.

But the problem is that illegal casinos that do not get an official audit will commit fraudulent practices with algorithms that will only benefit illegal casinos.
There is no chance of winning for the player, although winning it will happen when they lose everything.

But believe me, Legal casinos still have a fair RTP, are still worth playing and just need to do good management
and you have to know how much you can spend and if you want to expect winnings don't be too greedy.

[Betwrong]

~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 know who's smarter, but I always play like this. As you said, I feel no pain if I lose my micro bet, but when I eventually win like this



it feels so good. I don’t understand high rollers. To me, their gambling seems stressful instead of fun. And it’s supposed to be fun.

[aoluain]

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 one who plays with serious money is the one I am worried about, one mistake or wrong bet and this person goes broke, unless he is a son of a president or a governor of a country, it's smarter to risk only what you can on gambling and this is why I believe that the person who risk small money to win big money is smarter.

They are both lucky it is, but what about they days that they won't be lucky? The one who risked small money won't lose control, or start having mood swings, because he risked only what he can afford to lose but the other person who likes risking a lot of money will collapse and start feeling the pain, if they can't handle the feeling they will start thinking about how to recover his loses.

I think I would be of the same mind - high stakes with large amounts if money is really risky and
there will be losses, there is no way anyone has a 100% win rate, it just depends on the win/loss ratio.

At the end of the day both approaches described by the OP are just two different strategies amounting
to losses and wins.

If on both strategies there are more wins than losses then the high stakes high roller wins more
and if there are more losses than wins then the safer bettor just loses less

[Frankolala]

If they're both gambling with the amount of money that they can afford to lose, they're doing the right thing and I call that smartness. However, any gambler that gambles beyond the amount of money that he cannot afford to lose because he wants to win big is dumb because profit isn't guaranteed when gambling.

[Cointxz]

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

The gambler who is playing using a bankroll that he can afford to lose and playing using a proper bankroll management with his bets because regardless the amount of your deposit the result depends on how you manage your bankroll properly on the actual game.

Smart gambler doesn’t risk a money which they can’t afford to lose since they knew that gambling games has house edge therefore there’s a high chance of losing than winning. We are just trying our luck here on beating the odds given by the casino.

[Dr.Bitcoin_Strange]

When someone wins in gambling, some people would say it's lucky while others would say it's smartness but the question is, is it not luck that still favoured the person who won a huge amount? In a case like this, both players could actually be smart but luck has favoured one of them more than the others and you can not say the other person is not smart because he didn't win. Playing with a big amount and not winning doesn't mean the person is not smart, probably that's the person pattern, while the person who won big also has a pattern of staking with small amount.

[SatoPrincess]

Yes the high staking gambler is more smarter in the sense that gambling is risk taking and the higher staker knows that and took the risk and wins from it therefore he is smarter. And the low staker is conscious about the economic management of gambling and he doesn't want to lose big amount and he is contented with what he is doing. Op I will advise you if you don't have strong heart, don't go for the big staking but main you standard and gambling what you can afford. There is no imitation in gambling. Everyone carry their risk.

I don’t necessarily think one is smarter than the other. I would say the high staker sometimes is usually the safer bet because they usually bet on fewer games with decent odds. The “low stakers” on the other hand often bet on multiple games and are more likely to lose. But like you rightly put, it’s not smart to imitate others in gambling.

[danherbias07]

The smarter one will be the one who is responsible enough to stop whenever they win, or the one who already quits after he wins and never goes back to gamble again.

But if I am only to choose one, I prefer the long-term with small bets. Actually, that's me. I don't bet high stakes because I do want to have fun while playing, and I do believe that playing high stakes will only add stress to my life and frustration if I lose it all in one go.
If the purpose is to play and win a small amount of money, then I think there's no need to force the idea of betting high. That's for gamblers who can afford it.

[Webutxo]

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.

Let's talk about the funds. If you don't have the mind to lose that money you call big funds, please don't do it. You should gamble with what you can afford to lose, don't put too much on yourself just because you think you could win. It's good to be determistic but don't use that courage to take risk you are not sure of the outcome because you may lose everything you have build, you will lose your funds and may not even have any bankroll to play next time.

I dont care which principle of gambling that work, as long as after some time you sit and able to calculate that you have won more than casino has taken from you, then you should be good. Don't gamble because you see others doing a strategy, I'm not even sure if there is any person that gamble big money in gambling and was able to win frequently, I have not seen people and if you think because they post their games, you may be n a long thing because they don't show you everything.

[Rubuchi]

If they're both gambling with the amount of money that they can afford to lose, they're doing the right thing and I call that smartness. However, any gambler that gambles beyond the amount of money that he cannot afford to lose because he wants to win big is dumb because profit isn't guaranteed when gambling.

you spoke my mind on this. It does not truly depend on the topic ahead whether you are one who wins big after many tries or one who plays big, it all depends on your pocket and what works best for your money and your fun. Gambling is both fun and financially implicating, so while you are making your decision please consider which one works best with your pocket. A gambler has nothing much to lose in gambling aside from the money. Reason why I said this is what makes a lot of gamblers run mad mentally is not because of overexcited of the fun of gambling but mainly due to the amount that they have invested and lose or in few cases the amount they have won which is beyond their grasp.

[Africolo]

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.

Logically, I believe whoever is winning at the end of the day is smarter because winning doesn't really require a big amount of money nor a small amount of money that is to say you must have some basic ideas and knowledge about gambling before you can win which the winning can come from being lucky. Of what profit will it be that one uses a huge amount of money to stake and at the long run you can't win, different gamblers has their mentalities and the amount they feel like staking so we should stake with what we can afford to loose no matter the amount we are staking with, what matters is the winning factor.

To me, i think he that uses small money to stake and wins big is smarter compared to he who use a big amount to stake, obviously the person that uses big amounts to stake will win a substantial amount but the disadvantages here is when he looses it will be a big amount too but when the one that uses a small amount to stake loose he won't really get depressed or feel bad about it because the money he used is small and he can let go of it.

[Sammye3]

There is no "smarter" one when it comes to gambling, its just the lucky one. Gambling huge does not guarantee winnings,  because in multiple situations I gambled with a huge anount with expectations for a winnings but it failed. I placed a bet on three games with total of 2 odds and a 1.20 odd cut the game. So, its not really about how much you bet or how small the odd could be; luck is the principle factor.

[AmaGold70]

I have always valued few well researched selections , and increasing my stake than many selections with small stake. In gambling, both the big, and small stakers looses bet, but statistically, those who stake big with well researched games tends to make more winnings than large selection with little stake. In my own opinion, smartness is when you win more than you loose.
To me, the gambler that win periodically but with huge amount is still the smart gambler, though he doesn't win regularly, but wins very big each time he wins a bet. As for the low staker who might only end up winning big once in life time is just a lucky gambler, but not considered as a smart gambler.

[Akbarkoe]

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 focus on the object in your argument by saying big capital and small capital which in fact you don't judge the amount of money is big or small from one's view, for example like $1000 in your eyes is small and in my eyes is big.
A win of $500 from your bet of course I see as big but to you it might be normal because it's half of your deposit, likewise with me if I get $200 from my bet winnings of course I consider it big but to you it's just a small part of your spin, speaking of big and small it goes back to you.

But certainly in my opinion do not gamble more than you can afford to lose, betting big does not indicate he is smart, but indicates he is capable, gambling intelligence is seen from how often he wins his bets.

[Fivestar4everMVP]

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  think there is any amongst this two that is smarter than the other, I want to believe that both of them are simply and individually gambling with the amount of money they can afford to lose, so both are being smart on their own.

We have to know that winning from gambling is a luck based, it's not by the amount of money one is spending, the gambler who is spending high on stakes may go through a long losing streak which will probably or almost empty his bankroll in a twinkle of a eye if he is not careful, while the other gambler spending small on stakes will endure more if he is faced with a long losing streak because being conservative helps him have enough in his bankroll to play for longer.
Among the two, luck is what determines who win and makes profit and who loses, it's not about being smart or whatever.

[Awaklara]

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

Profitability is not determined by whether you bet big or small. You will profit when you get more wins than losses. And big bets will not affect your chances of winning in gambling.

Those who are smarter are those who successfully manage their bets. They do not force themselves to bet bigger. Gamblers know the amount they can bet, and you become a smart gambler when you do not lose more than that amount.

[Cryptomultiplier]

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  think there is any amongst this two that is smarter than the other, I want to believe that both of them are simply and individually gambling with the amount of money they can afford to lose, so both are being smart on their own.

We have to know that winning from gambling is a luck based, it's not by the amount of money one is spending, the gambler who is spending high on stakes may go through a long losing streak which will probably or almost empty his bankroll in a twinkle of a eye if he is not careful, while the other gambler spending small on stakes will endure more if he is faced with a long losing streak because being conservative helps him have enough in his bankroll to play for longer.
Among the two, luck is what determines who win and makes profit and who loses, it's not about being smart or whatever.

The instances given here of the types of gamblers, that is the one that stakes high amount and the one that stakes lower amount, is more or less what makes up examples of different gambling strategies we have today.
A smart bettor or gambler is one who have discovered their own way to have an advantage over the house and better their chances of winning. It could betting big or betting small, and whatever be the amount won, it is a reward for the risk they took.

No need biting more than you can chew as regards the funds you can spare when gambling, because it will bite you in the ass and am sure it would be harder to beg anyone for funds when your funds are exhausted from gambling without proper bankroll management and risk management practices involved.

[Achalugo BTC]

Well for me, I will say win is win, it doesn't matter how many times you try before winning or which method one use to win, as far as they did it responsibly, that what its more important because one might win and still have the ability to manage their emotions, which they can be pushed to gamble more and fall into the temptation of addiction, but those that have the mindset of sustaining the right way of gambling are likely to be tempted or fall into temptation, as they can afford to overcome it and understanding its just a game.