[natrass]

I ask because of this scenario.

Two teams, hot favourites at 1.4 to win their games (ie each bet $100 and win $40).

Now, place two $100 singles and you :

win $80 if both win
lose $60 if one wins
lose $200 if none win

If you place a $100 double

you win $96 if both win
lose $100 if one or both lose.

So thats half the exposure for a higher gain when playing short favourites.

Do you think this is the smarter play given you think the 1.4 prices are good value plays?

[natrass]

Just, for me personally, I am currently playing the singles and I am seriously thinking of "regressing" back to my niave parlay days of old in such cases.

[bigloser]

There should be no difference . The amount you bet of your starting bank should relate to the risk of losing. You have a greater risk of losing with a parlay and should therefore bet less.

[Sam Odom]

Is a parlay ever the smart play?

Depends if the 2 bets are correlated even if slightly.

[jjgold]

Better off betting 2 separate games and doubling up the bet from the 1st game.

[Aces]

any time I parlay teams i back it with a teaser.

[Ganchrow]

I potsed the following some time ago:

http://forum.sbrforum.com/players-ta...1-parlays.html
http://forum.sbrforum.com/players-ta...d-parlays.html

And you can find my Parlay Calculator here:

Betting Tools Temporary Home

[Sam Odom]

Ganchrow is sharp as a tack

[natrass]

Ganchrow is the man ... I will read this when i get time (friends round at the mo)

thanks gents for the feedback in the meantime (jjj ... not sure I follow your logic there ... not a first i know ... but, wheres the advantage?)

[Dark Horse]

One of the best books that covers parlays indepth: win more, lose less. An instant classic. Key to success with parlays is your winning percentage. If it's not high enough, don't mess with parlays.

[Aces]

JJs talking about the double up catch up method. It works fine if you have very-very deep pockets. I dont like doing it myself. Or he's saying take your winnings from game 1 and invest it along with your original stake on game 2.

[Brick Tamland]

Originally Posted by Dark Horse

One of the best books that covers parlays indepth: win more, lose less. An instant classic. Key to success with parlays is your winning percentage. If it's not high enough, don't mess with parlays.

key to success is the payout odds.... doent matter how many teams in your parlay if the payut is high enough.

[Ganchrow]

Originally Posted by Aces

JJs talking about the double up catch up method. It works fine if you have very-very deep pockets. I dont like doing it myself. Or he's saying take your winnings from game 1 and invest it along with your original stake on game 2.

Rather, I think that JJ is indicating that in the case of two (or more) non-contemporaneous bets, the payout structure of a parlay can be duplicated by risking the proceeds of the first bet on the outcome of the second.

[Aces]

LOL!!! In Alabama we call it take the winnings from game 1 put it with your original stash and pound the hell out of game 2.

[Justin7]

Stay away from parlays, unless you 1. master the math, and 2. have sharp opinions. As Dark Horse mentioned, Don Peszynski's "Win more, lose less" is great material on this topic.

Generally, the payouts on a 2-team parlay are close to what you get if you bet your winnings and principal from the first game on the second (retail on a 2-teamer is 2.6, but 2.64 is "fair" if -110 is fair).

The real problem with parlays is that it increase your variance. Losing streaks last longer playing these. The one time parlays are good (other than correlated parlays) is when you are a winning player. If you are a 55% handicapper, you can make more money (EV) with parlays... but variance still lowers your max bet.

[Ganchrow]

Originally Posted by Justin7

If you are a 55% handicapper, you can make more money (EV) with parlays... but variance still lowers your max bet.

One interesting (although largely academic) point here is that for large enough favorites, a proper Kelly bettor would actually choose the parlay in preference to the singles. (Assuming for some reason he couldn't bet both the parlay AND the singles).

A bit of a surprising result.

[SBR_John]

There was a poster named Roo from long ago that actually brought down a couple of decent size offshore books betting nothing but parlays.