Exp growth is better with favorable lines+parlays. Unless you call if bets not parlays.

Not even considering fixed/stale line parlays.

that's some interesting term's..
can you explain it all if you don't mind

Noob question here: Do correlated tennis parlays work? I have a book that blocks most of them but it allows tennis parlays on the same game. If so what should the strat be.. bcuz I know nothing about tennis. Parlay the fave spread and the under?

Let's say your local offers -110 and has 3 stale (independent) lines which are 3% off market (53/47). Assuming no ties, your best expected growth bets for 100k bankroll would be:

-straight bets 1,100 each;
-3 team parlay 6:1 200.

Fixed lines are offered at LV casinos in the form of parlay cards.

So True

sure it is ..if you are high on sports before you get into gambling than high on gambling and try to bet on sports without having a clue of what is going in the game !
your edge will probably come from 2 different places by watching the game or watching the lines ...vice versa mix of both etc

there is a reason pinny reduces odds on parlays

I'm curious, for those who do parlays in their betting, what % of your total wagers placed do you think parlays are? I sprinkle a correlated parlay once in a blue moon.... maybe something like 1/50 bets (so 2% max.)

For the fun punter parlays are good as if you spread the games out then you can have a sweat.

Never do more then 3 teams max as you will hit more often then if you do loads

Keep large parlays to very small stakes , and try and keep odds of each pack around evens unless you have reason back bigger odds.

For the fun punter parlays are good as if you spread the games out then you can have a sweat.

Never do more then 3 teams max as you will hit more often then if you do loads

Keep large parlays to very small stakes , and try and keep odds of each pack around evens unless you have reason back bigger odds.

The amount of horrible advice in this thread is overwhelming

I would say that unless you're hitting 55%+ to stay away from parlays. Even at 55% you aren't going to hit them very often but they will be more profitable long term than straight bets. You can figure out the rough probability of hitting your parlay by multiplying your win rate(0.55) by the amount of teams in the parlay. So if you have a 2x team parlay and a 55% win rate you will win that parlay that roughly 30% of the time. To determine if it is going to be profitable you need to convert the american odds to implied odds and multiply them. The simple method is just (0.55*0.55)-(0.5238*0.5238)=0.0281 Any positive number will be profitable long term assuming your bet sizing is correct. We can look at the expected profit from this by doing: ((bet*(1/implied1))*(1/implied2))-bet. So for a $50 bet and standard -110/0.5238 implied we expect to profit 142.23 when we win the parlay. As I said earlier with a 55% win rate you can safely assume roughly 30% chance of winning that parlay. So your expected value is (140*0.3)-(50*0.7)=$7 or 14% ROI. Lets compare that ROI to an ROI on 2x $50 straight bets (90*0.55)-(100*0.45)=$4.50 or 4.5% roi

It is simply an expected growth question. If parlays increase your EG, you bet parlays. If not, then you don't.

lol seriously.

It always amazes me A) how quickly people will give out advice on topics that they very clearly know nothing about, and B) how bettors will look for and find ways to make bets at worse odds than necessary.

Parlays are only good for a few things; if youre a noob and you just want some action, its a fun way to risk a little to win a lot. Like a scratch ticket. Or theyre good for getting around limits, as cover plays, stale lines in parlay cards, and of course with correlation. Thats pretty much it

someone said earlier ITT that books give you reduced odds if you parlay bets - is this true ever? I've never seen or heard of that, that's really harsh on unsuspecting punters who are very unlikely to realise that they are paying juice on top of juice.

Pinnacle does

sneaky, I imagine pinnacle taking a much less lower % of multiple bets than your average fixed odds bookie

Many books allow if bets which do not reduce the payout, if you do it right. (other than the implied hold)

If there are two good bets that aren't simultaneous you theoretically bet about your bankroll times your edge on the first bet and then bet a bit more on the second if you win that first bet and a bit less if you lose. When they are at the same time both bets are about the same and again about your bankroll times your edge. Thus a parlay can't usually be optimum because your second bet will either be too big or too small.

But there is a theoretical exception. Namely if your edge is absurdly high. I believe 80% on each game would do it. This should be obvious since if you took it up to 100% you would be very grateful that your bookie offers parlays.

Its a fine point but it is an exception that Like missed. Probably due to age.

lol 80%

i only bet 100% games

Have people lost their minds in this thread? Parlays are another way to make money. I gave a specific example above which is mathematically correct. If bets are another example. If you can increase your EG with parlays you bet them.

It's time to move on.

Obviously you should often bet a parlay if it includes a better line. You should also bet parlays if it gives you a chance to essentially bet more than the house limit on a game and your bankroll is high enough such that your optimum bet was greater than the normal house limit. My post was simply to mention the fact that it is mathematically conceivable that the better bet is a parlay even without those conditions being met. That would occur where the optimum bet on an individual game was so high that if you bet that much on each of the simultaneous great bets it would require more money than your total bankroll

Do you have a sportsbetting book I could purchase?

Sure.

Some of us can come up with absurd, over the top, theoretical technical examples. Other people who have been betting like in the real world, know that finding any bet with "80% edge" (lol even typing that feels weird) is something that happens maybe once or twice a lifetime? If that? And it would never, ever, EVER be in any market that you can parlay. Ever. If you find some bet like that, its a prop which, ok, fine...IF you find a book that has props giving away 80% edge, AND theyre the first and only book in the entire world that lets you parlay props, yes, go ahead and parlay it.

Actually, even in that example youre not even right. If you found a book that was dealing props with such absurd edges, you would be a complete fool to ever parlay even one. Do you see why?