Parlay Bets

[ChiTownHustler]

Russ,

These don't come along often. SEC examples would be Vandy/ Under a few years ago, when they played the top tier teams and I think they'd have an edge or Kentucky/ Over against the biggies.

N'West/ Over about 8-9 years ago was good for this too, they were ddigit dogs against top tier teams and would roll up points regardless and let up just as much.

Wazzu, when Gesser was there, was an automatic pair. Some books quit taking them.

You'll see a few develop this year as well, there are teams every season, just have to find them early and stick with it.

 

[YourAllAmerican]

I would not bet if I could not hit more than 55%. With no "certified" ATS record being a first time forum guy I can assure you I do better than that.
If you bet $1,000 a week for the 12 weeks of the regular season that would be an output of $12,000.00. If you hit 55% that would be $6,600 in winners and $5,940 in losers and juice. That would net you $660.00 total or $55.00 a week. Are you shitting me. I would rather play a slot machine.

How long have you been sports betting and keeping records, if you don't mind me asking? Snubbing 55 percent makes you sound inexperienced. If not with betting, then with record-keeping, at least.

Keep track of your picks this season. If you make at least 10 or so bets a week it'll become again clear just how difficult 55 percent is.

 

[EmmittRudd]

Comment: Looks like you both did pretty well to me. I would settle for the $2135.00 and feel pretty good about it.

But why? Look i don't play "if" bets. I was simply trying to illustrate how a four team parlay does not make sense when you can essentially hit the same thing and win $400 more. Is there something I am missing. Why would you ever play it that way and win $400 less and just say "oh well I feel pretty good about the $2135?" I'm not trying to be sarcastic, is there something I am missing? You can't just leave money on the table in this game and expect to make a profit.

 

[russ1945]

Russ,

These don't come along often. SEC examples would be Vandy/ Under a few years ago, when they played the top tier teams and I think they'd have an edge or Kentucky/ Over against the biggies.

N'West/ Over about 8-9 years ago was good for this too, they were ddigit dogs against top tier teams and would roll up points regardless and let up just as much.

Wazzu, when Gesser was there, was an automatic pair. Some books quit taking them.

You'll see a few develop this year as well, there are teams every season, just have to find them early and stick with it.

Let us know when one comes along. Interesting stuff.

 

[bellyputter]

The absolute best parlays(side-total) end up being correlated. Those were the days! @)

 

[russ1945]

How long have you been sports betting and keeping records, if you don't mind me asking? Snubbing 55 percent makes you sound inexperienced. If not with betting, then with record-keeping, at least.

Keep track of your picks this season. If you make at least 10 or so bets a week it'll become again clear just how difficult 55 percent is.

YAA: I am 63 and been betting for 40 years. Did not always bet parlays but in the last couple of years I have been doing well. I have never kept records of my betting and never saw any reason to. That is some kind of forum thing and I have never done a forum before. I am a momentum type of bettor and I do not have records to prove it but I will just tell you I could not get by on 55 percent. I have better things to do with my time. I have spent over 250 hours accumulating stats and data since January so if that sounds like inexperience so be it. I bet and move on. By Sunday night I have my plays down and have them in as soon as the lines open up unless I am anticipating the other way. I have put this on my thread a few times but I believe in it.

If you always do
what you have always done
you will alway get
what you always got.

You have to learn to broaden the scope of your handicapping and that includes choosing the types of bets that best suit your style. Not trying to impress anyone, either in 5-0SAT. Just sharing with those who have an open mind. Best of luck.

 

[5-0SAT]

If you are going to do that, why not just play an "if" bet?

If you started with $200 and played this card:

Nov 29, 2009 3:11am 4 Team Parlay - Winner 200.00 to win 2135.38
1. Football - Georgia Tech - spread +7½ (-120)
for the entire game held on Nov 29 at 12:00pm [winner]
2. Football - Florida - spread -16½ (-110)
for the entire game held on Nov 29 at 3:30pm [winner]
3. Football - Southern Mississippi - spread -14 (-130)
for the entire game held on Nov 29 at 3:00pm [winner]
4. Football - Virginia - spread +7½ (-110)
for the entire game held on Nov 29 at 12:00pm [winner]

You would risk $200 and after hitting your first game you would have won $161 roll that into your second game
The $361 turns wins you $342
Now you are laying $703 to win $598
You now are laying $1301 to win $1235.

If you hit you have $2536.
You won $2135 by hitting the same four games. That's $400 less. Now explain to me how that is not a sucker bet again.

that would be nice and all, but as you can see the games are played at the same times and many overlap. So your reasoning is faulty, but i do get your point. Using your logic you would have to start the day off with at least a 1300 bankroll. Gl during the '09 season @)

 

[mws]

If you started with $200 and played this card:

Nov 29, 2009 3:11am 4 Team Parlay - Winner 200.00 to win 2135.38
1. Football - Georgia Tech - spread +7½ (-120)
for the entire game held on Nov 29 at 12:00pm [winner]
2. Football - Florida - spread -16½ (-110)
for the entire game held on Nov 29 at 3:30pm [winner]
3. Football - Southern Mississippi - spread -14 (-130)
for the entire game held on Nov 29 at 3:00pm [winner]
4. Football - Virginia - spread +7½ (-110)
for the entire game held on Nov 29 at 12:00pm [winner]

You would risk $200 and after hitting your first game you would have won $161 roll that into your second game
The $361 turns wins you $342
Now you are laying $703 to win $598
You now are laying $1301 to win $1235.

If you hit you have $2536.
You won $2135 by hitting the same four games. That's $400 less. Now explain to me how that is not a sucker bet again.

The arithmetic is off:

200 + 200/1.20 = 167
367 + 367/1.10 = 700
700 + 700/1.30 = 1,238
1,238 + 1,238/1.10 = 2,363 - 200 (original stake) = $2,163 winnings

Thus, using a parlay has cost him $28, rather than $400+. However, the "if bet" would still provide a slightly better payout, so the point stands.
<!-- / message -->

 

[YourAllAmerican]

I have never kept records of my betting and never saw any reason to. ... I am a momentum type of bettor and I do not have records to prove it but I will just tell you I could not get by on 55 percent. I have better things to do with my time.

That tells me all I need to know about your betting.

We get a lot of handicappers join the forum each year who post in July and August about how they look forward to yet another year of 70 percent wins. Very few are still around come Thanksgiving.

I do wish you luck, however. Things could always roll your way.

 

[mws]

I don't generally advocate parlays, because they make money management so complicated, but I have to take the issue with the notion that the "true odds" make parlays a bad bet. First, the argument that the "true odds" make a five-team parlay a bad bet works just as well with a straight bet. If the "true odds" are 50-50 for each bet, why would you ever make a straight wager at -110?

The answer is that this is sports betting, and there aren't any true odds. The "true odds" that say that a five-teamer -- or a straight wager at -110 (or -107 or -102) -- is a bad bet are the true odds of a coin flip. We're not flipping coins here. We're all assuming rightly or wrongly that we can pick enough winners to beat the book. So, with that said, I have to point out that the standard three-teamer at 6:1 actually involves less juice (i.e., requires a lower winning percentage to beat) than a standard straight bet at -110. (The same does not hold true for two-, four-, and five-teamers.)

At -110, you have to win 52.38% of your bets to break even. In a three-teamer at 6:1 you have to win 14.29% of your bets, but just 52.28% of the components of the parlay (assuming the distribution of winners and losers evens out over time). Of course, in the short term, you will get some favorable and unfavorable groupings of winners and losers in your parlays, and you will have much bigger swings in your bankroll, which you want to avoid. That's a good enough reason to avoid parlays.

 

[russ1945]

That tells me all I need to know about your betting.

We get a lot of handicappers join the forum each year who post in July and August about how they look forward to yet another year of 70 percent wins. Very few are still around come Thanksgiving.

I do wish you luck, however. Things could always roll your way.

One last try: You guys alway talk ATS and you claim 55% is very good and I demonstrated how it is not worth the time and money. Consider this. Say you normally bet $50 a game (whatever) and on a given saturday you bet 10 games. You bet ten games at $50 and say you hit 7. Great day and that is 70% on the ATS. All star stuff. However, you bet $500 and netted + $185.00 or a little over 3 $50 units.
Lets say that you threw in a 5x4x5 like I described above for just $10 a pop for a total of $60.00. If you hit all five you would have won $750 (which computes into (+15 units) at $50 a unit. When you are hitting parlays like this ATS is out the window. Who gives a shit. You can have your ATS and I will settle for my money. Had you hit 4 out of five you would have netted $60.00. You wagered $500 dollars, had a great ATS, and netted $185.00 (35% return). The parlay cost $60, and you would have netted $60.00 (or one $50 unit). In the end you win $135 more and wagered $440 more to get it. Now, I ask, who is the sucker.
We have done all we can do. We have shown you how to do, how to do it on a budget, how it pays off if you have the ability, and how ATS does not necessarily tell the whole story. Best of luck.

 

[YourAllAmerican]

We have done all we can do. We have shown you how to do, how to do it on a budget, how it pays off if you have the ability

Russ, I just don't think you'll be around much come November. I suppose we'll just have to wait and see.

I do hope you post your 5-team parlays during the season.

 

[bigtendominator]

Russ, I just don't think you'll be around much come November. I suppose we'll just have to wait and see.

I do hope you post your 5-team parlays during the season.

Have to agree with you.

 

[russ1945]

Russ, I just don't think you'll be around much come November. I suppose we'll just have to wait and see.

I do hope you post your 5-team parlays during the season.

Yeah, like I would share them with you guys. If I post them they will be shared with others and documented by others. Oh and I do hope you can fully document your 55% again this year YAA.

 

[YourAllAmerican]

Yeah, like I would share them with you guys. If I post them they will be shared with others and documented by others. Oh and I do hope you can fully document your 55% again this year YAA.

Yes, we'd be lining up to play your 5-team moneymakin' parlays.

I'll tell you, I've remained open-minded about you ever since you joined and started posting frequently and strenously. But this conversation has led me to honestly believe you don't know a whole lot about sports betting. Not beyond pure recreation, at least.

It truly seems like you still have a novice's illusions about picking against a spread. 60 or 70 percent don't sound all that difficult to bettors just starting out, but it usually doesn't take long to realize just how hard it really is.

I'm completely taken aback.

 

[Avon_Barksdale]

I'm not very experienced and certainly may stand in the minority but I did enjoy a good measure of success working teasers around my "key" numbers.

I also like parlays with soccer and the importance of the moneyline.

 

[5-0SAT]

Russ, I just don't think you'll be around much come November. I suppose we'll just have to wait and see.

I do hope you post your 5-team parlays during the season.

B4 you question people like russ and i as ignoramuses who are all talk and no game. I actually did post my plays last year, and will do so again this year. Here's an example ... http://64.40.117.4/showthread.php?t=635844


gl in '09... cheers @)

 

[bigtendominator]

B4 you question people like russ and i as ignoramuses who are all talk and no game. I actually did post my plays last year, and will do so again this year. Here's an example ... http://64.40.117.4/showthread.php?t=635844


gl in '09... cheers @)

What was your record for the season?

Also, do you only bet 5 teamers or do you do 2-6 teams?

 

[BigdaddyQH]

Just remember, the more teams you play on a parlay, the bigger the rip off is. 5 team parlays have an actual 31% odds, but you guys do not get paid nearly that much. 6 teams is 63%. What is the payoff? 40? You guys are just giving away huge chunks of money.

Russ, I see a whole bunch of "if's" in your theories. You can not fight the true mathematical odds, so why try? You say you do not keep track of your wagers, so how do you know how much you win or lose. Your math is way off. If you do not keep track of your wagers, you are actually losing money. The reason is because you forget too many losses. This is human nature. You and your systems would be more than welcome in the books that my friends are involved in.

Having wagered as long as you have, and having wagered substantially more than you have, I can tell you this with absolute confidence. You may have done O.K. with parlays last year, but overall, you have lost. You say that you have to do better than 55% to make it worth your time. Again, that shows that you have lost. You should be very happy just to break even, because 85% of the gamblers out there do not. If you refuse to keep track of your wagers, you are ducking the truth. It is that simple. I have seen it thousands of times in Vegas. No serious gambler does not keep track of his wagers.

 

[GoSooners]

Like I said at the top of the thread, the house is at a 12.5% advantage with just a 3 team parlay. Those are just the facts. And you CAN'T argue with the facts. Look at it this way. Would you play 21 with a blackjack dealer who doesn't bust until he gets to 23? Same thing. You may still win a few hands. But over time your going to be a BIG loser because the house is at an advantage. How hard is that to understand?.