[Ganchrow]

It would appear that many posters believe that when betting large ML favorites it always (or often) makes sense to do so only within the context of a parlay with one or more additional large ML faves.

I'll just point out that this is wholly unnecessary.

If you like a large ML fave then just bet it. There's absolutely no value to be gained from waiting for another bet with which to parlay it (putting aside correlation, the desire to lock in a market price, proper Kelly staking, and the circumventing of limits). If at a later date, be it the next day of the next year, you like another large ML fave (and poor principles of money management don't concern you) feel free to roll over the principal and all proceeds of the first bet into the second.

That's all you're doing when betting a parlay.

[Richkas]

90% of the people on this board after reading this probably says phuck Ganchrow, he doesnt know what he's talking about. LOL

You are correct.

And people dont want to hear that they are doing something wrong. They cant handle the truth.

The problem is most guys on here only deposit $50, so to make any money they have to bet parlays. Sad but true.

[LT Profits]

Some of us never have to be concerned with this decision because we never lay -130 or more on anything.

[Justin7]

I can't tell you how many times I've seen someone parlay 6 "bridge-jumpers"... The whole thing pays even money, and they are shocked when they lose.

If you actually want to make money at this, do the math. Pay attention to Ganch.

[gordon gekko]

Playing a parlay is a sucker bet, when bookies here parlay they get excited.

[Wilforth]

Some of us never have to be concerned with this decision because we never lay -130 or more on anything.

LT,
From my experience, I've had to adopt your approach. The more chalky a favorite is, the greater the capacity for a "chalky" upset! Never laying -130 or more solves it.

[SlickFazzer]

Some of us never have to be concerned with this decision because we never lay -130 or more on anything.

My kind of thinking....

[pico]

i did 6 team parlays with about +150 parlay odds during the ncaa football season. it was about 50% win ratio for me during the experiement weeks (not sure the true odds, because i went 4-4). kind of worked out, because all upsets seems to happen in the same week, so it didn't make a difference to me.

[LT Profits]

I should clarify that I rarely lay -130 or more on any INDIVIDUAL game. The only recent exception I could think of is Red Wings -135 in Game 6 vs. Dallas.

However, I have on occasion laid more than that on future bets. I thought Ohio State -600 not winning the BCS was like finding money on the floor, not expecting that they'd actually MAKE it to the BCS game (thanks for the bailout LSU)! Point is, anything can happen in ONE game, while long-range projections can be more formful if you know what you are doing, thus sometimes justifying higher juice.

[Doc JS]

Surprised Ganch didn't post this in the Think Tank...I guess he was looking for a larger viewing audience than the TT usually draws.

Doc

[MrX]

We do see this over and over.

Someone hears from a poster they respect that the key lies in not laying money on large favorites.

Instead of coming to the conclusion that the chalky teams have a tendency to be overrated (and the underdog underrated) causing the value (if any) to be on the underdog, they think there is something fundamentally wrong with laying odds.

So they decide to fix the problem by parlaying favorites until they're getting odds instead of laying odds. Now they're not only making bad picks, they're utilizing bad money management as well.

I'll also go on record as strongly disagreeing with the belief that there is no value in favorites greater than -130. I do believe that most amateur betters fail to understand regression to the mean and tend to overvalue very recent performance which causes them to pick a lot of favorites that are -EV.

That said, there are a lot of big favorites out there that are +EV.

[The HG]

We do see this over and over.

Someone hears from a poster they respect that the key lies in not laying money on large favorites.

Instead of coming to the conclusion that the chalky teams have a tendency to be overrated (and the underdog underrated) causing the value (if any) to be on the underdog, they think there is something fundamentally wrong with laying odds.

So they decide to fix the problem by parlaying favorites until they're getting odds instead of laying odds. Now they're not only making bad picks, they're utilizing bad money management as well.

True, but if you do in fact wind up with an assortment of big ML favorites that do have value (according to you at least), Kelly does dictate that more than a token amount of your bets on those big ML favorites will be made up of parlays among them.

So I think that "casual" bettors' inclination at times to want to parlay big ML faves is not so incontrovertibly off. They may overshoot the idea, may use it as a crutch or as a catalyst for helping them believe what they want to believe about the games that they wouldn't believe as much if they had to bet the games straight, it's far from optimal, etc etc etc.

But I do actually think the instinct is in fact governed by the same pressures that govern the math of Kelly as well.

Obviously though, the basic idea that you don't "reduce your risk" or anything like that by parlaying ML faves is a point very well taken.

[LT Profits]

Mr X,

Would you agree that that the larger the favorite, the HARDER it is to find a big edge with them? I mean if a team is -160, that makes the break-even point 61.5 percent. I think it's very difficult to find a -160 favorite that has, say, a 63 percent expectency of winning, because bookmakers have more of a tendancy to overrate nice-sized favorites than underrate them. Conversely, it is fairly easy to spot +110 dogs that have close to a 50/50 chance.

[RickySteve]

Large favorites are generally undervalued.

[purecarnagge]

What about round robin parlays?

[ChuteBoxe]

I absolutely despise parlays. If I'm in the scratch-off lottery ticket type mood however, and my MLB card is shaping up to be a dog type of night, I'd much rather parlay 2-3 nice sized dogs. Most chalk betters would be shocked when they see those odds add up, and especially cash.

[Ganchrow]

True, but if you do in fact wind up with an assortment of big ML favorites that do have value (according to you at least), Kelly does dictate that more than a token amount of your bets on those big ML favorites will be made up of parlays among them.

That's only going to be true as part of a larger strategy of risk management. In all but the most extreme pathological cases, the optimal bet on the parlays will be much smaller than on the straight bets, and if given the opportunity to only bet straights OR parlays the straight bets will almost always win out.

[Ganchrow]

Mr X,

Would you agree that that the larger the favorite, the HARDER it is to find a big edge with them? I mean if a team is -160, that makes the break-even point 61.5 percent. I think it's very difficult to find a -160 favorite that has, say, a 63 percent expectency of winning, because bookmakers have more of a tendancy to overrate nice-sized favorites than underrate them. Conversely, it is fairly easy to spot +110 dogs that have close to a 50/50 chance.

For most sports (MLB being a notable exception), bookmakers tend to bias markets in the direction of money line favorites, giving a bettor a lower hurdle to overcome when betting at short odds. For a discussion of this see Fixed Odds Sports Betting: Statistical Forecasting and Risk Management by Joseph Buchdahl.

But this is only part of the story as not all edge is created the same. A bettor seeking to maximize the growth of his bankroll should always prefer a bet at shorter (i.e., more "positive") odds as opposed to a bet of identical edge at longer odds. This is due to the higher risk carried by underdogs.

[Ganchrow]

What about round robin parlays?

If betting 1 parlay is a bad idea, betting 3 will generally be even worse.

[pico]

heavy chalk ml has outragous vigs...not sure if you can find any value betting the underdog.

it is really hard to pull the trigger betting a +400 underdog...even though i like the dog a lot, i end up taking the spread.

actually, it is hard for me to pull the trigger when ML gets higher than +170.

[Ganchrow]

heavy chalk ml has outragous vigs...not sure if you can find any value betting the underdog,

Unless the bookmakers are hanging biased markets (and they are), the vig won't be any different whether you're betting fave parlays or dog parlays.

If they're biased in favor of the ML faves (as is generally true in NFL, NBA, and Euro soccer), then the dog parlays will be higher vig.

If they're biased in favor of the ML dogs (as is generally true in MLB), then the fave parlays will be higher vig.

[the shadow]

I know one that plays only -160 to -180 fav's in baseball.
He saves a lot of juice.
I believe the juice is less in a -180/+170 than a-105/-105

[pavyracer]

Some people use parlays to minimize bankroll risk exposure and some use them to maximize bankroll growth. Use them for what it's best for your bankroll.

[Busterflywheel]

I absolutely despise parlays. If I'm in the scratch-off lottery ticket type mood however, and my MLB card is shaping up to be a dog type of night, I'd much rather parlay 2-3 nice sized dogs. Most chalk betters would be shocked when they see those odds add up, and especially cash.

I agree with you...Ill take my chances, run down to the corner store and buy $100 of lottery tickets..

[Shortstop]

I thought Ganchrow was back...

[Wrecktangle]

I thought Ganchrow was back...

Yep, got me excited too...

[konck]

Here's one for you....I don't deposit I play off the money I have. I parlay big ML all the time I try to get my price around even money. Trust me no one stays in action more than me without investing. Have a nice day.

[FadeCommonSense]

Parlays are money killers. The best idea ever for the sportsbooks.

[Slim]

Who had the Orlando Magic moneyline last night?

[Jaug]

Where has Ganchrow gone? Good poster with alot of knowledge.

[RogueScholar]

Rehab maybe? Who knows...

[tullamore]

Where has Ganchrow gone? Good poster with alot of knowledge.

On a special project, can't wait to find out the results of this project.

[onthewhat]

Give me on the ocean floor for +1200

[BadBeatBodog]

Give me on the ocean floor for +1200

Parlay with 'Hit by the Mob +900'

correlation imo

[SHADYLANKY]

He either logged in on 1-5-10 or someone has his password. Look at his points if question this.