Small bets, vs big bets, vs small interrelated bets. Who wins?

I’ve heard the argument for small bets vs big one-off bets, in my mind, it has always implied going with your whim and building whatever idea is next - by no means in a negative sense. 

But would taking this approach and doing a bunch of small interrelated bets work better as a strategy? Would the specialising and niches, which pay off elsewhere in the world, pay dividends here - or would it totally destroy the magic of small bets, the diversity of bets?

I got the sense of an interrelated approach when I tried the product Blackmagic recently. Tony Dinh’s, what feels like a portfolio of Twitter tools under one product banner. He’s tied them together well, but each feature feels like a very different value proposition, sitting under a banner value proposition of ‘be better at twitter’.

That does come with some inherent complexity issues, and, to see this, just take a look at Blackmagic’s plan comparison page - a feature list that goes beyond the fold. But, does that really decrease the overall experience if the primary goal of the customer, which brought them to Blackmagic, is still being served amongst other users' primary goals?

I guess they're all just bets anyway.