Len Toth takes a look at "the vig" in his latest article

[Jeff]

http://www.bettorsworld.com/bstuff/len.html

[buckeye]

Excellent article. I just have one statement I disagree with somewhat. While taken on face value, I agree that a 2 team parlay at 13-5 has 10 % vig, I think that can easily be misconstrued when compared to a straight bet.

Is a 2 teamer really > twice the vig of a flat 11-10 BET ( 10% vs. 4.54% )? I say NO. No more than a conditional is twice the vig. If you discount the possibility of a tie, then a two teamer is a compounded flat bet in which the first bets stake+winnings are placed on the second game IF it wins. Thus it is really "two flat bets" in one wager. This is the only way to fairly and properly compare the two.

When looked at this way a two teamer at 13-5 is only VERY MARGINALLY worse than a flat bets vig. If you used ACTION-TO betting it would be slightly better than 13-5, but definitely worse than say 13.5-5.

What I am trying to say is that you should compare what the total results would be if you wagered 1 unit on team A and then 2 units on team C if A wins - to the 1 unit PARLAY payoff. Comparing the vig as 10% vs. 4.54% doesn't properly take the nature of the bets into consideration.

[wintermute]

Good point Buckeye.

Lots of people slam parlays as being stupid bets but if you know what you're doing they are better than single wagers.

Take the following scenario. Say you've got two baseball games going off at the same time and you figure that you have a 50 percent chance of winning either game. If the money line on each of your teams is +110 and you wager $100 on each game then you stand to get back on average

2 * 0.50 * 100 * 2.1 = $210

A return on investment of 5 percent.

If you instead put $100 down on a 2 team parlay you get back on average

1 * 0.25 * 100 * 4.41 = $110.25

A return on investment of 10.25 percent.

So you make more money, $10.25 versus $10.00 and you risk less.

Bottom line is:

If you make money betting singles, you'll make more betting parlays. If you lose betting singles, you'll lose more betting parlays.

'mute

[reno]

Huey Mahl was a big proponent of round-robin parleys as a strategy for implementing the Kelly Criterion money-management system when one has multiple plays. However, if a guy has 20+ outs, he usually won't get the best line on each game at the same joint. Consequently, even though there can be good vig-value on 2-team and 3-team parlays at some books, because I always want the best line on every game, I never bother with parlays.

[Ronbets]

Jeff,

Len Toth great acquisition. Who did we trade to get him? Good writer!--Ron

[buckeye]

Good point reno. Any vig advantage to 2 teamers, at say 14-5, could be counteracted if the spreads taken are any worse than you can find on the individual games at seperate outs. This is an absolutely legitimate reason why most "line shoppers" tend to NOT play parlays. The advantage can only be realized with all other things being equal. The same can be said of "no vig specials". These are great if you don't mind making early plays and discount line moves, but any advantage they give can be negated by crummy lines.

My problem with "flat bet bigots" is that they don't usually use valid arguments for why parlays shouldn't be used, like reno's or the argument that it forces the "2nd outcome" to be inheritantly weighted double when that might not have been indicated by capping the games individually. Most say its because of vig or because the books love them. The books love them because they make you lose more than you would lose betting straight ( assuming you lose ). Since most bettors ( 95-99% according to figures I have seen ) lose, then the books love them! All things being equal, if you are consistantly on the plus side you are better off betting parlays in the long run. Since so few bettors are able to win consistantly, they should be avoided for that reason, not because they are "sucker" bets any more than flat bets are. If you can't break the 52.38% mark, it doesn't matter!

[Jeff]

Originally posted by Ronbets:
Jeff,

Len Toth great acquisition. Who did we trade to get him? Good writer!--Ron

Every once in a while, someone posts a great one liner that just cracks me up.....