Interesting Question About NFL Parlays

[PistolPete]

Ok, so I'm fairly new to sports betting and this was the first week I ever tried Parlays and Teasers...

I did a 7 Game Parlay with the following Teams
$33.75 to win about $680.. to be paid $713 total
1) Bengals +3
2) Vikings -2.5
3) Broncos -1
4) Giants Straight up
5) Chargers Straight
6) Bears Straight
7) Patriots Straight

and...

I did a 6pt 5 Team Teaser with the following spreads
$100 to win $450.. to be paid $550 total
1) Bills +11
2) Bengals +9
3) Cowboys +9
4) Saints +9.5
5) Eagles +10


Now, as the early games on Sunday were coming to a close, and I was perfect through all of them, I realized that the 1 tough game left on my 7 Team Parlay was the Denver Broncos(-1) at Kansas City. The other two were New England straight vs. Jets, and Chargers straight vs. Raiders (I was hoping these were Locks). Now I figured I had $700 to be paid as long as the Broncos won and covered 1. So I thought if I bet $350 on the Chiefs, then I would win $350 no matter who won.

I decided not to and watched the game. The Broncos D was giving up big plays, and the Chiefs were flying through the Broncos Defense right before Halftime. At this point I realized I could still bet $350 (in a game I considered a coin flip) on the Chiefs as a 2nd half wager, because the score was Tied.

So my question is.. Should I have made this bet on the Chiefs before the game? Should I have definitely made it at Halftime?


The same thing happened in my 5 Game Teaser. It came down to Monday Night Football, Eagles at home (I need Eagles +10). I could bet $275 on the Seahawks(-4) and be paid a minimum of $275 (much more if Seahawks won between 5-9pts).

So does anyone know if this strategy can be used when it comes down to 1 Game? Should I always exercise this option when the situation rises? Or am I losing value by making these bets? Your Opinions are Appreciated. Thanks,

-Pete

[Mr_J]

You wouldn't want to bet on the chiefs, since NE and SD could've lost to spoil the parlay. If chiefs had lost and either NE or SD lost, then you'd lose an extra $350 on top of any losses from the parlay or teaser. To secure a profit you must back each of the opposing teams.

[ QUOTE ]

So does anyone know if this strategy can be used when it comes down to 1 Game?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, it's called hedging. It's usually done when you have a large future that is near cashing, and you're willing to lower your EV in order to guarantee the large profit.

[ QUOTE ]
I was hoping these were Locks

[/ QUOTE ]

They weren't (locks don't exist /images/graemlins/smirk.gif).

[youtalkfunny]

I know I sound like a broken record when this subject comes up, but for those of you (like the OP) who are just joining us:

You paid hefty juice to put that team on your ticket. Now you want to pay MORE juice to shave them off? Why not just leave them off in the first place?

I used to book in Vegas. One player stepped away from the window with his newly-purchased ticket, and boasted to me, "I *always* put the Monday Night game on my ten-teamer. That way, if the first nine come in, I can come back and hedge!"

"Thanks for the extra juice," I replied.

[Mr_J]

If he wants to beat a 7 team parlay and a 5 team teaser, I don't think he should be worried about any juice paid when he hedges /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[Ken_AA]

this is what i think.

NEVER HEDGE A PARLAY. First off, parlays on seperate games are losing bets. its almost impossible to win betting parlays in the long run. However, its incredible dumb to make a parlay and then hedge a game (your TOUGH?? game, why are you betting a game if you think its a coin flip???). Just leave the game out.

teasers are slightly different. (I don't like teasers and think there dumb). Since with a teaser you could leave yourself an opportunity to win both bets its not as bad.

Ken

[tech]

[ QUOTE ]
Should I have made this bet on the Chiefs before the game? Should I have definitely made it at Halftime?

[/ QUOTE ]

Only you can answer this question. It is not in theory a +EV bet. However, if making sure you get a guaranteed profit of almost $300 would make a big difference to you personally, then it might be the right move for you even if it is not theoretically optimal.

[junkmail3]

[ QUOTE ]

"Thanks for the extra juice," I replied.

[/ QUOTE ]

Were you immediately fired?

[youtalkfunny]

I was going to type a long post, explaining the context of that remark that you find so offensive that you would fire a guy supporting a wife and three little kids for it, but decided I didn't care enough.

But I will tell you this: when a ticket writer or supervisor is discussing different ways to bet a certain proposition, it is usually the player who has come to the sportsbook employee, asking for an opinion. Such is the history I had with the player in question here.

This isn't the poker room. There is no "one player to a bet" rule. Players are allowed to discuss opinions with other players, or even employees of the casino.

My job would've been a lot easier, if you had been my boss, banning all such conversations.

TOURIST: My husband wants me to bet on the Browns to win the Superbowl. Do you think that's a smart bet?

ME: Sorry, lady, I can't comment. I need this job.

[bills217]

I understand why hedging parlays is -EV.

But, for example, let's say you're one game away from a miracle parlay that would pay something huge...let's just say $50,000 for the example.

Sure, hedging would be -EV, BUT...you could guarantee yourself, let's say, ~$23,000 with a hedge.

The question is, does the fact that it's slightly -EV matter? It's not like hitting this huge parlay is a weekly thing where you'll lose tons of money in the long run by hedging it, like, say, playing too many hands in poker. This might be a once-in-a-lifetime thing.

With that said, why not guarantee yourself the ~$23,000, a still-huge payout, and take chance out of the equation?

My point is, if you're talking about a significant sum on some kind of huge miracle parlay, the fact that hedging is slightly -EV might not be relevant when you consider how rare this occurrence is.

To take the example further, if you gave me a one-time offer of a sure $100,000, or a 1 in 100 shot at $20,000,000, I'd take the sure $100,000 without a second thought.

(Which reminds me, hedging a huge parlay like that wouldn't technically be -EV. Rather, it would be LESS +EV than not hedging, but I digress.)

[youtalkfunny]

[ QUOTE ]
Sure, hedging would be -EV, BUT...you could guarantee yourself, let's say, ~$23,000 with a hedge.

[/ QUOTE ]

Or you could've put one less team on your ticket, and made that a $25,000 guarantee, instead of $23,000.