View Full Version : Betting strategy?
What do you all think are the best types of bets to make? Of course, it's dependent on the variables and circumstances, but generally speaking, do you generally bet straight wagers? Parlays? Teasers? My basic formula is if I see one game that I think is as close to a lock as you can get, I'll bet that straight and also throw it into a 3 team parlay. Is this effective or am I off base?
Also, I see references to "unit's". What exactly constitutes a unit? And when you all post YTD records, would that be records on bets or on individual games? If I miss on 3 parlays is my record 0-3? Or is it whatever outcomes came out in those individual games? Sorry for the newb questions, I will learn fast. Thanks for the input.
9DiGiT
09-20-2005, 02:38 PM
Well I too am no expert at it all, but a lot of the guys here have some great advice and you can pick up a lot from these people by just coming around here.
I have learned over the course of a year that the straight wager is probably the best way to bet on a game. Parlays are sucker bets, the bookies love them, and in the end, they do more harm than anything.
That being said, I do enjoy playing a parlay once and a while, but I would never risk the same amount of money on a parlay vs. a straight wager.
When the bettor refers to a unit play... EG. Denver Broncos +6 for 3 Units, a unit represents a certain dollar amount... eg. 1 Unit = $25... Every players Unit $ representation is different because every players bankroll is different.... bet what you can afford to lose. Some people a Unit is $25, others $100...
Hope this helped you somewhat... I am sure other people here have much better answers than myself, that is what I have gathered over the last year though... :)
Horfin
09-20-2005, 03:25 PM
Welcome.
I tend to agree with 9. Parlays are just a pisser. I made that mistake in 04. I had a great year in 03 and figured I could play more parlays in 04. Well I didn't do as good in 04 so I lost more money than I should have because of the parlays. Consider this (assume no juice). You like three games so you play:
$25 to win $25 on Philly
$25 to win $25 on Chicago
$25 to win $25 on Dallas
$25 to win $160.00 on the parlay of the three.
YOu win on Philly and Chicago, but lose Dallas
You win $50, but you lose $50 (the parlay and the dallas game). It sucks to break even (actually lose money because of the juice) because you threw in that parlay AND you have a winning record.
If your units are $25, I'd say 1/5 is good for a parlay or $5. If your units are $100, I'd say $15 to $20. When you parlay you have to have the mindset of how can I minimize my losses.
Teasers: I only use these as protection for when I parlay.
I have to state if you are in this for the long haul screw parlays, screw teasers. However, I am an addict so I keep playing them.
Welcome!
Horf!n
:thumbs:
The War Dogs
09-20-2005, 07:09 PM
Parlay's and teasers are not the way to go imo. Straight bet and try to hit at a high enough rate to make a profit. The problem with both exotic bets is that all it takes is one game to go bad on you and the whole teaser or parlay is dead. They force you to actually be right on a number of games, and all of them with no exceptions, to win. That's hard to do.
I also think they take your focus away from what real sports gambling requires. Remember that one of the things that happens with us is that we learn as we do this more. But if you're always trying to figure out the right way to tease a play or the right combination in a parlay, you're focus is not going to be on the myriad of elements involved with picking winners.
beermantm
09-20-2005, 08:22 PM
I have learned over the course of a year that the straight wager is probably the best way to bet on a game. Parlays are sucker bets, the bookies love them, and in the end, they do more harm than anything.
That being said, I do enjoy playing a parlay once and a while, but I would never risk the same amount of money on a parlay vs. a straight wager.
I disagree here........(sorry dogs)
First Pralays are not sucker bets..............here is the big if though.........If your getting the right odds. The payoff for your parlays are pretty standard accross most of the books that this forum endorses though which make parlays and absolute to add into your betting strategy.............
There is a whole host of problems when dealing with parlays though I could write up a whole page on this stuff but right now I don't have the time.
I will say this though if you parlay bets (which should have a high expectation of winning) you should play the parlay for exactly the same amount as your flat wagers.........The problem is you lose value for the parlays you do hit then if your not betting them for the same amount as a flat wager.............. On the flip side of that coin Your winning percentage to break even or get ahead on parlays is much lower than the 52.7% you need to break through the juice with str8 bets.
Of course having said what I said which is just a scrapeing of the surface of covering parlays if you are new to the world of sports betting I would at least heed The War Dogs advice and stear clear...............
There is alot to understand before you go diving into parlays...........
Now teasers are sucker bets!!! (I know it and I still sometimes play them because they are fun) They are sucker bets because the spread doesn't effect the outcome of a wager often enough that adding points or taking away points would change the outcome either.......... From memory I believe in football 8-10% of the games are effected by the spread and about 50% of those tend to go with you and the other 50% go against you............This makes the payoffs on teasers pathetic and really you should stear clear of them at all costs.
Thank you all for the replies. I see your points regarding parlay's. I'm not new to the world of sports betting, but I AM new to the world of online sports betting. Up until late last year I was simply playing 3 team parlays with a local bookie at the (outrageous) payoff of 4 to 1! I managed to win money in '03 and break even in '04 despite this marked disadvantage. For this reason I could probably argue that parlays are worthwhile for me, however I am aware that I probably have NOT played enough parlays to factor out luck. With this in mind, I am probably headed for a parlay losing streak at some point in the near future.
I think what I will probably do, is play 1 unit straight wagers primarily, and if I happen to REALLY like 3 teams, I'll play a .25 unit parlay. The teaser bet as protection for the parlay is another interesting concept, and I think it would probably work, but it would certainly be terrible for the bankroll if both bets were busts.
EDIT - also, if straight wagers are the way to go, at what point does the juice get too high to make it not worth playing the bet, regardless of how strongly you feel about it? -115? -125?
beermantm
09-21-2005, 02:45 PM
I think what I will probably do, is play 1 unit straight wagers primarily, and if I happen to REALLY like 3 teams, I'll play a .25 unit parlay. The teaser bet as protection for the parlay is another interesting concept, and I think it would probably work, but it would certainly be terrible for the bankroll if both bets were busts.
Why would you move the unit size?? I just got done saying that is a bad idea. If you play for one unit a wager you have to play for one unit a parlay...............which is still one wager.
Look the quickest way to put it is this..........If you play a bunch of wagers and one three team parlay one loss of equal value will not really hurt you much but one win of a three teamer at the equal value catapults your bankroll up.
Bad idea to bet less but a common thing that is done......... It's funny how everything you would think you should do when using common logic seems to somehow end up wrong in the end.
beerman, it's in everyone's nature to lose money. :gulp:
I see what you're saying, but I guess the way I look at it is, the payout is proportionate. A parlay is obviously a harder bet to hit, and therefore I will likely donate a few times before I hit one. My bankroll may not be able to sustain several whole unit losses in a row, where as it could sustain several .25 unit losses. I personally think we're splitting hairs here, the difference in the strategies is directly tied to the size of the BR. Small BR = smaller bets. Big BR = bigger bets. Does this make sense?
You should risk the same amount on each play. The parlay has higher odds making it seem as if you should risk less. The problem is that if you risk less on a parlay than you do on a straight wager you're putting more emphasis on your straight wager and losing money when you hit your parlay.
You should play a small portion of yor bankroll on each play. 1% (what I play), or 2% at the most. Using this method you can afford to risk 1 unit on each parlay or straight wager until you hit the parlay. You're going to lose and unless you manage your risk you're going to be without a bankroll.
My BR started with only 10 units. I understand this is a risky proposition and I'll probably end up broke, but in the meantime, it doesn't make sense to me to play a parlay that's 1/10th of my BR when I can play one that's 1/40th. Perhaps the problem here is that my straight wager bets are too big, comparatively speaking. I'm sorry, but I just don't quite understand your argument regarding keeping all bets the same.
Also, how do you stay interested with your bets if they're only 1% of your BR? Do you play a large amount of games per week?
If you risk a large percentage of your bankroll on each wager then you're gambling. If that's what you're in it for then there really is no strategy to save you from the inevitable: losing your entire bankroll.
Your unit is what you make of it. If you're not risking enough to be interested with just 1% of your bankroll then you will only lose money and shouldn't expect to win anything.
When you speak of "staying interested" or "having enough action" then you're describing signs of an addictive personality and shouldn't be playing in the first place.
I only had an initial BR of $75, and if I'm making wagers of $5 and $10, then of course it's gambling. This isn't intended to be some sort of income generator. I'm simply trying to have some fun during football season. A good football bettor will win more than lose over the long term, but there will certainly be cold and hot streaks. I'm basically hoping that I can start out with one of those hot streaks to ride the season on. If not, I'll lose my investment by week 5, which I'm fine with. I bet on football more for the enjoyment than as an actual money maker.
I still can't understand why making all parlay bets the same amount as straight wagers is proper strategy. Can you elaborate further? If the payout is proportionate, then I can't see why it matters. I'm obviously missing something!
If you have a true positive expectation with the parlay then, over the long haul, you're going to come out ahead.
This is why you must reduce your risk and play a small percentage on each wager. You're essentially doing that, but you have to do it with your straight wagers, too.
beermantm
09-21-2005, 05:19 PM
My BR started with only 10 units. I understand this is a risky proposition and I'll probably end up broke, but in the meantime, it doesn't make sense to me to play a parlay that's 1/10th of my BR when I can play one that's 1/40th. Perhaps the problem here is that my straight wager bets are too big, comparatively speaking. I'm sorry, but I just don't quite understand your argument regarding keeping all bets the same.
Also, how do you stay interested with your bets if they're only 1% of your BR? Do you play a large amount of games per week?
what good does it do you to hit a parlay that is only 1/40th of your bankroll??
The payout is the absolute thing you're looking for..........what good is a payout worth one bet of your normal wagers?? Why even bother with parlays then?
Lets say you lay 3 wagers str8 for 100 a piece...........
Lets also say they are all -110 wagers.............
If you lose all 3 you lost $330 but paid no vig charges.
If you parlayed all three you lose 1 bet for $100 and pay no vig but your lay is different.
If you win all 3 you get your original 330 back pluss 300 for winning all three....... 91% ROI you pay $30 in Vig or 9.09%.
If you win all 3 in a parlay you get 6:1 or $600 payout for winning all 3......... 600% ROI you pay about $100 in vig or
12.5%.
If you only bet 25 though you pick up $150 only 50 dollars more than one of your flat wagers.......... It's like eliminating the payoff for hitting a parlay.
Even if you pressed all 3 of the winnings on each bet your total risk ends up being higher than a 3 team parlay.....
You would pay the vig charge of 4.55% on each bet pressed but only pay about 4.35% vig for each bet in the parlay.
Originally posted by rjp
If you have a true positive expectation with the parlay then, over the long haul, you're going to come out ahead.
This is why you must reduce your risk and play a small percentage on each wager. You're essentially doing that, but you have to do it with your straight wagers, too.
Right, that's what I realized. With a BR of $75, I really have to play all $5 and $10 wagers. Thanks.
Originally posted by beermantm
what good does it do you to hit a parlay that is only 1/40th of your bankroll??
The payout is the absolute thing you're looking for..........what good is a payout worth one bet of your normal wagers?? Why even bother with parlays then?
Lets say you lay 3 wagers str8 for 100 a piece...........
Lets also say they are all -110 wagers.............
If you lose all 3 you lost $330 but paid no vig charges.
If you parlayed all three you lose 1 bet for $100 and pay no vig but your lay is different.
If you win all 3 you get your original 330 back pluss 300 for winning all three....... 91% ROI you pay $30 in Vig or 9.09%.
If you win all 3 in a parlay you get 6:1 or $600 payout for winning all 3......... 600% ROI you pay about $100 in vig or
12.5%.
If you only bet 25 though you pick up $150 only 50 dollars more than one of your flat wagers.......... It's like eliminating the payoff for hitting a parlay.
Even if you pressed all 3 of the winnings on each bet your total risk ends up being higher than a 3 team parlay.....
You would pay the vig charge of 4.55% on each bet pressed but only pay about 4.35% vig for each bet in the parlay.
What is a vig charge?
And as to your comment regarding playing a $25 parlay and hitting it for $150: You say it's like eliminating the payoff. How so? It pays 6:1 on my investment, still 600% ROI, just on a smaller scale. Would I make less money playing parlays at that level? Yes, but I would also keep losses lower, if they were to occur. I'm not contending that it makes more sense to play .5 unit parlay's and 2 unit straight wagers, I'm simply saying I don't see how it matters. Also, perhaps we're disagreeing because we're thinking of two different sized bankrolls. You obviously have a large BR, compared to what I have.
Say you have a $200 BR. You play (8) $5 parlay's, hitting 2 of them. You get $30 return on a $40 investment. 75% ROI minus the juice. If you play those same 8 parlays for $20 apiece, you still get 75% ROI, but see $120 profit. The payout is proportionately smaller compared to the risk. Right? So the ultimate point I'm getting at, is that it doesn't make sense to play $20 parlays when I have a $200 BR...whereas I CAN play $20 straight wagers, because they're much more likely to hit, and not cause me to go broke.
I'm a semi-professional poker player, and therefore am very knowledgeable in the area of BR management and ROI. Perhaps the differences between poker and sports betting are what causes me to not quite grasp this concept. I'm only trying to understand your point; I'm not saying that you're wrong. You obviously have much more experience, wisdom, and expertise than myself in this area. For whatever reason I can't make sense of your argument though. Thank you for your help.
beermantm
09-21-2005, 06:00 PM
What is a vig charge?
And as to your comment regarding playing a $25 parlay and hitting it for $150: You say it's like eliminating the payoff. How so? It pays 6:1 on my investment, still 600% ROI, just on a smaller scale. Would I make less money playing parlays at that level? Yes, but I would also keep losses lower, if they were to occur. I'm not contending that it makes more sense to play .5 unit parlay's and 2 unit straight wagers, I'm simply saying I don't see how it matters. Also, perhaps we're disagreeing because we're thinking of two different sized bankrolls. You obviously have a large BR, compared to what I have.
How can you not see the difference? Why would you make a wager that pays odds but make your wager size so small that it's like picking up one flat bet? There is a huge differnce in the two..........
If you're worried about losing just str8 wager bets is the ticket but if you think you can a win a couple of parlays then why would you make them and not be able to profit from them?
Your assuming more risk by playing a parlay so why have it where the payout is so small?? It doesn't make any sence at all. The odds of hitting a 3 teamer are 7:1 and you get paid off at 6:1.............
If you lower your wager size what the hell good is it to hit one?? Your picking up just one bet or just over one bet........ If you bet the same as your normal size your picking up 6 bets.........if you lose, you lose one bet.
again if your worried about losing the one wager so much just don't play parlays................
If your hitting 57% a week on your str8 picks losing one 3 team wager a week doesn't kill your bankroll but if you hit one it catapults it............. If you bet just a 1/4 or your wager size then hitting one is almost the same as hitting a str8 bet or just slighty better............. There is no up side to playing them like that other than you'll lose money slower.
What is a vig charge?
JUICE you pay juice when you win not when you lose!!!
There is no up side to playing them like that other than you'll lose money slower.
Or win money slower, right? Basically it's a case of "don't beat around the bush?
beermantm
09-21-2005, 06:11 PM
Or win money slower, right? Basically it's a case of "don't beat around the bush?
Seeing that one str8 play will wipe out your odds play for the most part there is no reason to be playing an odds wager..........
Reducing the wager size is exactly what the books love for people to do. When they payout on that they smile.........when they payout on someone who just hit them up for 6 times thier flat wagers they want to cry........
Why is that?? Because it makes it a lot harder to get the money back.
lol, I don't think I'll ever quite understand this concept fully, so I think I'll just take your advice and play universally sized wagers on all bets.
beermantm
09-21-2005, 06:28 PM
lol, I don't think I'll ever quite understand this concept fully, so I think I'll just take your advice and play universally sized wagers on all bets.
That my friend is one hell of an idea!! I promise I won't stear you wrong!!
Some of this stuff is confusing.............also I hear the argument being made that there is a number of way to be successfull at sports betting..........
I promise you though it's the same thing as gravity........it only works one way. You may be able to beat gravity for a short period of time but eventually gravity wins.........same thing with sports gambling only one way to truely beat it.
beerman's been drinking again. Watch out. :gulp:
beermantm
09-21-2005, 07:04 PM
beerman's been drinking again. Watch out.
Sick as a dog or I would be at work right now.
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.