[k13]

Patriots/Packers ML Parlay.

Usually you'll hear me hating on the Packers and fading the public and taking dogs, etc.
That's just in certain spots. You take what the books give you.

Might be a little juicy for some on here but to me a ~47% return on something that will hit a high % is worth it.

If 49ers win the first game, I recommend doubling or even tripling the bet size on this.

So you get the top two teams with the top two QB's playing at home with no spread. Just win.
Anything can happen so no need to go all-in just play your usual units and enjoy.

Don't be scared of the Giants, not yet at least. Best tip, never look at last week.

[Sunde91]

Ravens ML is the best value by a mile AND public are pretty heavy Texans, giving the greenlight to pseudosharps like yourself

If 49ers win the first game, I recommend doubling or even tripling the bet size on this.

derp

[tony_come]

It's a box

[Puppy]

have to be scared of a rusty GB. im not buying all the giants hype but GB could still be out of sync. they should have played rogers a quarter wk 17. pats is a lock

[k13]

Ravens ML is the best value by a mile AND public are pretty heavy Texans, giving the greenlight to pseudosharps like yourself

If 49ers win the first game, I recommend doubling or even tripling the bet size on this.

derp

Bal was my original thought, don't see them losing either. I'll have them in some other play,it just might be an ugly game where weird stuff happens. Rather lose with rodgers than flacco.

[fergie's balls]

Giants have a legit shot, imo slightly better shot (say 5%) then Texans. too much going on here to ignore, things are alligning for Giants. my square ML parlay is three favs & Giants +17.5.

[GunShard]

Ravens defense are good at exploiting rookie QBs. TJ Yates will struggle.

I'm on the Packers, Patriots and Ravens ML parlay. Home field advantage.

[d2bets]

Betting a ML parlay is the same as betting both ML's separately. Would you do that? It's also pretty silly if your best number on both is not at the same book.

[blackbeSSt]

Betting a ML parlay is the same as betting both ML's separately. Would you do that? It's also pretty silly if your best number on both is not at the same book.

how is dropping $725 to win $100 on the pats, and dropping $325 to win $100 (grand total of $1050 to win $200) the same as dropping roughly $410 to win $200 in a parlay?

[NYSportsGuy210]

Ravens/ Pats to me is the best parlay. Anything can happen in the NFC conference this year with so many strong teams. AFC is a joke.

[moses millsap]

how is dropping $725 to win $100 on the pats, and dropping $325 to win $100 (grand total of $1050 to win $200) the same as dropping roughly $410 to win $200 in a parlay?

Because you don't risk to win $100 each. You bet it as an accumulator, so that your total risk will end up being less than $410 to win $200. Looking at lines available right now, you can bet Pats ML on matchbook at -680:

$400 to win $58.82

Then bet that on Packers at -325

$458.82 to win $141.18,

giving you a bet of $400 to win $200. Only reason to parlay is to circumvent limits or if there is a correlation.

[j_to_the]

have to be scared of a rusty GB. im not buying all the giants hype but GB could still be out of sync. they should have played rogers a quarter wk 17. pats is a lock

rusty like week 1 on short preseason when they put up 42?

rusty like week 9 after the bye when they put up 45?

[p19101]

Patriots/Packers ML Parlay.

Usually you'll hear me hating on the Packers and fading the public and taking dogs, etc.
That's just in certain spots. You take what the books give you.

Might be a little juicy for some on here but to me a ~47% return on something that will hit a high % is worth it.

If 49ers win the first game, I recommend doubling or even tripling the bet size on this.

So you get the top two teams with the top two QB's playing at home with no spread. Just win.
Anything can happen so no need to go all-in just play your usual units and enjoy.

Don't be scared of the Giants, not yet at least. Best tip, never look at last week.

Is this just as good as you Steelers ML last week?

[k13]

Is this just as good as you Steelers ML last week?

This is as good as Houston ML last week.

How does this compare to the Steelers? They were on the road.

[p19101]

This is as good as Houston ML last week.

How does this compare to the Steelers? They were on the road.

I don't know how it compares? You tell me? I wasn't the one playing them, I read you had them to close out a couple of parlays.

You realize how dumb this bet makes you look? You already stated you gave Giants 28% and then go and bet Packers for minus EV

[k13]

I don't know how it compares? You tell me? I wasn't the one playing them, I read you had them to close out a couple of parlays.

You realize how dumb this bet makes you look? You already stated you gave Giants 28% and then go and bet Packers for minus EV

http://www.sportsbookreview.com/forum/players-ta...l#post13061727

http://www.sportsbookreview.com/forum/players-ta...l#post13036049

http://www.sportsbookreview.com/forum/nfl-bettin...r-all-day.html

Does that sound like I like Steelers to win? ^

You probably saw this... http://www.sportsbookreview.com/forum/players-ta...l#post13150783

Do I sound that confident in them winning? ^ They were parlays to hedge some futures. Never posted a play on the Steelers.


Anyway, you think the Giants have a good chance to win because you are a Giants fan. Kind of biased no?

[d2bets]

Because you don't risk to win $100 each. You bet it as an accumulator, so that your total risk will end up being less than $410 to win $200. Looking at lines available right now, you can bet Pats ML on matchbook at -680:

$400 to win $58.82

Then bet that on Packers at -325

$458.82 to win $141.18,

giving you a bet of $400 to win $200. Only reason to parlay is to circumvent limits or if there is a correlation.

Thank you for saving me the time. I find it amazing how people don't really understand parlays.

The other reason to parlay might be if the events are happening at the exact same time. Then you couldn't do the "accumulator" as you stated it. But in this case the events are on different days, there is no correlation and I doubt anyone here is really needing to circumvent limits on NFL playoff games. So a parlay is incredibly square, but for a different reason than k13 believes.

[k13]

The value is actually on the Packers. They were -7/-6.5 in NY and now only -7.5 in GB

I really liked the Giants in week 13, not so much now.

[jihadvillager]

K13- what do you think of Balt -1.5/ gb -1.5 6point teaser? I almost expect something to I wrong w that one but like green bay and ravens to win

[p19101]

Still no answer why you're making a bet with 93% paypack according to your own estimate of 28% Giant win???

[p19101]

Packers need to win over 77.5% for a bet to be motivated. You gave Giants 28% = Packers 72%.

[Gilly86]

have to be scared of a rusty GB. im not buying all the giants hype but GB could still be out of sync. they should have played rogers a quarter wk 17. pats is a lock

Remember when people said this going into the season because of no(limited) training camp and then rodgers had 3 td's in the first quarter of the opener?

[k13]

K13- what do you think of Balt -1.5/ gb -1.5 6point teaser? I almost expect something to I wrong w that one but like green bay and ravens to win

I like baltimore to win too, getting a fishy vibe about that game but Ravens have been money at home.
Maybe if the line goes below 7 then I might reconsider it.

For some reason this is the only big fave I can picture losing but how can you not play it?

[thebestthereis]

One thing is for sure Pats at home in playoffs is a lock, plus Teebow has won nothing yet. Lock it in here or close to here.

[jihadvillager]

Thanks k13

[k13]

Still no answer why you're making a bet with 93% paypack according to your own estimate of 28% Giant win???

Giants futures.

That number will drop to 3% if Niners beat Saints.

[moses millsap]

Thank you for saving me the time. I find it amazing how people don't really understand parlays.

I don't find it surprising at all. How many threads do you see where people ask should I hedge the last leg of my parlay? Beyond comical. Why add it in the first place and then just hand the books free money by taking the other side of the ml with a minimum differential of 20c worse (usually larger since their last leg will either be a -200 or greater or +200 or greater fave/dog)

[p19101]

Giants futures.

That number will drop to 3% if Niners beat Saints.

Ok, fair enough. Although I have Giants futures and was hoping to hedge them I can't make that bet. Hopefully Giants will get credit enough after the Packers game so I can actually hedge them without negative value...

[blackbeSSt]

Because you don't risk to win $100 each. You bet it as an accumulator, so that your total risk will end up being less than $410 to win $200. Looking at lines available right now, you can bet Pats ML on matchbook at -680: $400 to win $58.82 Then bet that on Packers at -325 $458.82 to win $141.18, giving you a bet of $400 to win $200. Only reason to parlay is to circumvent limits or if there is a correlation.

ok, so i parlay them $410 to win $200. you play them both separate and risk $400 to win $200. $10 difference to you if it cashes

where you go wrong is if the pats win, you take said $458 on GB, and if they lose you are out $458 while im out only $400. $58 difference to me if it doesn't cash.

[d2bets]

ok, so i parlay them $410 to win $200. you play them both separate and risk $400 to win $200. $10 difference to you if it cashes

where you go wrong is if the pats win, you take said $458 on GB, and if they lose you are out $458 while im out only $400. $58 difference to me if it doesn't cash.

Wow. Read and re-read. Then stop and think. If necessary, repeat until comprehension.

[blackbeSSt]

Wow. Read and re-read. Then stop and think. If necessary, repeat until comprehension.

my statement makes perfect sense. take the pats $400. if they win you win $58. take the $458 on gb. if they win, in the end you drop $400 to win $200. i would drop $410 to win $200 on a parlay.

if GB loses, you are out $458. im only out $400 on my parlay. you lose $58 more then me if gb loses. if they win you saved $10

[d2bets]

my statement makes perfect sense. take the pats $400. if they win you win $58. take the $458 on gb. if they win, in the end you drop $400 to win $200. i would drop $410 to win $200 on a parlay.

if GB loses, you are out $458. im only out $400 on my parlay. you lose $58 more then me if gb loses. if they win you make $10 more

You spent no more than 1 minute reading and re-reading. Do you want to try reading more slowly or should I explain why you're wrong?

[blackbeSSt]

You spent no more than 1 minute reading and re-reading. Do you want to try reading more slowly or should I explain why you're wrong?

go for it

in the end, your $458.82 to win $141.18= $600 if they win. and you know what, my $410 to win $200= $610 if they win

[d2bets]

go for it

If GB loses the backend you lose the $458 but you've already won $58 on the Pats, thus your net in this accumulation play is $400. Under the scenario that moses laid out, you can lose no more than $400 total (going for the $200 win). Under the parlay scenario it's a $410 risk to win $200. It's that simple. And the reason why separate bets is usually better that you're likely to find the best ML on the two games at different books.

There is one other consideration though. The way we lay it out you want to wait until the first game is complete to place the second wager. If you believe that the backend game ML is going to rise, then maybe you do want to lock it in early as a parlay.

So there are some considerations that can make a one-bet parlay preferential, but people really need to understand that a ML parlay is really no different than betting the first game on the ML and then rolling the return into the next game on the ML. If you wouldn't bet the first game straight ML then you shouldn't include it in a parlay.

[blackbeSSt]

If GB loses the backend you lose the $458 but you've already won $58 on the Pats, thus your net in this accumulation play is $400. Under the scenario that moses laid out, you can lose no more than $400 total (going for the $200 win). Under the parlay scenario it's a $410 risk to win $200. It's that simple. And the reason why separate bets is usually better that you're likely to find the best ML on the two games at different books. There is one other consideration though. The way we lay it out you want to wait until the first game is complete to place the second wager. If you believe that the backend game ML is going to rise, then maybe you do want to lock it in early as a parlay. So there are some considerations that can make a one-bet parlay preferential, but people really need to understand that a ML parlay is really no different than betting the first game on the ML and then rolling the return into the next game on the ML. If you wouldn't bet the first game straight ML then you shouldn't include it in a parlay.

but you haven't won $58 cause you put it on the initial $400. if GB loses, you lost your initial $400 plus pats profit of $58