One fallacy that seems to be common among gamblers is that a "progressive" staking plan can turn a system that makes a small loss to level stakes into a profitable one.
While the term "progressive" sounds very considered, if the more appropriate term of "aggressive loss chasing plans" were to be used, perhaps it wouldn't sound quite so so sensible.
"Progressive" staking plans means increasing your bet size following a loser or a series of losers. In the short-term, this strategy may work, but if your system is a losing one, sooner or later you will lose your entire bank. Increasing your bets following a losing streak doesn't make any mathematical sense. The laws of probability and mathematics pay no heed to previous unrelated results, be they good or bad. Betting against those laws is a recipe for financial ruin.
Many punters believe that a progressive staking plan is the magic ingredient for profits, and they are partially right in that good money management principles are essential, but to expect a progressive plan to be the secret to success is mathematically flawed. Some system sellers of course play on this naïveté to claim "98% success rates" for example, but as I have written before, if your system isn't profitable to level stakes, nothing is going to help you in the long-term.
In your opinion does not make sense to use progressive staking plans? What´s your banking management? All in?
ReplyDelete