Notes

The Difference Between Bankroll and Money Management
You've probably been exposed to comments like "If you don't have funds management skills, you will not win"; or, how about "money management is more crucial than the selection strategy used"; or even "You aren't going to win if you money management skills are poor."
One punter group will never cease to boast about the advantages and virtues of money management. They believe that'money management' will magically transform their otherwise unsuccessful method to one that's profitable. All they have to do is alter the way they invest. It's as likely as Jess going to a night out with Nicole Kidman.

Now , I realize that I could be stepping on your toes somewhat here, especially if you too have been influenced by those who revere these two words. This is only an opinion, and you are free to ignore everything I say.
I confess that I shouldn't be feeling as strongly as I do. I tell you, I get some terrible thoughts rushing through my head every time the words "speak" are used.

Okay, what is all the excitement about? What's the difference between money management and the management of your bankroll?

mobile games (in my opinion) is the process by which a gambler seeks to make money from any kind of gambling using some sort of stake-taking strategy. As we all know, regardless of the game we choose (horse racing or sports betting, craps roulette, etc.) If we gamble blindly, don't make a mistake about it the odds are against us. This means that if you wager on number 7 on a roulette wheel for long enough it is likely that the casino will be the winner. Although we might be lucky for a short time, reality will eventually set in after a reasonable amount of time.

It is impossible to win these games if you only alter the stake for each race, bet, spin or hand. This is a losing strategy. That is, you're trying to employ money management to win the game. It's a losing game but trying to win simply by staking.


We know that if we apply our knowledge and skills, then we can turn the majority of gambling games into profitable activities. Certain games are more difficult than others.

Management of your bankroll, on other on the other hand, is deciding how to stake your selections once you've found the most profitable strategy.
You should only think about the way you place your bets in the event of a win.

Essentially, that is the primary difference. Punters who try to win a game through staking are using money management. It can be great for fun however, it's not a good idea for your finances.

It would be stupid and arrogant to ignore the fact that the whole idea of stakestaking is quite contentious. Millions upon million of punters will claim (or many punters) that you can make a losing strategy profitable through 'clever money management'. If this is true and you believe it, then don't allow me to hinder you. play free games that any punter can do is to continue with the strategy that is working for them. Simply put, if you discover that your stake strategy is able to work for you take it to the next level and keep working.

On the other hand I would prefer using established methods for managing your bankroll. How to make the most out of a profit-making method is what bankroll management is all about, not how to determine a winning approach through staking. If check here don't have a profit-making method, there's no way to come up with a viable strategy through simply staking your selections differently. This isn't a theory or a guess - it's a mathematical fact that has been in use for more than a decade!

If punters are willing to listen and discover what is proven to be effective, or they are looking to put their heads into the sand, and claim that this is just 'academic wank' and that it doesn't work (as a number of punters have kindly informed me) It is obviously the decision of the punters.

It begs the question what if it was possible to beat an invincible game by simply staking the money, how would casinos be even able to exist? Roulette, like other games at casinos has an edge on the house that is lower than horse racing, or the keno. (For instance, 2.7% house advantage for roulette, as compared to 15% - 25% on horse racing and 5% - 10% for sports betting.) Therefore, if it were likely, you would think that casinos are the first to be cleared. Wouldn't you?
But, I can tell you that when one's livelihood depends on these types of decisions, I am more secure in trusting mathematically proven approaches to succeed, even if they are all 'academic garbage', instead of relying on hunches and hot streaks. My experience has been that hot streaks and hunches aren't going to provide food for the table.

Now in a tournament sense, much of the above does not apply. Since an entrant is playing against another opponent and is therefore an one exception to the rule. This is why it might make sense to use any kind of staking strategy which can differ based on the position of the opponent. You can maintain or increase your bankroll by playing a conservative and steady game, whether you are playing in blackjack or roulette at a casino. In order to win these tournaments you must be more aggressive in order to beat the other players.

In the end, if financial management is your passion and you think that games like roulette can be beat purely by staking, then you're more likely to get accepted at any gambling establishment.

My Website: http://www.crazyscraps.com/ruby-fortune-casino/