lu_hawk
09-26-2004, 04:40 PM
I have a friend who made this bet this weekend, he laid down $240 to win $200. It is called a 3 game teaser, in case you haven't heard of it before it is a 3 game parlay but he is able to shift the lines by 6 points in whatever direction he wants. I forget what games he took and what he set the lines at but it is not important for my question.
I don't bet on sports but this seems like a huge sucker bet to me. You need 7-1 to break even on a 3 game parlay with a correct spread, he is able to change the line but now only getting 5-6.
So tell me if this is right. Slansky says in Getting the Best of it that a one point spread is a 2.5% advantage to win the game outright. So if it is normally 50/50 with a correct spread his odds increase to 65% to win each game by shifting the spread 6 points in his favor. So his chance of winning the bet is .65^3=27%. So he would need to be getting close to 3-1 to break even. The thing I am not sure about is if it is appropriate to simply say that he has a 65% chance of winning each game based on Slansky's rule of thumb. Even if my math is wrong I still feel like it isn't even close EV wise and I berated him for taking the bet.
I don't bet on sports but this seems like a huge sucker bet to me. You need 7-1 to break even on a 3 game parlay with a correct spread, he is able to change the line but now only getting 5-6.
So tell me if this is right. Slansky says in Getting the Best of it that a one point spread is a 2.5% advantage to win the game outright. So if it is normally 50/50 with a correct spread his odds increase to 65% to win each game by shifting the spread 6 points in his favor. So his chance of winning the bet is .65^3=27%. So he would need to be getting close to 3-1 to break even. The thing I am not sure about is if it is appropriate to simply say that he has a 65% chance of winning each game based on Slansky's rule of thumb. Even if my math is wrong I still feel like it isn't even close EV wise and I berated him for taking the bet.