Let's look at the main financial strategies for betting.

A **financial strategy** is a *system designed to manage a player's capital (or bankroll)* . The primary aim of implementing a financial strategy is to *optimize winnings and reduce the likelihood of bankruptcy* . Most strategies have been developed for gambling games such as roulette, while some have been specifically designed for bookmakers.

It is recommended to use a particular financial strategy not only in value betting, but also in regular gaming. The key is to choose the most suitable strategy for oneself and stick to it for a long time. This helps to avoid significant losses and neutralize the consequences of poorly thought-out actions.

*Flat betting* is the simplest of existing strategies, yet one of the most effective. Its essence lies in the fact that the player consistently places bets of the same size, regardless of the chosen event and outcome.

For beginners, it is recommended to choose a fixed bet size equal to 3-4% of the initial bankroll. You can as well set separate fixed amounts for most single bets, accumulator bets, and system bets (and these amounts can and should differ), which you place outside of any specific gaming strategy.

The advantage of this strategy is the simplicity of assessing the game effectiveness. Knowing each stake amount and the final bankroll, you can easily figure out the percentage of the player's forecast accuracy.

This strategy is similar to the previous one, but unlike *Flat betting* , it fixes the size of the desired net profit - instead of the stake amount. Thus, *the stake amount depends on the odds value*:

`Stake amount = desired net profit / (1 - odds)`

In other words, the higher the odds, the greater the risk, and the smaller the stake amount. And vice versa: the lower the odds, the more likely success and the bigger the stake.

For both strategies, you can also set several fixed values for each level of confidence the player has in the outcome. In the case of overestimated bets, this means different fixed values for different degrees of bet overestimation.

Both systems, whether *fixed stake* or *fixed profit* , have their advantages. Preference may be given to one system or the other depending on the odds. Let's consider this mathematically by comparing the functions of *average net profit* for each of them. We have:

`Flat Betting: f1(k) = Sst*(K-1)*p(K) - Sst*(1-p(K))`

`Fixed Profit: f2(k) = Spr*p(K) - Spr*(1-p(K)) / (K-1)`

where `Sst`

is the fixed stake amount, `Spr`

is the fixed profit size, `K`

is the coefficient (odds), `p(K)`

is the probability of correctly guessing bets with coefficient K. Let `p(K) = 1/K + V(K)`

, where `V(K)`

is some function expressing our advantage over the bookmaker's line, which, obviously, should also depend on `K`

. Without distorting the meaning, we can assume that `V(K) = C/K`

, where `С`

is a constant indicating the effectiveness of our forecasts (for example, if for `K=2`

our forecasts have a 10% advantage over the line, then we can consider `C=0.20`

). Thus:

`Flat Betting`

: `f1(k) = Sst*(K-1)*(1/K+C/K) - Sst*(1-1/K-C/K) = Sst*((K-1)*(1/K+C/K) - (1-1/K-C/K)) = Sst*(1+C-1/K-C/K-1+1/K+C/K) = Sst*C`

`Fixed Profit`

: `f2(k) = Spr*p(K) - Spr*(1-p(K))/(K-1) = (Spr/(K-1))*((K-1)*(1/K+C/K) - (1-1/K-C/K)) = (Spr/(K-1))*(1+C-1/K-C/K-1+1/K+C/K) = Spr*C/(K-1)`

Both of these functions have the form `S(K)*C`

, where `S(K)`

is the function representing the dependency of the stake amount on the coefficient (odds). For *Flat* , the `S(K)`

function is constant (according to the condition), and therefore, the function of the average net profit for this strategy is also constant, and it does not depend on the coefficient. However, the function of the average net profit for *Fixed Profit* inversely depends on the coefficient due to the dependence of the stake amount function on the coefficient. The function `Spr*C/(K-1)`

intersects the line `Sst*C`

at the point `(Spr/Sst)+1`

. Since the function `f2(K)`

is monotonically decreasing, before this point, the average net profit for the *Fixed Profit* strategy is greater than for *Flat* , and after this point, it is lower, for the same `K`

.

From this, it is evident that when the quality of forecasts is low (i.e. `C<0`

, which is equivalent to `K*P(K)<0`

meaning that the forecasts have a negative expected value), neither strategy will yield a profit. However, if the quality of forecasts is good, then the player can increase their profit by manipulating these strategies.

A simple but very reliable strategy. Its essence lies in constantly placing bets in proportion to a certain percentage of the current bankroll. The less money remains, the smaller the stake amounts; the larger the bankroll, the larger the sums that can be risked. It is recommended to choose a percentage no more than 25% of the bankroll.

The advantage of this strategy is that in the case of frequent losses, the player can continue playing for quite a long time until they exhaust the entire bankroll.

The most well-known gambling strategy. In the long run, it theoretically allows winning even with frequent losses. Its main point is to select the initial stake amount, and in case of a loss - to double it, and in case of a win - to return to the initial value. The advantage is that provided the player has a sufficiently large bankroll, it allows them to remain in profit after a certain number of games.

The disadvantage, like for any other progressive strategy, is that in the event of losses, stakes increase exponentially, and with a series of failures the player's bankroll can be depleted very quickly.

This strategy is less known than the *Martingale* and also originates from the world of gambling. Like the Martingale, it is progressive. However, stakes increase not in geometric but in arithmetic progression, making this strategy less risky.

That is, the player selects some initial stake value and, in case of a loss, increases it by a fixed amount. In case of a win, the stake decreases by the same fixed amount. To reduce risks, the player can also reset the stake amount to the initial value after each win.

This strategy is better suited for bets with odds of 3-4.

As seen from the name, this is a strategy opposite to the *D'Alembert*. The difference is that the player increases stakes in case of a win and decreases them in case of a loss. Such a strategy is better suited for bets that often win, especially in a row.

However, both strategies, D'Alembert and Reverse D'Alembert, usually lead to losses in the long run. Although they may often yield some profit initially.

This strategy was developed for Red And Black Roulette, making it suitable for bets with odds around 2.

Bets are placed according to the rules, with a fixed amount considered as 1 unit.

The goal is to gain a profit of 1 unit at the end of each cycle. If a smaller stake is sufficient for this, compared to what should be according to other rules, the stake should be reduced to this amount. This rule has the highest priority. The initial stake is 1 unit. If the initial stake is lost, the second stake is also 1 unit. The stake after a loss is the same amount as the lost bet. After a win, the amount of the next bet is increased by 1 unit.

As seen, this strategy is also progressive.

This is a highly popular strategy. Unlike progressive strategies and strategies with fixed stakes/winnings, it provides maximum protection for the player against bankruptcy. That is, it withstands the longest sequence of unsuccessful bets. This is achieved by the fact that stakes depend on the size of the bankroll, the odds values, and the player's forecast regarding the probability of winning. The following formula gives the optimal stake amount:

`bankroll size * ((odds * player's forecast) - 1) / (odds - 1)`

Here, the player's forecast is the assumed probability of the selected outcome. This strategy requires the player to provide high-quality forecasts.

To assess the probability of the outcome, the player can use our service to search for valuebets.