Would this be an effective form of proportional betting?

[dalmatian]

Lets say I have Table A with a table min of X and max 20X and another table with min of Y and max of 20Y. My max bet at each table is the table maximum. I spend 50% of my time at Table A and 50% of my time at Table B. X <Y.

I keep track of my bankroll and adjust accordingly how much time I spend between the two tables. For example, in the case of a losing streak I would spend proportionally less time at table B until it swung back around.

I'm tired of not being able to increase my bets following a positive streak due to the constraints of the low table max. Thinking outside the box here but unsure if this would be effective. Thanks for any meaningful feedback!

[Freightman]

Paragraph 2 is voodoo.

Otherwise, the scheme is okay, subject to strong bankroll and the following caveat. Short term variance may cause long term ball scratching, though all should turn out in the end.

So, you're upset about 1-20 spread because of table max constraints? 10-200 and 25-500?

One last thing - time allocation over table based on positive streaks? Are you counting, or just playing basic. If just playing basic, you will be a long time loser.

[Stealth]

Are you counting? What the hell do streaks have to do with anything?

[Meistro123]

I prefer to play at tables where my max bet is significantly less than the table max if that is an option. Betting table max is a red flag and my goal is not to stand out.