Why is Parlaying Series onto GM1 not allowed?

**Justin7** · 10-19-11, 09:01 PM

It is correlated. If a book doesn't take positive correlated parlays, they should not take negative ones as well (to be fair to the player).

**durito** · 10-19-11, 10:23 PM

Originally posted by Justin7

It is correlated. If a book doesn't take positive correlated parlays, they should not take negative ones as well (to be fair to the player).

that´s ridiculous. that´s like saying they shouldn´t offer -ev bets.

they arent offered because the book is either too stupid or lazy to set up the software properly so they just ban all possible parlays between those two markets.

**Cicima6709** · 10-19-11, 10:31 PM

if you really want to parlay STL game 1 with TEX series, or vise versa, just make a bet on (for example) STL to win game 1.

Then take your bet + your winnings, and do double or nothing on the newly produced series price. Its essentially a parlay, and you'd be getting much better odds then had you initially parlayed it anyways.

**Justin7** · 10-19-11, 11:45 PM

Originally posted by durito

that´s ridiculous. that´s like saying they shouldn´t offer -ev bets.

they arent offered because the book is either too stupid or lazy to set up the software properly so they just ban all possible parlays between those two markets.

A standard Las Vegas rule is that a book must take action on both sides of a wager. This principle expands to 4 markets in a 2-way parlay. Your suggestion that a book should only take negatively correlated parlays advocates an unethical behavior.

I suppose you think that all books should also code their software to allow most negatively correlated plays in all sports? Fortunately, none of the top books (or any books that I know of for that matter) agree with your ethical standard.

**durito** · 10-19-11, 11:51 PM

try harder

**andywend** · 10-20-11, 12:19 AM

Durito, multiply your intelligence by 100 and you're still not qualified to shine Justin7's shoes.

As usual, Justin is right and you're wrong.

**donjuan** · 10-20-11, 01:49 AM

Originally posted by andywend

Durito, multiply your intelligence by 100 and you're still not qualified to shine Justin7's shoes.

As usual, Justin is right and you're wrong.

lololol

**skrtelfan** · 10-20-11, 12:52 PM

Originally posted by andywend

Durito, multiply your intelligence by 100 and you're still not qualified to shine Justin7's shoes.

As usual, Justin is right and you're wrong.

Spoken by the biggest book shill on the forum.

**Snatch** · 10-20-11, 01:30 PM

it's a software issue as well - one can't negate the absolutely corelated Tex,gm1 to TexSeries in the software and allow Stl,gm1(same event) to TexSeries. They could offer it on a hand written ticket i9f they thought you were worth the trouble, but 99.9% aren't.

**d2bets** · 10-20-11, 02:01 PM

1. It's obvious why you can't parlay e.g. STL to win Game 1 with STL to win this series.
2. It should be obvious why you would not want to parlay e.g. STL to win Game 1 with TEX to win the series.

To wit, what is the point of this question?

**RickySteve** · 10-20-11, 02:06 PM

Originally posted by Justin7

A standard Las Vegas rule is that a book must take action on both sides of a wager. This principle expands to 4 markets in a 2-way parlay. Your suggestion that a book should only take negatively correlated parlays advocates an unethical behavior.

I suppose you think that all books should also code their software to allow most negatively correlated plays in all sports? Fortunately, none of the top books (or any books that I know of for that matter) agree with your ethical standard.

Respectfully, you are wrong on this point. Cantor and Pinnacle (used to, could have changed?) both allow negatively correlated parlays on markets where the positive counterparts are rejected.

I don't see this practice as unethical.

**BigDaddy** · 10-20-11, 02:28 PM

Originally posted by Justin7

A standard Las Vegas rule is that a book must take action on both sides of a wager. This principle expands to 4 markets in a 2-way parlay. Your suggestion that a book should only take negatively correlated parlays advocates an unethical behavior.

I suppose you think that all books should also code their software to allow most negatively correlated plays in all sports? Fortunately, none of the top books (or any books that I know of for that matter) agree with your ethical standard.

A+ book up top blocks all positive CP's

but they allow the the negative ones.

should we discuss this?

i can show proof

**RickySteve** · 10-20-11, 02:31 PM

If I ever feel like getting arrested again, maybe I will file a NGC complaint against Cantor on this issue.

**durito** · 10-20-11, 03:00 PM

i just tried some at pinny that were blocked, but i know they took em as recently as last year.

**durito** · 10-20-11, 03:00 PM

Originally posted by andywend

Durito, multiply your intelligence by 100 and you're still not qualified to shine Justin7's shoes.

As usual, Justin is right and you're wrong.

have you ever been right about anything?

**Not Matt Rain** · 10-20-11, 03:03 PM

Leaders from all industries look up to bookies as beacons of ethical behavior.

Such cynicism, dorito.

**Justin7** · 10-20-11, 03:12 PM

Originally posted by RickySteve

Respectfully, you are wrong on this point. Cantor and Pinnacle (used to, could have changed?) both allow negatively correlated parlays on markets where the positive counterparts are rejected.

I don't see this practice as unethical.

Can you give me an example at Pinnacle? I have never seen this available.

**durito** · 10-20-11, 03:15 PM

Originally posted by BigDaddy

A+ book up top blocks all positive CP's

but they allow the the negative ones.

should we discuss this?

i can show proof

yes, i found this book too.

**durito** · 10-20-11, 03:17 PM

Originally posted by Justin7

Can you give me an example at Pinnacle? I have never seen this available.

it used to be all of them. now i dont see it.

nevertheless there is another a+ advertiser that allows it right now

**uva3021** · 10-20-11, 03:51 PM

why would you want to do this anyway, since Texas lost their WS price will drop about 10-15%

**RickySteve** · 10-20-11, 03:58 PM

Originally posted by Justin7

Can you give me an example at Pinnacle? I have never seen this available.

Um, no thanks. As I said, they might have changed their policy regarding this.

Unfortunately I can say with absolute certainty this is happening in LV at this moment...elohel sh tty runners.

**BigDaddy** · 10-25-11, 12:40 PM

this thread died real quick.

**BigDaddy** · 12-04-11, 11:44 AM

Originally posted by Justin7

It is correlated. If a book doesn't take positive correlated parlays, they should not take negative ones as well (to be fair to the player).

well today i can bet +13.5 OV26 / -13.5 U26 1st half parlays

but i can't bet the other 2 combos

this is at the most respected book in the world most would say

jeez

**Justin7** · 12-04-11, 12:31 PM

Originally posted by BigDaddy

well today i can bet +13.5 OV26 / -13.5 U26 1st half parlays

but i can't bet the other 2 combos

this is at the most respected book in the world most would say

jeez

Hmm. I confirmed that you can bet the bad pair, but not the good pair at Bookmaker. That's pretty shitty.

**durito** · 12-04-11, 02:07 PM

i´m shocked, you find the other A+ book that allows these yet?