Question on If Bets

**That Foreign Guy** · 09-16-10, 03:04 AM

> Assuming the two legs of the If Bet are not correlated in any way, i

It's easier to make a blanket rule than be sure you've covered all correlations.

**LegitBet** · 09-16-10, 03:29 AM

i have the same question..i don't think you got it answered yet..you can make the second bet more than the first on thegreek, but i can't do it on 5dimes...makes no sense..as i've tried doing it with two different sports to avoid ANY correllation, but it still gets kicked out by 5dimes...
let me know what you have found out please
andrew

**Halifax** · 09-16-10, 03:42 AM

Originally posted by That Foreign Guy

> Assuming the two legs of the If Bet are not correlated in any way, i

It's easier to make a blanket rule than be sure you've covered all correlations.

Actually, I probably didn't even need to bring up the topic of correlation, because most books' software (including Bookmaker's) will not even allow you to use two legs that are correlated.

I only brought up the subject of correlation to show that "correlation" isn't the reason that most books prevent you from betting larger amounts on the 2nd leg of the If Bet.

**LegitBet** · 09-16-10, 03:47 AM

thats my point Halifax,

since the books are way sharp with correlations, why does it matter to them if the amounts of the two if bets are very different?

**Halifax** · 09-16-10, 03:51 AM

Originally posted by LegitBet

i have the same question..i don't think you got it answered yet..you can make the second bet more than the first on thegreek, but i can't do it on 5dimes...makes no sense..as i've tried doing it with two different sports to avoid ANY correllation, but it still gets kicked out by 5dimes...
let me know what you have found out please
andrew

The only other book that I know of that allows it is WSEX.

Last football season I could do them at BetCris. I haven't funded my BetCRIS account this year, but I did fund my Bookmaker account (presumably the same software and rules as BetCRIS ??), and Bookmaker is currently not allowing these bets to go through.

**RickySteve** · 09-16-10, 04:10 AM

Bets can be correlated and not be on the same actual event. It takes very little correlation to have a big edge on leveraged if-bets.

**That Foreign Guy** · 09-16-10, 05:50 AM

Yeah I could think of some situations where bets on two different sports are correlated - whether it's enough to make an IF bet +EV is a different discussion but why would a bookie take the risk?.

For example, let's pretend there's the possibility of a massive snowstorm hitting New York. If it does, the Jets game will almost certainly go under. The New York Red Bulls are also playing that day (this is let's pretend I don't care if this is impossible). Soccer games also tend to go under more often in bad weather so a $5 bet on the Jets under with a $50,000 IF bet on the Red Bulls under would make a bookie cry (and wipe out all his profit from all the other IF bets he took that day).

**wrongturn** · 09-16-10, 10:24 AM

Yes, there are situations where games can be correlated, like at end of regular season when teams are juggling for playoff positions.

**Halifax** · 09-16-10, 11:30 AM

I think we can all agree that there are certain situations (weather correlation, playoff-status situations, etc.) that would cause both legs/outcomes of an If Bet (and Parlays as well) to be related to one another. I also think that it is relatively easy for a book (if they are on the ball) to prohibit/block If Bets and Parlays in these limited circumstances.

I would have to assume that the vast majority of If Bets that are placed are not correlated. So assuming that most If Bets are not correlated, I'm still looking for the reason that the 2nd leg of an If Bet is limited to the same bet size as the 1st leg.

Are the books so paranoid that someone might find a situation that's correlated, that they put this restriction on every If Bet, including the vast majority of If Bets that are not correlated ?

**wrongturn** · 09-16-10, 12:05 PM

Paranoid? I think that is the main reason. Because they don't think players really want to place a much larger 2nd leg bet unless there is an advantage that books don't know about.

**That Foreign Guy** · 09-17-10, 06:24 AM

Originally posted by Halifax

So assuming that most If Bets are not correlated, I'm still looking for the reason that the 2nd leg of an If Bet is limited to the same bet size as the 1st leg. Are the books so paranoid that someone might find a situation that's correlated, that they put this restriction on every If Bet, including the vast majority of If Bets that are not correlated ?

It's not paranoia if they really are out to get you.

**BigDaddy** · 09-17-10, 10:51 AM

Hal

try the rolling if bet option

it's a nice feature at some books.