I Do Not Gamble...BUT

[Baboontyme 2809]

if I did, I would take out my entire 401k and put it on a 4 Team NBA parlay tonight.

Wash/Toronto Over 231

Memphis -9

OKC -1.5

Dallas -7.5

 

[Capn81 372]

Oof.

[Steamboat1874 4048]

Just to throw this out there

i would take the Chiefs and lay the points

take the Packers with the points 

[Baboontyme 2809]

Interesting. Can you tell me more? I still do not gamble but if you can make a compelling argument I might make a one time exception. Do you have any stone cold locks? 

[WhatTheBuck 28772]

On 1/17/2020 at 4:30 PM, Baboontyme said:

if I did, I would take out my entire 401k and put it on a 4 Team NBA parlay tonight.

Wash/Toronto Over 231

Memphis -9

OKC -1.5

Dallas -7.5

How would that have worked out for you?

Parlays are for suckers. 

[ztejas 43411]

37 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Parlays are for suckers. 

I'm sorry you've never hit a good parlay.

[WhatTheBuck 28772]

20 minutes ago, ztejas said:

I'm sorry you've never hit a good parlay.

I’m not a sucker. The odds don’t pay off as well as betting the games separately. I would never make a parlay bet.

But you’re welcome to join my poker game. 

[ztejas 43411]

1 hour ago, WhatTheBuck said:

I’m not a sucker. The odds don’t pay off as well as betting the games separately. I would never make a parlay bet.

But you’re welcome to join my poker game. 

Yeah you don't want me at your poker game. 

And I'm not sure what you mean about the odds not paying off as well. The whole point of parlays is that you can risk less with a potential to win more. I don't make a lot of parlays but generally when I do it's something like this where I can get +200 odds by pooling a bunch of games that I'm fairly confident in the winner. 

I mean say I put $8 and some change on all of those games instead of $50 on the 6 game parlay. I'm not getting close to $102 back. Sure I could put $50 on all 6 and win a similar amount I believe? I mean what's the difference if you hit?

But I'm more of a gut-feeling hobbyist type bettor than someone who sweats over long term statistics and what I technically should or shouldn't be doing. 

The nice part about it is that if you're actually good at the predictive part the methodology winds up mattering a bit less. Which sometimes I nail and sometimes I don't. 

I guess the roundabout point here is there are a looooot of people that have made a loooooot of money on parlays. It is a bit like winning the lottery but the risk/reward potential is too fun to ignore sometimes. 

Edited May 19, 2021 by ztejas

[WhatTheBuck 28772]

4 hours ago, ztejas said:

Yeah you don't want me at your poker game. 

And I'm not sure what you mean about the odds not paying off as well. The whole point of parlays is that you can risk less with a potential to win more. I don't make a lot of parlays but generally when I do it's something like this where I can get +200 odds by pooling a bunch of games that I'm fairly confident in the winner. 

I mean say I put $8 and some change on all of those games instead of $50 on the 6 game parlay. I'm not getting close to $102 back. Sure I could put $50 on all 6 and win a similar amount I believe? I mean what's the difference if you hit?

But I'm more of a gut-feeling hobbyist type bettor than someone who sweats over long term statistics and what I technically should or shouldn't be doing. 

The nice part about it is that if you're actually good at the predictive part the methodology winds up mattering a bit less. Which sometimes I nail and sometimes I don't. 

I guess the roundabout point here is there are a looooot of people that have made a loooooot of money on parlays. It is a bit like winning the lottery but the risk/reward potential is too fun to ignore sometimes. 

There’s a reason the slots take up so much of the casino floor.

Parlays are for suckers. Yeah, you can bet a little and have the potential for a big win, but not big enough to justify it.

And yes, I do want you in my poker game. I’ve never met a parlay bettor who was any good at poker. 

[Baboontyme 2809]

Is this where we act like tough guys about our gambling chops? Gambling is entertainment with disposable income. If you view it any other way you might take yourself a tad too seriously. Provided it's not what you do for a living. lol @ a recreational better not betting a parlay or a teaser because it's a "sucker" bet. Every single bet you make is a sucker bet. 

 

[ztejas 43411]

On 5/19/2021 at 6:20 AM, WhatTheBuck said:

There’s a reason the slots take up so much of the casino floor.

Parlays are for suckers. Yeah, you can bet a little and have the potential for a big win, but not big enough to justify it.

And yes, I do want you in my poker game. I’ve never met a parlay bettor who was any good at poker. 

I'm not a big parlay bettor. As for slots - I despise everything but poker and sports betting.

As for poker I should probably pursue it and take it seriously. It's the only thing I do where my brain doesn't understand or try to overanalayze how I did what I just did. I just win. That's why I say you don't want me at your game - I don't think I'm better than you, I just know that when I play that game I win. 

Go look at the Rangers' baseball thread if you want a very loosely defined example. I have 21k posts here across almost 3 years now and a regular can't tell whether I'm sober or not. 

Actually - I know you're an tOSU guy but do you live in Texas? If so set a date and I'll come to a poker game. 

Edited May 21, 2021 by ztejas

[WhatTheBuck 28772]

On 5/19/2021 at 8:55 AM, Baboontyme said:

Is this where we act like tough guys about our gambling chops? Gambling is entertainment with disposable income. If you view it any other way you might take yourself a tad too seriously. Provided it's not what you do for a living. lol @ a recreational better not betting a parlay or a teaser because it's a "sucker" bet. Every single bet you make is a sucker bet. 

I’ve bought a car with my gambling winnings. (Mainly poker and sports betting. And I’ve never been brave enough to try to make a living out of it.) We obviously view it differently. Statistics and probability should probably be taught at a younger age.

[Baboontyme 2809]

2 hours ago, WhatTheBuck said:

I’ve bought a car with my gambling winnings. (Mainly poker and sports betting. And I’ve never been brave enough to try to make a living out of it.) We obviously view it differently. Statistics and probability should probably be taught at a younger age.

Poker is obviously a different story. And I'm not trying to be a dick, but obviously if you are that big into statistics and probability, you understand that any success you have had in sports betting...is luck. (provided you're not seriously putting in the work)

There are lots of things you can do to incrementally increase your percentages. However, at the end of the day, unless you do ALL of it, you're not netting yourself enough of a positive EV to make it profitable long term. 

[Governor 18]

I realize I'm a couple of weeks late to this discussion, but I figured I could offer my expertise to clear a few things up (for those that don't know I've been filing my taxes as a professional gambler for 15 years now).

[Governor 18]

Egos aside, there are certainly some popular misconceptions being regurgitated in the posts above, likely due to a lack of understanding of how parlay odds are calculated and what they actually mean to the bettor.  Before getting into it, though, if sports betting isn't your professional, like Baboobntyme said, treat it as entertainment & just fire way and have fun.  

 

On 5/19/2021 at 12:48 AM, WhatTheBuck said:

I’m not a sucker. The odds don’t pay off as well as betting the games separately. I would never make a parlay bet.

But you’re welcome to join my poker game. 

While I appreciate the confidence, WhatTheBuck, this simplistic misconception just isn't accurate.  In the true definition of a parlay, the odds pay off EXACTLY the same in a parlay as they do in two (or more) straight bets.  All parlays (should) truly do is increase the bettor's variance while offering opportunity, with long term results remaining equal.  What a parlay allows is a player to bet a second game before the first game is complete (all a parlay does is roll the implied winnings from game 1 into the bet for game 2).  Similarly, a "rolling IF" bet allows a player to place a second bet while the first is in play, whereas the parlay is placed on both (or more) games at the outset. While there are plenty of books out there that will take advantage of the recreational bettor (find a better book), there are more that pay out true odds.

Parlay payouts will vary depending on the odds given on any included bet, but to provide some examples, let's assume traditional -110 lines.  A 2-team parlay (both legs at -110) should pay out 2.6446:1.  So if you bet 100 and win the parlay, your payout should be 364.46.


This screenshot is from one of the many books I bet at.  To explain what I said above--that the parlay pays out EXACTLY the same as two separate bets, assume you did make two separate bets:  Bet 100 at -110, win, receive 190.91.  Then bet that 190.91 at -110 odds on the second game, win, receive the same 364.46 that you would have in the parlay.

The same is true for parlays with more legs.  A 3-team parlays (all legs at -110) should pay 5.9579:1.  If you bet 100 on the parlay and win, your payout should be 695.79.


Just like in the example above, if you bet three separate bets, the net payout is exactly the same as the parlay.  The first bet pays out 190.91.  Bet 190.91 @ -110 paying out 364.46.  Then bet 364.46 @ -110 (to win 331.33), paying out the same 695.79 as the parlay.

Likewise, ztejas, your $50 parlay 6-team parlay isn't 6 separate 8 and change.  You're betting $50 on the first game (to pay 55.59), then 55.49 @ -220 to pay 80.71, then 80.71 @-400 to pay 100.89, the 100.89 @-640 to pay 116.65, then 116.65 @-840 to pay 130.54, then 130.54 @-600 to pay 152 (you're getting shorted 29 cents on your bet above).

In summary, if you're getting worse odds on a parlay payout than you should be, it doesn't make parlays a sucker bet.  You're just a sucker for betting at that book who gives you bad odds.  Hope that explains parlays a little better.

[ztejas 43411]

14 minutes ago, Governor said:

Parlay payouts will vary depending on the odds given on any included bet, but to provide some examples, let's assume traditional -110 lines.  A 2-team parlay (both legs at -110) should pay out 2.6446:1.  So if you bet 100 and win the parlay, your payout should be 364.46.


This screenshot is from one of the many books I bet at.  To explain what I said above--that the parlay pays out EXACTLY the same as two separate bets, assume you did make two separate bets:  Bet 100 at -110, win, receive 190.91.  Then bet that 190.91 at -110 odds on the second game, win, receive the same 364.46 that you would have in the parlay.

I've never used a book that doesn't multiply parlay odds beyond what they would be if you won each game separately. And even if that's true there is a big difference between risking $100 to win x dollars vs. risking $200 to win x dollars. 

I'll use this as an example. $20 risked at -255 and $20 risked at -150 wins you about $20 and change if you win both. $20 risked on that ML parlay wins you $26 as displayed. 

So, not sure what you're talking about. (Unless you're talking about just rolling winnings into subsequent bets in which case it isn't a parlay at all - and sometimes not possible if games have overlapping start times).

Edited June 10, 2021 by ztejas

[ztejas 43411]

3 minutes ago, ztejas said:

I'll use this as an example. $20 risked at -255 and $20 risked at -150 wins you about $20 and change if you win both. $20 risked on that ML parlay wins you $26 as displayed. 

And if you're point is that I win the same amount if I roll that first bet plus winnings into the 2nd game then suddenly I'm risking more than I did in the first place with literally the exact same payout. If I lose the first leg I'm fucked either way. 

[Governor 18]

I was just defining what a parlay is, as it seems some people are confused, while providing examples to hopefully help others understand. My breakdown simply explained it.  Regardless of your bet amount on legs 2-6, your investment is only the initial $50, just like it would be if you bet the $50 6-leg parlay.  The investment is the same (you don't bet game #2 until game #1 is complete).  The beauty of a parlay is it allows you to bet games running at the same time.  Of course this increases your variance, but it does not affect your long-term profitability.  

21 minutes ago, ztejas said:

I'll use this as an example. $20 risked at -255 and $20 risked at -150 wins you about $20 and change if you win both. $20 risked on that ML parlay wins you $26 as displayed. 

Again, you're confusing two different things.  In the first, you're risking $40 (two separate $20 bets) to win 21.18.  In the second (your parlay) you're risking half ($20) to win 26.  Risking $40 and risking $20 are not the same thing.  If you were to treat the separate bets the same as the parlay, you'd be risking $20 on game 1 @ -2.55, and then risking the payout of 27.84 @-150 to win 46 (really 46.40, but it seems your book rounds to the nearest dollar)

Edited June 10, 2021 by Governor

[jeevsie 3733]

I was entertained and informed by the Gov's posts.  I rewarded him with rep.