Apparently being taken aback is a daily occurence in your case. I told you, everything I put on there about parlays is there and you can take it or leave it. I now see why people don't use forums and it is guys like you who just don't get it. You are your own worst enemy. I have been doing this for forty years. I will be doing this full time when I retire. All I can say is you may have been walking the same path for a long long time, but there is a super highway over the next hill. If you are basing your disregard on experience, evidentally a bad experience, then that says more about you and your ability to handicap then it does about parlays themselves. I really kind of feel sorry for you. Would you try to pass a car on the highway without hitting your passing gear. Use a parlay like a passing gear once in a while. Your reluctance to accept parlays even as a concept sounds like a novice's approach to me. I am not preaching to everyone to try them. I said already if you only hit 55% consistently then don't try them. I am afraid that there are people on this forum that really don't realize that there are some people who have taken it up a notch and that even when they try to share it and to try to pass it on there are naysayers like you who share nothing but pessimism. It is a shame and it is a waste. I have never been on a forum before. I did not get on here to have someone pick my games for me. I came on to share my 40 years of experience in the hopes that someone out there can put it together sooner than I did. It is not about bragging, or ego, it is nothing more than sharing what I have learned. You can take it or leave it, but don't knock it until you have tried it.
Apparently being taken aback is a daily occurence in your case. I told you, everything I put on there about parlays is there and you can take it or leave it. I now see why people don't use forums and it is guys like you who just don't get it. You are your own worst enemy. I have been doing this for forty years. I will be doing this full time when I retire. All I can say is you may have been walking the same path for a long long time, but there is a super highway over the next hill. If you are basing your disregard on experience, evidentally a bad experience, then that says more about you and your ability to handicap then it does about parlays themselves. I really kind of feel sorry for you. Would you try to pass a car on the highway without hitting your passing gear. Use a parlay like a passing gear once in a while. Your reluctance to accept parlays even as a concept sounds like a novice's approach to me. I am not preaching to everyone to try them. I said already if you only hit 55% consistently then don't try them. I am afraid that there are people on this forum that really don't realize that there are some people who have taken it up a notch and that even when they try to share it and to try to pass it on there are naysayers like you who share nothing but pessimism. It is a shame and it is a waste. I have never been on a forum before. I did not get on here to have someone pick my games for me. I came on to share my 40 years of experience in the hopes that someone out there can put it together sooner than I did. It is not about bragging, or ego, it is nothing more than sharing what I have learned. You can take it or leave it, but don't knock it until you have tried it.
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.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Holy crap, one voice of reason in a thread of Sooner math!
<<
<!-- / message -->
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.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Holy crap, one voice of reason in a thread of Sooner math!
<<<!-- / message -->
Just wipe out the whole concept of getting screwed by true odds and focus on the reality that you can win more money by wagering less. I am not concerned about true odds. I hit a ten teamer once on a parlay card where ties were a loss. I only hit it because Arizona State (remember Jake Plummer) went into over time favored by 7 and scored on their first possession. When the other team got the ball they threw an interception that was run back for a TD (why would they run it in?) I bet $10 straight and a $10 teaser and pocketed $3,600. Been playing on their money ever since. Now was I wise, no. Did I win, yes. That is all that really matters in the end.
As far as keeping records goes that is not ducking the truth. Why would anyone not on a forum keep records like that. It is all about winning. Good grief, we used to go to the track every day and bet football at the same time. The only records I kept I destroyed when we settle up. I have talked to many of my friends about the ATS thing and they all laugh.
We have been doing this so long and we are not worried about impressing anybody. Basically we just move on to the next weeks games, win, lose, lor draw. I realize anybody can be a somebody online, that is why I have been so reluctant to get on a forum. But there are so many skeptics on this forum that I am stunned. I liken it to the guy behind the curtain in the Wizard of Oz. My intention is not to impress but to share. Some people bet more, some people bet less. And why would I be happy with breaking even, why even bet at all if that is the case. Fianlly, I am not fighting the matematical odds and I am just going with the flow and winning money. What are the odds on that?
I think you guys are making this more complicated than it should be. The big challenge with Parlays is just how good of a handicapper are you? And if your not that good of a handicapper, then how good are you at flipping a coin and having it come up heads 3 times in a row. Or for some posters here 5 times in a row. And how strong are you mentally that when you pick 3 games in a parlay, and win 2 but see no money out of it, there is no consolation prize given out. If you can deal with that week in and week out and avoid doing any "chasing", then go for it. I'm not a math whiz, but even if I didn't have an ounce of eduation, I know that hitting 3 games together is a hell of a lot harder than hitting one single game. I don't care what the odds or juice are on any of those games.
I haven't really heard on here exactly what people do when picking a 3 team parlay. Do you pick a group of games at random? Do you pick what you think is your strongest 3 games. Do you just pick dogs? Do you just pick big favorites? Do you just go with close ML type of games etc.? I can tell you thi much: Just about every week during the season I have that one game that sticks out and fits the formula for a very strong play. I call it my Best Bet play. Over the years on here I've hit these games I would guess around a 75% to 80% clip. I believe I went 6-0 last season before I finally lost my first game. But my point is I can usually only find one good game like this a week. Sometimes I don't find any. And I think I've found two in a single week just once in the past couple of seasons. Now if I had 3 Best Bet plays a week to put in a parlay I would consider playing one. But even if I did that, I would probably still miss many more parlays than I hit, because that 25% number of losses would kill the rest of my plays. From all of my years of doing this, I CAN tell you this much. If somebody tells you they have 3 very strong games to play that week, run the other way as fast as you can. It doesn't happen.
Now can somebody hit a five teamer more than once in a season? Sure. Twice? sure. 3 times? Maybe. Hell, a long time ago I put $5 bucks down and hit a 10 teamer at work. Everytime somebody did something like that, news got around and people would start asking for that lucky person's opinion on a game. And then everybody would play the ten teamers in hopes of striking another pot of gold. But the reality is, I would only hear of somebody hitting a 10 teamer maybe once a year. And then I would see the very thick stack of cards in the bookies hands when he did his weekly run of passing out Parlay Cards every week. And all I could think about was these guys are making a killing because of that one 10 team payout they had to make. In the 30 years that I worked for my company, I saw the same guys handing out the same cards year after year. It was a great business being a middleman for a rich bookie.. They made a killing off of the workers because in the end they, like the offshore books we use now, are making a killing because the odds caught up with the parlay and teaser gamblers.
The worst thing a gambler can do is win early on a big Parlay Card. He'll spend the rest of the season spending his profits plus more just chasing after that second win. If he's lucky he'll win again. If not he'll kick himself for not playing more individual games and making a sweet profit..
Oh cmon GS, we don't (or at least I don't) pick games at random. That's ridiculous. Do you randomly bet games? Ok were fine, I know you were being sarcastic. I look at it this way. There are around 120 teams in d-1A. Meaning there are around 60 games througouht the week. 60 games!!! I don't know about you, but i really don't have that hard of a time finding a handful of games that look promising and bettable. I never include ridiculous favorites like -300 or dogs like +240 or anything like that. I stick to point spread games with the occasional reasonable underdog moneyline of +125 or so. I mean thats about it, i don't pick my plays out of a hat, I pick what i believe the be the best games on the board for the week. That's been my strategy over the last year or so, and its worked out well. Last year i took down 5 - 5 team parlays for about an average of 5k each. I did an average of 1.5 parlays each week. So for 12 weeks I played about 18 parlays for about 200$ each. Meaning i took in 25k while giving the books about 2.5k. So their you go. Can't wait to follow you during the regular season, especially cause you are more centered towards big 12 games, of which I think are most bettable as well. Gl and let's bang the books hard in '09 @)
The bottom line is this parlay players. The Books make more money on parlays (on apercentage of money wagered basis) than they do on striaght wagers. Period!!! The odds are way in their favor, and there is no way you can twist them around. YOu guys think that because you study the game, you haqve some advantage over other gamblers, so the odds are actually in your favor. WRONG!!! The odds never change. Let's face it. Most of the people in here who play parlays are losers, if they kep accurate track.
Russ, your argument does not hold water. Bottom line, and be honest. Have you won or lost money? You know what the answer is and so do I. By failing to keep records or publishing your picks, you have absolutely no weight in here, and what you say will be taken with a grain of salt. Like it or not, you come off as a major loser because you are afraid to post your games in here. By refusing to prove your system right, you are admitting that it is worng. So cut to the chase. Either be willing to post your parlays and your system plays or DO NOT TALK ABOUT THEM. (A polite way of saying put up or shut up). I have known more gamblers than you ever will in your life. Those who do not keep records are losers. Every single one of them. They want to forget about the losses, but remember the wins. This is what Vegas makes it's money on. Having been involved with Vegas, I know the secrets, and one of the big secret is haing people like yourself think than you are smarter than their computers, which tell them exactly which wagers to allow and which ones not to. No offense, but failing to post your picks while bragging about your system is an admission of defeat.
Russ, your argument does not hold water. Bottom line, and be honest. Have you won or lost money? You know what the answer is and so do I. By failing to keep records or publishing your picks, you have absolutely no weight in here, and what you say will be taken with a grain of salt. Like it or not, you come off as a major loser because you are afraid to post your games in here. By refusing to prove your system right, you are admitting that it is worng. So cut to the chase. Either be willing to post your parlays and your system plays or DO NOT TALK ABOUT THEM. (A polite way of saying put up or shut up). I have known more gamblers than you ever will in your life. Those who do not keep records are losers. Every single one of them. They want to forget about the losses, but remember the wins. This is what Vegas makes it's money on. Having been involved with Vegas, I know the secrets, and one of the big secret is haing people like yourself think than you are smarter than their computers, which tell them exactly which wagers to allow and which ones not to. No offense, but failing to post your picks while bragging about your system is an admission of defeat.
I already said I would post them on here. ???????? I never said I have a system, you did. I don't forget about losses I try and learn from them.
I went over at least 50 games that I was involved with LY just to take a long hard look at the box scores vs. the final result. I do my homework.
You don't have to be smarter than a computer to be successful but you have to be smart enough to do what you do best. I already said they are not for everyone. If you can't pick them don't bet them. I do not mean that in a smart ass way. If you are that adament against them either you listen too closely to the vegas talk or you have tried them unsuccessfully.
If I ever get to where I can't hit 1 out of 12 (5) teamers I will probably quit betting them. I understand different strokes for different folks but your opinion is simply your opinion. BOL.
If bets are a conflip, they will lose a bigger percentage when parlayed than they will lose when bet straight. This is why books make a nice percentage on parlays. And this is why every $50 bettor on every message board throws out this saying. "parlays are sucker bets"
Let's ask ourselves this. If parlays are pure sucker bets, Why do zero sportsbooks (anymore) offer more competitive odds on parlays than the standard 2.6-1 or 3-1? I mean the whole world knows these are sucker bets, and GoSooners tells us they are tougher to beat than a crooked blackjack game, and have a huge margin of error. The reason is that while losing bets lose more on parlays, solid bets win a greater percentage when parlayed. Sharp bettors can get parlay limits cut at sportsbooks, not invitations to come lose money on these sucker bets.
Please read this IMPORTANT message:
<TABLE cellSpacing=10 cellPadding=10 bgColor=#ffffff border=2 FGCOLOR="#ffffff"><TBODY><TR><TD width=400>$250 max bet on parlays</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
Now you don't have to go through a whole season of two and three teamers. But if you think someone like GoSooners is going to hit 58% on his 4-5 stars, and DrBoB or someone will hit 55+, then do some round robin stuff with those. The best situation is where you know for sure you have value. Say you get breaking info that Tim Tebow just was ruled out... try parlaying it with your other top 2 plays of the week. The main idea is that you don't have to be 100% straight bets or 100% parlays. And not all winning bettors avoid parlays like the plague.
Let's ask ourselves this. If parlays are pure sucker bets, Why do zero sportsbooks (anymore) offer more competitive odds on parlays than the standard 2.6-1 or 3-1? I mean the whole world knows these are sucker bets, and GoSooners tells us they are tougher to beat than a crooked blackjack game, and have a huge margin of error. The reason is that while losing bets lose more on parlays, solid bets win a greater percentage when parlayed. Sharp bettors can get parlay limits cut at sportsbooks, not invitations to come lose money on these sucker bets.
Please read this IMPORTANT message:
<TABLE cellSpacing=10 cellPadding=10 bgColor=#ffffff border=2 FGCOLOR="#ffffff"><TBODY><TR><TD width=400>$250 max bet on parlays</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
Now you don't have to go through a whole season of two and three teamers. But if you think someone like GoSooners is going to hit 58% on his 4-5 stars, and DrBoB or someone will hit 55+, then do some round robin stuff with those. The best situation is where you know for sure you have value. Say you get breaking info that Tim Tebow just was ruled out... try parlaying it with your other top 2 plays of the week. The main idea is that you don't have to be 100% straight bets or 100% parlays. And not all winning bettors avoid parlays like the plague.
The fact still remains, guys, and this is the point you are missing, 2-1 straight bets pay out more than a 2-1 parlay; 3-1 straight bets pay out more than a 3-1 parlay; 4-1 straight bet pays out more than a 4-1 parlay; and so on, and so forth.
It is easier to go 4-1 or 3-2 and make money than it is to go 5-0. That is just simple truth. I've been on these forums for over 7 years and the only parlays I ever see anyone hit are the ones where nothing is posted ahead of the games and after the games are played someone posts a thread saying, "Holy Shit I just hit a 5 team parlay I threw $100 on!"
Gamblers are notorious for talking about their winnings, but never their losings. Boasted parlay profits and strategies are all irrelevant until I see some posted evidence of records.
It is easier to go 4-1 or 3-2 and make money than it is to go 5-0. That is just simple truth. I've been on these forums for over 7 years and the only parlays I ever see anyone hit are the ones where nothing is posted ahead of the games and after the games are played someone posts a thread saying, "Holy Shit I just hit a 5 team parlay I threw $100 on!"
Gamblers are notorious for talking about their winnings, but never their losings. Boasted parlay profits and strategies are all irrelevant until I see some posted evidence of records.
Not true. Run some sample numbers and take a look at the outcome.
For a fast example, try this:
* A bettor plays 100 3-team parlays with a payoff of 6:1. He bets $100 on each parlay
* A bettor plays 300 straight bets with -100 juice. He bets $100 per game.
In each case assume the bettor has a 60% ATS rate for each game involved.
If you want to test that example, let me know the numbers you get.
If anyone needs clarification on the facts about parlays just do the math and then check with your book and see what they payout is. Or you can just use a parlay calculator and then check with your book. For example, The Greek uses proper payouts on 2 and 3 teamers, but starts skimming more and more as you go higher.
You're correct, I meant -110 juice, but I've got slightly different numbers.
I rounded the number of winning parlays up to 22 instead of the fractional 21.6, and that profit figure comes in at $5,400. I show the straight bettor with a profit of $4,800 ($18000 winnings [180 * $100] - $13,200 losing bets [120 * $110]).
My very quick figures show the tipping point at about 57% on a theoretical basis that doesn't round winning parlays to the nearest integer.
