Correlated Parlay Betting Strategy Question (ALL-SPORTS)

S

Schrute

Assistant __ ___ Regional Mod
There isn't a great place to put this so I figured I'd just post it in a busy sub-forum and the one where I spend most of my time. My question is how much do you guys use correlated parlays when it comes to wagering? I don't mean games like TAMU -33 Over 57. I mean you cap it into a correlated manner. Example is the Texas UCLA game. I thought Texas would cover and I really liked Texas but I didn't envision a scenario where Texas could cover and the game would go over. IMO the only way Texas covered was in a low scoring game so I parlayed the points with the under. This pays +265ish which is far better than -110. I did this again yesterday with the Cowboys game. I didn't think Dallas would have much chance in a low scoring game. I certainly could have seen the Rams winning a high scoring game but if the Cowboys were going to win, I envisioned that it would have to be via scoring a lot of points.

The more I think about this the more it makes sense. I think I am going to incorporate it more into football immediately. I could see a way where it could work well in baseball especially with the run line and over. If you envision a certain pitcher getting crushed then why not parlay the RL with the over for a nice payout? Likewise I could see situations where you parlay it the other way in baseball with a dog who you expect to only allow 1-2 runs. If they win, then its likely to have to be a low scoring game.

I think I can make it work in college basketball as well with a little more kenpom research. However, I have no idea if it can translate to the NBA. I'm sure it could work in soccer/hockey as well but I'm not sure where to start or even if its allowed.
 
The more I think about correlated parlays, I'm surprised some books take 'em. Don't most of the offshores circle the run lines, or am I not remembering that right? Haven't done that in a while.
 
tipyerbartender said:
The more I think about correlated parlays, I'm surprised some books take 'em. Don't most of the offshores circle the run lines, or am I not remembering that right? Haven't done that in a while.
Click to expand...


I really don't know. I've not ever looked into it except for these last few weeks on football and you can certainly bet a correlated parlay within reason. I'm not sure what the cutoff is for most sportsbooks but I would suppose it's somewhere around when the spread is 30-40% of the total.

I have no idea how they handle it for other sports than football and I can't really find much information via google
 
I'm doing correlated parlays now until someone tells me to stop.
 
Are you betting both sides? For instance Texas and the Under in one parlay, along with UCLA and the over in another parlay? That's how I understood these parlays.. you don't win much but it gives you great odds to profit a little bit.. Not sure if I'm correct or not though.
 
I haven't looked into the game yet but this is an example. If you think the Cards bats are going to have success against Hendrick tonight then a Cards -1.5/O7.5 parlay pays +372

Cards RL is +140-145ish

If you like the Cards RL then you have to think there is value in the parlay
 
amwagner0 said:
Are you betting both sides? For instance Texas and the Under in one parlay, along with UCLA and the over in another parlay? That's how I understood these parlays.. you don't win much but it gives you great odds to profit a little bit.. Not sure if I'm correct or not though.
Click to expand...


That is how you do it if you can find a book that will let you take the game when the spread is 40% of the total. You just blindly bet both sides because the math is in your favor. However it is nearly impossible to find a book that will let you bet correlated parlays where the spread is such a high percentage of the total

I'm talking about capping a game and trying to find an edge in correlated parlays through capping
 
I think my lazy local takes those correlated run line/total parlays, no one's going to take his house, but I don't think "real" books take those.
 
Yeah I just checked all my outs and only 1 book (local) takes them on RLs and totals in baseball.

However 5Dimes takes them on football within reason. You can parlay the Colts -9 and over 45 in NFL this weekend. I'm not sure there is a mathematical edge of tremendous proportions there. However if you're taking the Colts -9 because you believe their offense is in a great situation and is going to score a shit ton of points then the parlay would make sense and confer a pretty big advantage. Personally this is something that I believe I've been overlooking when it comes to wagering. However I've only done it twice and won both bets so it could be that I'm just fired up about it from some very small, very early success
 
The cutoff is usually if the spread is 1/3 of the total.

You're very, very lucky to have a local who takes RL parlays in baseball with the total. They aren't accepted anywhere else. Nice for you for sure.
 
Lareux said:
The cutoff is usually if the spread is 1/3 of the total.

You're very, very lucky to have a local who takes RL parlays in baseball with the total. They aren't accepted anywhere else. Nice for you for sure.
Click to expand...

Yeah I suppose and I'll probably try to do it some. However my question is more capping related. Even taking a ML dog with the under is allowed at a place like 5Dimes. So if you thought Colon was going to have a stellar game tonight but had some concerns about the Mets bats then why not parlay Colon with the under and make the game +400 as opposed to taking Colon +167? I realize that the Mets could win and the game go over. This is purely an example as I don't have any play or idea what might happen in this game but it just seems like a way to cap that is seldomly used
 
I've always used your line of thinking Dwight, without doing parlays but rather 2 straight bets. If you think a team can score 'x' amount of points, and they are getting 'x' amount of points, you can't lose both bets if you bet the dog and the over. For example, if you took your Colts example for this weekend against Tenn...if you think Tennessee can score 18 points, then you play Tenn and the over, and you can't lose both bets if they score 18 since they are getting 9 (Indy would have to score 27 to cover which would put it at the game total of 45). Or, if you think Indy can score 27 points, you take them -9 and the over...same thing...if they score 27 for you, you can't lose both bets.
 
Same here. I have had success and lost a few in this situation. I still keep w/ the parlays. I just like the fact if you like a side and feel there may or may not be points scored.why not profit a little doing the parlay?
However there have been a lot of times I ask myself why did you parlay that when you could have placed 2 bets and at least won some $, instead of putting it in the parlay and lose to the total or the line. I just say to myself hey that was a gamble, instead of saying I know my #s were right why didn't I just play a side a walk away w/ a profit. then I remember a wise old man telling me, greed will cost you in the long run.

So when I REAlly like a side I play it as a single bet. AND I play it in a correlated parlay as well.
I know still Greedy right? I guess I still don't listen well.


Good thread, Thanks !
 
gynecologist said:
Schurte...

I'm going to join you here,, if you don't mind..
Click to expand...

Why would he mind? :p

Seriously though, do you also have a local that allows these correlated parlays? I'm definitely jealous of you guys (I'm sure I'm not the only jealous one), because you can't find them accepted anywhere anymore except locals.
 
Last night I did it with Arizona and the over as well as the marlins and the under. 1-1 pays pretty well on these. The way I figure it is you have to compare it to 4 separate plays. If I go 4-0 I make more by risking 2 units on correlated parlays than I would risking 4 units to win 4. If I go 3-1 I still make more doing a correlated parlay. If I go 2-2 I either lose two units or make a solid profit. If I go 1-3 I am down 2 units either way. If I go 0-4 then I lose 2 units as opposed to 4.

Gyno, I would love to chat with you about this and hear your thoughts
 
I think during baseball playoffs we could parlay some teams and the under..
 
Went back to the well with Arizona and the over on the early games at +380

Will probably have 1-2 on the later games as well
 
Looking at tomorrow's college football stuff I don't see how App St covers without the game going over. However I can certainly see GSU covering without the game going over. I don't necessarily have a lean to App St but if they cover, IMO the game should be an under type of game. Right now the line is 19.5 and the total is 60 and 5Dimes will let you parlay it. I haven't locked anything in on this one yet but definitely lean that way

I'm already on ASU +5.5 and ML so won't be adding anything on that game

TTU vs OK St doesn't seem to fit the profile. I could see OK St covering with an over or with an under. I could see Texas Tech covering in a shootout especially with a backdoor. If the game goes under then TTU certainly has a chance to cover
 
Schrute said:
Looking at tomorrow's college football stuff I don't see how App St covers without the game going over. However I can certainly see GSU covering without the game going over. I don't necessarily have a lean to App St but if they cover, IMO the game should be an under type of game. Right now the line is 19.5 and the total is 60 and 5Dimes will let you parlay it. I haven't locked anything in on this one yet but definitely lean that way

I'm already on ASU +5.5 and ML so won't be adding anything on that game

TTU vs OK St doesn't seem to fit the profile. I could see OK St covering with an over or with an under. I could see Texas Tech covering in a shootout especially with a backdoor. If the game goes under then TTU certainly has a chance to cover
Click to expand...
I'm basing this on the fact that TT's defense is questionable and the whole ordeal with the team losing their DC etc, but if you have TT covering I'd assume it would correlate to an over based on the fact that Okie lite should be able to do what TT's previous opponents have done: UTEP 26, Central Arkansas 35, Arkansas 49. IMO, there's a better chance to the over with ttu covering than the over
 
gsro said:
I'm basing this on the fact that TT's defense is questionable and the whole ordeal with the team losing their DC etc, but if you have TT covering I'd assume it would correlate to an over based on the fact that Okie lite should be able to do what TT's previous opponents have done: UTEP 26, Central Arkansas 35, Arkansas 49. IMO, there's a better chance to the over with ttu covering than the over
Click to expand...


I agree to an extent and I like that there is a chance with the backdoor. The problem I have is that I can see OK St scoring every time they get the football and running away with the game ala Arkansas. 49-28 Ok St is an over and a Cowboy cover and that's not out of the realm of possibility for me either.
 
Schrute said:
I agree to an extent and I like that there is a chance with the backdoor. The problem I have is that I can see OK St scoring every time they get the football and running away with the game ala Arkansas. 49-28 Ok St is an over and a Cowboy cover and that's not out of the realm of possibility for me either.
Click to expand...
yep, definitely hear what you're saying...I also agree TT wont' be stopping this offense who isn't nearly as proficient as Arky but can score in bunches. Caveat is also that Arky gave up 21 and Okie state, by the numbers, has a better d...something's going to give..enjoy this thread thanks for posting

and I meant to say that there's a better possibility to the over than the under with tt covering...
 
Looking at tonights baseball card. Mets and Under would seem to correlate. Seattle and over would seem to as well though who the hell knows what the Blue Jays bats are gonna do. Red Sox and over would seem to correlate...just can't see them winning a low scoring game there. Braves and under maybe but don't love doing this with favorites unless I can do it with the RL. Cubs and under but would need to look into wind before locking it in. Rockies and over seem to correlate but hate that ballpark and overs. Giants and under definitely correlate IMO...Kershaw is gonna throw a gem and only way Giants are gonna win is if its 1-0, 2-0 or 2-1
 
Taking a stab with Giants and under. I do not see a scenario where the Giants win the ballgame with over 6 runs scored. Kershaw is gonna throw a gem to try and clinch the division. Huddy could also throw a gem and this thing will hopefully be 1-0 Giants. Giants/Under is +528 and I think definitely worth a shot that Huddy outduels him at that number. That'll probably be it for tonight
 
Dwight, your last two posts are mathematically impossible.

In baseball, a specific correlation exists with betting two different outcomes and only two different outcomes. Visiting team to OVER. Home team to UNDER. With home/UNDER, if the home team is leading after 8 1/2 innings, they do not bat in the 9th. That leaves 3 outs on the table. Instead of 54 outs in the game, there are only 51. From pure math standpoint, that's 5.55 percent fewer outs in the game. If the visitor leads after 8 1/2, the home team must bat, so 5.55 percent potentially more outs will occur. There cannot be a more clear definition of a correlation than my above example.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

He Hate Me
Player Props Week 2 Discussion
Replies
36
Views
281
He Hate Me
He Hate Me
R
Rochclone Week 7 NCAAF
Replies
14
Views
650
rochclone
R
G-Man
***G-Man's College Week 7***
Replies
14
Views
953
G-Man
G-Man
B.A.R.
Week of Saturday, October 5th Plays and Analysis Thread...
Replies
35
Views
750
B.A.R.
B.A.R.
VirginiaCavs
Texas vs. Michigan Preview Article
Replies
19
Views
349
Frank Costanza
Frank Costanza
Back
Top