Re: some help if you would

dtsteele@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
what are the true odds against hitting the following parlays assuming
you are betting the point spread? (a link to a site with this info
would help too because google had no hits)
3 teams
4 teams
5 teams
10 teams

tia

cheers,
dan

Relatively simple math.
You multiply the "expectation" by itself for a 2-teamer,
and by itself again for a 3-teamer, and by itself again
for a 4-teamer, etc.
So, ASSUMING an expectation of 50% ATS - which it would
be if say you were flipping a coin - then for a 2-teamer
the "true odds" of hitting it are 50% X 50% = 25%
This makes sense when you merely look at the chances by
scoring ALL the possible results:
Team 1 wins and Team 2 wins = WINNER
Team 1 wins and Team 2 LOSSES = loser
Team 1 LOSSES and Team 2 wins = loser
Team 1 LOSSES and Team 2 LOSSES = loser
Thus you have a 1 in 4 chance of winning BOTH, or 25%
of winning the 2-team parlay....or expressed another
way, the odds are 3 to 1 AGAINST (ie. 3 bad results, 1 good)
So, at 3 to 1 odds against, as I understand your question,
the "true odds" or BREAK-EVEN point would be *IF* the
payoff for each winner is 3 TIMES the cost of any loss.
Thus, over time, for every 3 losses you will win ONCE
on average and that ONE WINNER needs to pay $300 if each
loser parlay costs you -$100...
However, the books will NOT give you "true odds"
They need to take their cut (vig)
They do this by taking it from the WINNING payout.
Instead of paying you a fair $300 on a winning 2-team
$100 parlay, most books only pay $260 or so...

For a 3-teamer parlay: 50% X 50% X 50% = 12.5% (or 1 in 8)
Most books only pay $600 or so for a winning $100 3-teamer.

For a 4-teamer parlay: 50% X 50% X 50% X 50% = 6.25%
which is a 1 in 16 chance.
Most books only pay $1000 or so for a winning $100 4-teamer.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: some help if you would
    ... Team 1 wins and Team 2 LOSSES = loser ... Thus you have a 1 in 4 chance of winning BOTH, ... the books will NOT give you "true odds" ... most books only pay $260 or so... ...
    (rec.gambling.sports)
  • Re: Mohegan Sun Trip Report
    ... > pay out at less than 1:1, which the is what the DP pays, whereas all ... This is a common argument against laying odds: ... of losses front side, while a string of wins will win less. ... chance of winning, while odds taken have a less than 50% of winning. ...
    (rec.gambling.craps)
  • Re: True odds bets? Clams
    ... If you notice, in each of your examples, the losing percentages decrease ... to be winning, ... Unequal length steps for a random walk are more complex, ... They are my favorite subject in those books, ...
    (rec.gambling.craps)
  • Re: greg lemond theory
    ... The arbitrators are well aware where the money comes from that goes to pay their salaries and they won't bite the multi-million dollar hand that feeds them. ... If they were to decide for Floyd, it would jeopardize billions of dollars in sponsorship and TV contracts. ... A slave in 1790 had a better chance of winning a lawsuit contesting slavery that was filed in Mississippi than Floyd does of winning his appeal. ...
    (rec.bicycles.racing)
  • Re: Rafa wants to die with his boots on
    ... sportsmanlike image. ... The deliberate downplaying of his chances of winning can't be anything ... an attempt to defuse expectations. ... The losses and the pressure of holding onto #1 seem to be getting to Rafa. ...
    (rec.sport.tennis)