**Safe betting Strategies for Your balance**

In this article you will learn about betting strategies and their variations. This information will give you the right to make a mistake, when you’ve got a bad approach to choosing bets and in case of any sporadical failures, or even a series of lost bets you will have an excellent chance to successfully continue the game.

**“Flat” Strategy**

Perhaps this is the simplest and the most successful betting strategy. You need only to define a certain percentage of the total bank, for example no more than 2% of the bank, therefore with a total capital of $ 200 you need to bet only $4. Do not change these 2% until the bank does not increase by 25% ($ 250 in our example).

**“Fixed Income” Strategy**

Coefficients may be different, but you should always change the bet amount so that the winning is always the same. For example in order to win $50 at a coefficient of 1.5, the bet should amount to $100, and at the coefficient of 2.0 you need to bet $50 to win another $50. The formula is: bet = (desired gain) / (coefficient – 1).

**Miller Financial Management**

Miller Management is the scientific name tor the “Flat” betting strategy, which implies betting on a 50% to 50% odds, usually these are the bets with 1.80-2.00 coefficients (the margin is different for every bookmaker). Aaccording to this strategy you should bet no more than 1-2% of the initial capital.

Your task is to guess more than half of the outcomes. To be at a gain you need to win more than 56% of the bets at coefficients of 1.8-2.0. After the capital increases by 25%, we also increase the size of the bet. This is the highlight of this strategy. With the increase of the bet amount we increase the probability of loss. Here’s an example: Suppose you have already increased your bank to 125%, meaning that you already bet 1.25%. If you start to alternate wins and losses, you lose 50% of your initial capital in 40 bets! Think about what happens if you get into a losing streak?

This strategy can hardly be called successful. Please note that the coefficients are rather high, and the amount of bet is small compared to the abnk. Who will be able to qualitatively analyze such number of events? Who has sufficient information? Only after 1000 bets you can draw some conclusions on the effectiveness of this strategy. In case you are just mindlessly guessing the odds, your chances will be 50% to 50% in the long run. In addition, there’s a commission that the bookmaker withdraws under any scenario, and this means that the Maldives will have to wait.

**Kelly Criterion Strategy**

This strategy was developed over 50 years ago for the stock market. When betting on sports its essence lies in the correct assessment of teams’ or players’ chances and betting, for example, if you see an interesting event in the betting line and assume that the bookmaker is mistaken as a formula it looks like this … when (the coefficient in the betting line) * (probability, in your personal opinion) > 1.

This is a really stable strategy, which does not allow to get rich quickly or immediately go bankrupt.

You always need to bet a certain percentage of capital.

This percentage from the bank is calculated using the following formula:

(Coefficient of outcome) multiplied by (probability of this outcome, in your opinion) – 1, and divided by (the coefficient offered by the bookmaker – 1).

It looks like this: (а х в — 1)/(а — 1) = optimal percentage for betting.

For example, at a coefficient of 2.50, you have determined the probability of 0.45.

Check the bet’s profitability: 2.50 * 0.45 = 1.125; 1, that means your bet is profitable and will bring you 12.5% of revenue in the long run, which is not very bad.

Now we determine the percentage of capital: (2.50 * 0.45 -1) / (2,50-1) = 0.083

Now let’s determine the amount of bet. Multiply your bank by the bet’s coefficient. For example, you have $325 on oyur account, then 325 * 0.083 = 27.

The disadvantage of this strategy is that you are required to have a professional understanding of the event, and win over the linemakers on a regular basis. It’s pretty difficult, that’s why many players using the Kelly strategy apply a decreasing 0.3-0.7 coefficient, which will provide good stability in case of a series of unsuccessful bets.

It’s a good idea to test this strategy and your ability to assess the events first on paper, and then by betting the real money.

**Unsafe Strategies for Your Capital**

In these articles we provide a review of strategies that are likely to lead to undesirable consequences.

**Martingale ****Strategy**

This is the most unreasonable and insanely risky game tactics. Martingale was invented for betting on “red or black” in the classic casino roulette. The main point is to constantly double the bet at a loss, according to the following scheme: 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64, 128, etc. If the bet wins, you will earn only one basic (initial) bet, while sometimes risking the entire bank. Martingale strategy can be used for a long time, but sooner or later you will face a losing streak and will simply have no money in the bank to double your bet.

**D’Alembert Strategy**

Also, a strategy known as «the Pyramid», the D’Alembert Strategy as well as the Martingale strategy, was invented for betting in casinos. In comparison with the Martingale strategy, it is a little more difficult, therefore, less popular, but less risky.

Let’s consider an example: you need to determine your bet and not change it in the future, for example $1 , if the bet is lost – your regular rate will be increased by this amount ($1), and if you win the bet, it has to be reduced by this amount.

This strategy is applicable for those who bet on a regular basis because it can quickly return the lost money. If the desired result doesn’t occur for a long time, there’s the reverse of this coin – you can quickly lose your money.

The strategy applies only to high coefficients starting from 2.0. One of the options for using the d’Alembert betting strategy is to bet on a draw (X).

An example of the strategy for a 2.0 coefficient:

Bet |
Winning |
Gain |

1 | 0 | -1 |

2 | 0 | -3 |

3 | 6 | 0 |

2 | 0 | -2 |

3 | 6 | +1 |

To reduce the risk, after winning you can decrease the amount of your bet not by the amount of the initial bet, but to start with this amount. However, regardless of the coefficient this strategy leads to a loss. At the 2.0 coefficients, three unsuccessful bets bring a null result, which further turns into negative:

Bet |
Winning |
Gain |

1 | 0 | -1 |

2 | 0 | -3 |

3 | 6 | 0 |

1 | … | … |

**Contra D’Alembert strategy**

The idea behind this strategy is similar, but the approach is totally opposite.

When losing you need to decrease the amount of the bet by one unit, and when winning – increase it by one unit.

Bet |
Received |
Balance |

1 | +1 | +1 |

2 | +2 | +3 |

3 | +6 | +6 |

4 | -4 | +2 |

3 | … | … |

In order to have something to detract from in the future, you should start with larger bets amounting to several units.

This strategy is often used by players who have losing and winning streaks. In the event of losing a series of bets, the players minimize their losses, and vice versa in a series of several wins in a row, they maximize profits.

**Oscar Grind Strategy**

**
**This is basically a copy of d’Alembert strategy, however with some differences. First of all, at the end of each cycle, the net profit should not exceed one unit. Second, it’s necessary to reduce the bet to a minimum to achieve the net profit of one unit.

**General rules:**

- initial bet – 1 dollar (euro)
- after the loss, the following bet is equal to the previous bet
- in case of winning the size of the bet should be increased by one

**Let’s see an example:**

Bet |
Winning |
Gain |

1 | 0 | -1 |

1 | 0 | -2 |

1 | 0 | -3 |

1 | 0 | -4 |

1 | 2 | -3 |

2 | 0 | -5 |

2 | 4 | -3 |

3 | 6 | 0 |

1 | 2 | +1 |

This strategy is developed to minimize risks. The main rule is not to apply this strategy at coefficients less than 2.0.

### Danish System

This is a risky system based on the requirement to increase the bet when loosing and to choose further events with larger coefficients.

Example: 1 bet – 1$ at the coefficient of 2.00

in case of loss: 2 bet – 2$ at the coefficient of 2.50

in case of loss: 3 bet – 3$ at the coefficient of 3.00

in case of winning the gain will amount to 3*3-3-2-1=3$

**Value Betting Strategy**

“Value betting” is a strategy of betting on incorrectly estimated events, whose coefficients are overestimated based on statistics. Suppose one team wins a visit only one time out of three, then 1 to 3.30 winning coefficient for this team gives us a positive expectation, since if you bet 3 dollars, after three gains you will get $3.3. Of course, this theory, because basing on the statistics, you do not take into account such factors as current rival team, its position in the championship, the current shape of players, injuries, etc.

**Unproven Value Betting Theory **

From the mathematical point of view, for a successful game, you need to make bets with the mathematical expectation of over than zero. What is the bet’s mathematical expectation? This average gain (or loss) on a single bet that you would get if you make identical bets on identical events for quite a long time.

Suppose you bet on guessing one exact number on a standard roulette (with one zero). Every time you bet $1. After a large number of bets made you will see the following: on average each 37^{th} bet will win, in this situation the gain will be $ 35, and the loss will be $ 36 ($1 per each lost bet). Every 37 bets you lose on average 1 dollar or 1/37 dollar (about 2.7 cents) on every wager.

It turns out that when playing an ordinary roulette, the mathematical expectation of any bet will be negative, hence in the long run you lose money, and the casino makes a profit.

The formula for calculating the mathematical expectation of a bet is as follows:

MO = V * P (V) – L * P (L)

where:

MO – expectation;

V – possible gain;

P (V) – the probability of winning;

L – possible loss, i.e. the amount of your bid;

P (L) – probability of loss.

Considering the fact that the probability of winning and the probability of loss should add up to 1 (P (V) + P (L) = 1), this formula can also be represented as follows:

MO = V * P (V) – L * (1 – P (V))

When betting on sports events, in contrast to the usual roulette, there is an opportunity to bet with a positive mathematical expectation. For example, a bookmaker accepts bets on the game between teams A and B. The team A’s coefficient of winning is 1.40 (i.e., when betting $1 your possible gain will be 40 cents), the team B’s coefficient will be 7.50 (possible gain – $6.5), the coefficient of the draw amounts to 4.00 (possible gain – $3). You have analyzed the situation and concluded that the winning odds for team A are 60% (or 0.6), team B – 10% (0.1), the probability of a draw is 30% (0.3).

The calculation of the mathematical expectation of three possible bets (for a $1 bet):

MO (A) = 0.4 * 0.6 – 1 * (1 – 0.6) = 0.24 – 0.4 = – 0.16

MO (B) = 6.5 * 0.1 – 1 * (1 – 0.1) = 0.65 – 0.9 = – 0.25

MO (x) = 3 * 0.3 – 1 * (1 – 0.3) = 0.9 – 0.7 = 0.2

It turns out that one out of three possible bets, namely the bet on the draw outcome, has a positive expectation of 20 percent.

Also, there is an easier way to determine this. Divide 100 by the supposed probability (in percent) of the outcome. The number that we get is a coefficient at which your bet will get zero expectation. To make the bet profitable the coefficient has to be greater than that number.

In our example, betting on team A will profit at a coefficient of over 1.67 (100/60), betting on team B – at a coefficient of over 10 (100/10), betting on the draw outcome – at a coefficient of over 3.33 (100 / 30).

Also keep in mind that underestimated event is not an event with higher probability. In the above example the winning of team A would be the most probable, however due to the very low coefficient the bet would be unprofitable. Coefficients for the favorites are usually very underestimated. This happens because many players are betting on the favorites, thinking they made a “win-win” decision. Bookmakers are forced to reduce the coefficients for the events, on which a lot more money was bet.

In the long term, permanent bets on the favorites will bring loss. It is easy to calculate that when the favorite’s winning odds amount to 1.04-1.20, the bet can have a positive expectation only in case the probability of winning is more than 91%. Such a huge probability is very rare for sporting events rare.

**Conclusions on the ****“Value betting” Strategy**

1. The most difficult task is finding the right event with a high value betting coefficient. Football and tennis are the best sports for this type of betting, because there are a lot of bets in lines for these events, the bookmakers will necessarily make a mistake. Also, the value betting strategy is applicable in Live bets, where a goal scored in the first minutes can dramatically change the coefficients. It is better to use value betting strategy at less popular bookmakers. They have less players willing to earn with this scheme and, correspondingly, the coefficients will be higher.

2. You need to perform mathematical calculations and have experience of working in Microsoft Excel table editor to collect the data and correctly calculate the probabilities of various outcomes. Mistakes in calculations are unacceptable, they will lead to an incorrect calculation of the bet’s mathematical expectation, hence the whole point of this strategy will be lost.

3. Use appropriate money management strategies. Bets on undervalued events can often result in the long term profits. Of course you shouldn’t exclude the series of losing bets. Even the casino owners sometimes have loss-making days. The right capital management strategy combines with a reasonable approach to choosing bets will minimize the probability of loss. Keep in mind that Martingale and other aggressive capital management strategies will always result in a loss.

4. Choose bookmakers that offer the best coefficients on the corresponding outcomes, because the coefficient directly affects the bet’s mathematical expectation.