Notes

What is the difference between bankroll management and the management of money?
I am sure you would have heard comments like "if you don't have great financial management skills, then you simply won't be successful', or what about 'money management is much more important than the choice strategy used'; or even 'you can't win if you don't have good money management skills'.
There will always be a group of punters who is always singing about the virtues of money management. They believe that the mysterious term "money management" is the answer to their problems, which will turn their otherwise unprofitable approach magically into a highly profitable one, by changing the way they invest. This is just as likely as Jess going on an outing with Nicole Kidman.


Now I realise, that I could be stepping on your toes somewhat here, especially in the event that you have also been deceived by the people who revere these two phrases. This is just an opinion, and you are free to ignore everything I say.
Although I know I shouldn't feel this strongly but I can assure you that these words can cause me to experience some negative thoughts.

What's the fuss about? What is the difference between managing money and managing your bankroll?

The term "money management" (in my view) is when a punter seeks to make money from any kind of gambling employing a betting strategy. We all know that no matter what game we play (horse racing as well as sports betting, craps roulette, etc.), if we bet 'blindly', make no mistake, we lose. This means that if we place a bet on number 7 on a wheel of roulette for a long time and eventually, the casino will end up losing our cash. It is possible to be lucky in the short-term however it will all be over in over a half reasonable time.

You can't beat these games if you only change the stake per race/bet/spin/hand. It's a losing strategy. This means that you're trying to manage your money to beat the game. You're trying to win a game by just putting your money into.

It is clear that we can make the majority of gambling profitable if we use our expertise and knowledge. Some games are more difficult than others.

The management of your bankroll, on the other on the other hand, is deciding which stakes to place once you've found an approach that is profitable.
If you're winning that you have to consider how you will put your money in the bank, not after you have proven that you are able to turn into a profit following a specific strategy betting level stakes which is basically, the same amount every bet.

That is, in essence the main difference. Punters who try to win a game by staking use money management. It can be a lot of entertainment, don't get me wrong, but not so good for your wallet.

This is a bit ignorant and arrogant of me to fail to point out that this whole notion of staking is quiet contentious. There are millions of gamblers who swear (maybe perhaps even the vast majority of punters) that it is possible to make a loser's strategy an income-producing one by using 'clever money management'. Do not let me stop you in the event that this is the case. The best thing any punter can do is to continue with the strategy that is working for them. If your strategy for staking works for you If it does, absolutely take it to the next level and keep going.

However I like using methods that have been proven to work for bankroll management. apps to get the most profit from a profitable approach is what bankroll management is about, not how to determine a winning approach through placing bets. If you don't have a profitable approach, then there is NO way that you can discover a successful strategy by simply staking your money differently. This isn't an thought or an idea based on a hunch. this is a ten-year-old mathematically proven fact!

If punters are willing to listen and discover what is proven to work, or they want to throw their heads in the sand and claim that it's all academic junk' and isn't working (as many punters have informed me) It is obviously the decision of the punters.

In saying this it is necessary to be asked, that should it be possible to beat an impossible game by simply staking, it would have to be one of the greatest mysteries in the world about how casinos could be allowed to exist. Roulette, along with other casino games has a lower house edge than horse racing or the keno. For example the house edge in roulette is 2.7 percent, as opposed to 15 - 25 percent for horse racing, or 5% – 10% for betting on sports. If it were possible then one would think that the casinos are the first to be cleaned. Wouldn't you?
However, I will tell that when one's livelihood is based on these kinds of decisions, I feel much more confident choosing strategies that could be mathematically proven to be successful even if it's academically unsound, rather than to rely on hunches and hot streaks. According to my experience, hunches and hot streaks do not bring food on the table.

If you are playing a tournament this rule doesn't apply. Because an entrant is directly playing against a different opponent it is an exception of the general rule. This is why it might make sense to use some sort of staking approach which can differ based on the opponent's position. You can maintain or increase your money by playing a cautious and steady game, regardless of whether you're playing blackjack or roulette in a casino. To win these tournaments, it's essential to use a somewhat more aggressive approach in order to outsmart the other players.

In conclusion, if you are a money management fan and believe that the facts are academic wank, and believe that games such as roulette are beaten simply through staking, then have one advantage over players who employ more mathematical methods and that is that you will always be welcomed with open arms at any gambling establishment.

Read More: http://www.iloveubuntu.net/nautilus-receives-tags-ubuntu-1204-lts