[jolmscheid]

Thanks in advance for the help as always..

[GarbageMan]

correlated parlays>>>>>>correlated teasers

[jolmscheid]

Yesterday I wanted to tease Tennessee +36 and over 40...I was not able to do this at any of my books...the bet ended up not winning but it got me to thinking . Does anyone know how to exploit teasers like this? I assume that they are +ev if books don't allow this..

[ThaddeusB]

Yesterday I wanted to tease Tennessee +36 and over 40...I was not able to do this at any of my books...the bet ended up not winning but it got me to thinking . Does anyone know how to exploit teasers like this? I assume that they are +ev if books don't allow this..

First, backing +36 and over is negatively correlated. You want dog/under or favorite/over to be positively correlated. Now, to answer the Q: there are almost no spots where blind betting correlated teasers is +EV. The problem is that you'll be buying a bunch of relatively worthless numbers on both the total and the spread (higher spread=more variance=each point is worth less). The value wasted on teasing is greater than the value gained on the correlation (unless the total/spread are EXTREMELY correlated.)

Books block them because they know the associated parlays are +EV and they have a poor understanding of teaser value in general.

[Bsims]

I tried betting a NHL parlay with Florida and under this morning at 5dimes and it was rejected. I've made this type of bet many times in the past. Is this a new policy?

[Snatch]

Thad - not if the dog Spread is >35% of the Total - it's correlated.

[laxbrah420]

First, backing +36 and over is negatively correlated. You want dog/under or favorite/over to be positively correlated. Now, to answer the Q: there are almost no spots where blind betting correlated teasers is +EV. The problem is that you'll be buying a bunch of relatively worthless numbers on both the total and the spread (higher spread=more variance=each point is worth less). The value wasted on teasing is greater than the value gained on the correlation (unless the total/spread are EXTREMELY correlated.)

Books block them because they know the associated parlays are +EV and they have a poor understanding of teaser value in general.

i really have a tough time understanding why dog and over is negatively correlated? 20pt dog o/u 40 --throw that in a 10 team teaser, you've guaranteed yourself 1 win...

[jolmscheid]

Im pretty sure books wouldn't allow that would they?

[Frats]

i really have a tough time understanding why dog and over is negatively correlated? 20pt dog o/u 40 --throw that in a 10 team teaser, you've guaranteed yourself 1 win...

What good would one win possibly do you? Just think about your example. If you had a team at +36 and put it with the under, the only possible scores that could hurt you are between 36-40 to 0-4. It's almost impossible for the favorite and under to hit. Those events are directly coorelated, if the under hits then the underdog is going to hit over 95% of the time.

[laxbrah420]

when i said 10 team i meant 10 point, because i'm dumb.
also im dumb. thanks

[Bsims]

I tried betting a NHL parlay with Florida and under this morning at 5dimes and it was rejected. I've made this type of bet many times in the past. Is this a new policy?

Later in the day same wager was accepted. They must not allow this with opening lines.

[LT Profits]

Thad - not if the dog Spread is >35% of the Total - it's correlated.

Which is great for parlays (where accepted), NOT for teasers.

[jolmscheid]

So when parlaying totals and sides at greater than 35%, is it smart to take both the dog / under and the fav / over?

[Uga]

So when parlaying totals and sides at greater than 35%, is it smart to take both the dog / under and the fav / over?

That's right.

[LT Profits]

That's right.

* - where accepted.

[jolmscheid]

I don't think there are any legitimate books that will take those wagers...dang

[mm9182]

you should take both dog/under and fav/over?..slightly confused but are there any statistics showing when the dog/under or fav/over hit in relation to being home away? what im trying to get at is..doesnt it make more sense to take one side and not both?

[jolmscheid]

you should take both dog/under and fav/over?..slightly confused but are there any statistics showing when the dog/under or fav/over hit in relation to being home away? what im trying to get at is..doesnt it make more sense to take one side and not both?

Good Question...

[HoulihansTX]

I don't think there are any legitimate books that will take those wagers...dang

If you live in Vegas. Arizona Charlies allows correlated parlays.

[LT Profits]

you should take both dog/under and fav/over?..slightly confused but are there any statistics showing when the dog/under or fav/over hit in relation to being home away? what im trying to get at is..doesnt it make more sense to take one side and not both?

Because of the title of thread (except should be parlays). Since the parlays are correlated, one parlay or the other should hit over 30% of the time. So if you play both the fav/over and dog/under combos in, say, 5 games (10 combos), 3 of them should win which is +EV at +260 odds (even better at true odds).

[jolmscheid]

Shoot...correlated parlays are really where its at...thanks for the insight LT and Holli
.

[LT Profits]

Shoot...correlated parlays are really where its at...thanks for the insight LT and Holli
.

But I can't stress enough..... * - where available

[jotoha]

But I can't stress enough..... * - where available

How do you know/calculate a play as "correlated"?

[LT Profits]

How do you know/calculate a play as "correlated"?

35% or higher spread/total ratio. 5 Dimes for one stops taking them at 30%.

[jotoha]

35% or higher spread/total ratio. 5 Dimes for one stops taking them at 30%.

Thanks LT. It seems to be rare in NFL to find one 35% or higher. I guess it's mostly in college then.....