All said it shouldn't be done. Some said it couldn't be done. None thought it would be done. I have DONE IT!

[Sol Aristatel]

Diablo, do you know what EV means and how to calculate it?

Yes. And no. Im not a math wiz.

 

But I know you get better odds on 2 straight bets winning at -110. Then betting a 2 team parlay at 2.6:1.

[Sol Aristatel]

Yes. And no. Im not a math wiz.

 

But I know you get better odds on 2 straight bets winning at -110. Then betting a 2 team parlay at 2.6:1.

You have to obviously factor in the 1-1 scenario. Only losing juice if you split. Vs losing the whole bet if one team loses in a parlay.

[evade]

Yes. And no. Im not a math wiz.

 

But I know you get better odds on 2 straight bets winning at -110. Then betting a 2 team parlay at 2.6:1.

 

2.6: 1 Is that still a thing? All books that I know give true odds.

[rito]

And for every team you add in the parlay, you are losing odds vs straight up winners.

Only if the bets are -ev

[Sol Aristatel]

Only if the bets are -ev

Right. And Ive asked you questions about that, that you have yet to address.

[Sol Aristatel]

2.6: 1 Is that still a thing?.

At every single book in Vegas it is. Unless something has changed recently.

[Blue]

Oh brother

[rito]

"Edge" based on what? Your models? Or your capping?

 

"Edge" seems subjective.

Edge is theoretical on a sports bet.

[Sol Aristatel]

Edge is theoretical on a sports bet.

So its subjective and unscientific. Gotcha.

[Sol Aristatel]

Oh brother

Whats the problem? You one of those guys that thinks betting parlays is generally +ev?

[evade]

You have to obviously factor in the 1-1 scenario. Only losing juice if you split. Vs losing the whole bet if one team loses in a parlay.

 

This is where calculation of EV comes into play and this is what rito was referring to.

[evade]

At every single book in Vegas it is. Unless something has changed recently.

 

I am only aware of online betting.

[Sol Aristatel]

This is where calculation of EV comes into play and rito was referring to.

Yes. But he is refering to edge. Parlay odds vs -110, with all things equal, and without edge, you are getting worse odds with the parlays.

[Sol Aristatel]

I am only aware of online betting.

Where do you get better than 2.6:1? And how much better odds?

[milwaukee mike]

oh brother

 

keep this up diabler and you will be a SHOOOO IN for worst poster of the year

[Sol Aristatel]

oh brother

 

keep this up diabler and you will be a SHOOOO IN for worst poster of the year

Whats the problem? You one of those guys that thinks betting parlays is +ev in general?

[Blue]

Whats the problem? You one of those guys that thinks betting parlays is generally +ev?

 

Quite the opposite young fella.

[Blue]

oh brother

 

keep this up diabler and you will be a SHOOOO IN for worst poster of the year

 

[Sol Aristatel]

Quite the opposite young fella.

Ok. So your comment was not directed at me. Just clearing that up. Gotcha.

[Sol Aristatel]

Its always hard to tell if Michael is being sarcastic or not. He plays both roles well.

[Blue]

Ok. So your comment was not directed at me. Just clearing that up. Gotcha.

 

Correct

[evade]

Where do you get better than 2.6:1? And how much better odds?

 

dsi is offering 2.65 for two -110 parlay bets as it should be. pinnacle, greek etc  - all offer true odds. But, that's a moot point considering your following point.

 

Yes. But he is refering to edge. Parlay odds vs -110, with all things equal, and without edge, you are getting worse odds with the parlays.

 

Nobody is disagreeing with it.

[Sol Aristatel]

dsi is offering 2.65 for two -110 parlay bets as it should be. pinnacle, greek etc - all offer true odds. But, that's a moot point considering your following point.

 

 

Nobody is disagreeing with it.

Right. But "edge" is perceived, subjective, and unscientific. Id like someone to prove over a large sample size that they can win long term betting nothing but parlays.

 

That would be fun. My guess? No takers.

[evade]

Right. But "edge" is perceived, subjective, and unscientific. Id like someone to prove over a large sample size that they can win long term betting nothing but parlays.

 

That would be fun. My guess? No takers.

 

Do you hold the same theory for single bets too? If yes, then it's fine. If no, why not?

[Sol Aristatel]

Do you hold the same theory for single bets too? If yes, then it's fine. If no, why not?

Yes. But beating -110 is hard enough. Beating parlay odds long term? Good luck.