Notes

The Difference Between Money Management and Bankroll Money Management
You've probably seen comments like "If you don't have money management skills, then you won’t be able to win" Or, what do you feel "money management is more important than the strategy employed" or "You won’t win if your financial management skills aren't up to scratch."
There will always be a section of gamblers who are always bleating about the virtues of money management. They believe that'money management' will magically transform their shaky approach into one that is highly profitable. All they need to do is modify the way they invest. I can assure that there's the same possibility of this happening like there is of Jess having a romantic date with Nicole Kidman.

It's now clear that I could be off-guard a little here, especially if you too have been influenced by those who worship these two phrases. This is only an opinion, and you can dismiss everything I have to say.
I acknowledge that I shouldn't feel as strongly as I do, but I'm telling you, I get some really horrible thoughts entering my mind whenever those two words are spoken.

What is the fuss all about? What's the difference between money management and bankroll management?

Money management, in my view is the method of earning money by gambling. This is done purely using a staking strategy. We all know that it doesn't matter which game we play (horse racing or sports betting, craps roulette etc), if we bet 'blindly', make no mistake, we lose. This means that if we bet on the number 7 on a wheel of roulette for long enough and eventually, the casino will be left losing our cash. While we may be lucky for a while but reality will set in after a reasonable amount of time.

It is impossible to win these games if you just alter the stake for each race, bet, spin or hand. This is a lose-lose strategy. It means that you're trying to control your money to win the game. Playing a poor game, but trying to win simply through betting.

It is obvious that we can make the majority of gambling profitable if we use our knowledge and skills. ( best free to play games are much easier to beat than others).


Bankroll management, on the other side, is the choice of which stakes to place ONCE you have found a profitable approach.
It is when you are winning that you have to consider ways to place your bets, but not until you've proven that you are able to turn profits, by using a specific approach by betting level stakes that is betting the same amount each bet.

That is, in essence the difference. Players who attempt to beat a game solely by staking use money management. This can be great for fun however, it's not good for your bank account.

It's stupid and arrogant to not mention that the entire concept stakestaking is a contentious issue. There a millions upon millions of punters who will affirm (maybe even the majority of punters) that they can make a loser's strategy an income-producing one by using 'clever financial management'. Don't let me stop if that is true. play free who plays the game should take the best approach for them. Very simply, if your strategy for staking works for you, then by all means, keep going.

I am, on the other hand, prefer to use approaches, which actually may be proved to be effective, and that is where we are able to get into managing our bankroll. Management of bankrolls is about how you can maximize the profit potential of a strategy. It's not about staking the path to success. It is difficult to find a lucrative method to stake your investments in the absence of an effective strategy. This isn't just a theory or an assumption - it's a mathematical fact that has been around for a decade!

It is the responsibility of punters to decide if they're willing to accept what has been proven to work or if they prefer to ignore the evidence and claim that it does not work (as numerous punters have graciously admitted to me).

This begs the question what if it was possible to beat an otherwise impossible game just by placing bets, then how are casinos capable of being around? Roulette, along with other games at casinos is a game with a lower house edge than horse racing or Keno. As an example the house edge in roulette is 2.7%, compared to 15 - 25 percent for horse racing and 5-10 percent for sports betting. So, if this were possible, one would think that the casinos would be the first to be cleaned out. Wouldn't you?
But, I can tell that when one's life depends on these types of decisions, I feel more secure in trusting mathematically proven methods to achieve success, even if they are all 'academic garbage', rather than relying on intuition or hot streaks. My experience is that hot streaks and hunches will not bring food on the table.

In a tournament sense in a tournament, many of the above rules don't apply. This is due to the fact that an enterer is directly playing against an opponent, which makes this the exception to the above rule. It may be an excellent idea to test an alternative staking strategy based on the opponent's position. When playing a tournament, like a blackjack or roulette tournament, simply playing your game in a steady and conservative manner will many more times than not result in you maintaining, or possibly expanding your bankroll in a certain amount. However, to win such tournaments, it's essential to adopt a slightly more aggressive approach in order to outsmart the other players.

So, to conclude the end, if you're an avid fan of money management and think that all the evidence is 'academic wank', and believe that games such as roulette are beaten simply through staking, then you have one thing over those who employ more mathematical methods You will be welcome with open arms in any casino.

Here's my website: http://www.antrim.net/great-novelty-of-online-casinos/