Who Plays Parlays Here??

[jjgold]

The most I go now is 3 teams most of time 2 teams and that is hard

 

[RRsilver]

Rarely these days JJ. I used to play a few each week.

 

[KingKolzig]

good way to get action when you cant find anything you really like

put 3 dogs in a parlay you never know payout +1200

.25 unit risk

 

[Tanko]

Rarely play them. They usually only come up when I'm seeing massive juice and need to try to offset some of it with a 2-teamer.

 

[BobbyFK]

Sucker bets. It's hard enough to win one game

 

[stormtrooper8]

Rarely play them. They usually only come up when I'm seeing massive juice and need to try to offset some of it with a 2-teamer.

Doesn’t that just add juice? Lol

 

[Tanko]

Doesn’t that just add juice? Lol

What?

 

[stormtrooper8]

What?

Parlays you are adding juice

Cheaper overall price obviously but more juice

 

[Tanko]

Parlays you are adding juice

Cheaper overall price obviously but more juice

I see what you mean. Yeah. I agree, books really mess with parlay odds in their favor (more than statistically should be). Some books are worse that others on this.

But to offset some risk on a large Fav (one that you probably shouldn't be betting anyway) by pairing with a dog or small fav, can be beneficial.

 

[KVB]

Sucker bets. It's hard enough to win one game

This is wrong.

It's all a matter of probablilities and math.

The old parlay card that shorted odds were sucker bets, but not because of how difficult it is to win one game, because they shorted the odds.

Parlays are a good way to decrease risk and increase rewards in the markets. Sure, you might win less times, and have larger droughts, but when you do win, you get paid more.

 

[stormtrooper8]

I see what you mean. Yeah. I agree, books really mess with parlay odds in their favor (more than statistically should be). Some books are worse that others on this.

But to offset some risk on a large Fav (one that you probably shouldn't be betting anyway) by pairing with a dog or small fav, can be beneficial.

You'd be better off just playing the two plays separately in that case to avoid extra juice

 

[stormtrooper8]

Parlays are a good way to decrease risk and increase rewards in the markets. Sure, you might win less times, and have larger droughts, but when you do win, you get paid more.

Over the long run though it almost always creates more losing. It's a -EV move

Even though hitting a parlay is fun. On a one off or just rare play, then it's fine . I get why people like them

 

[KVB]

Over the long run though it almost always creates more losing. It's a -EV move

Even though hitting a parlay is fun. On a one off or just rare play, then it's fine . I get why people like them

No, it won't change your EV. That doesn't make mathematical sense. If you're a -EV bettor, it will be that way. If you are a +EV bettor, it's like anything, you just need enough instances to get there.

Like I said, you will have droughts, but the expectation will catch up.

Getting shorted on the odds payout, on the other hand, ruins the whole gig and of course changes the EV.

 

[stormtrooper8]

If you bet a 2-teamer that is assumed to be properly priced at -110, you are getting +264

For something that is truly +300 in terms of actual probability (juice free world)

 

[stormtrooper8]

If you bet a 2-teamer that is assumed to be properly priced at -110, you are getting +264

For something that is truly +300 in terms of actual probability (juice free world)

-110 for each leg, to clarify

 

[KVB]

If you bet a 2-teamer that is assumed to be properly priced at -110, you are getting +264

For something that is truly +300 in terms of actual probability (juice free world)

This post makes me realize you don't understand what I'm saying, and I'm not sure I can be clearer without a ton of words.

It's a bit like a conversion problem, but not really, it's just a multiplaction problem and I feel like you understand that but for some reason decide to leave the vig in on the individual bets then remove it for the parlay as if to say that is shorting the odds or to make a point.

I don't understand your point, it doesn't seem relevant.

If the bet is -110, the it's -110. If a parlay of two of those together pays proper, the EV doesn't change by putting them together, it's the variance that changes.

 

[KVB]

Having the variance change to the point where you win fewer times, and have droughts, but you still get payed properly when you do win might feel like you have less EV, but the EV never really changed.

 

[Wagerallsports]

I haven't played parlays in years

I used to though

Hit a 12 teamer before and missed a few parlays with 10+ teams by 1 game

The one that sticks out the most is one worth around $18,000 with only the Jets & Brett Favre left as 3pt favs in the playoffs, and they lost

 

[KVB]

This is why I suggested, in a losing streak to decrease your number of bets or make two pick parlays to decrease your risk and increase your rewards.

To me these are both better options than lowering your bet size after or during a bad losing run.

 

[RRsilver]

When Manning was still at Indy and they were playing Sunday night or Monday night, they bailed me out a lot of times, on taking Indy and the over.
Something even if they played Sunday evening.