Jump to content

Governor

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    28
  • Joined

Posts posted by Governor

  1. I was just defining what a parlay is, as it seems some people are confused, while providing examples to hopefully help others understand. My breakdown simply explained it.  Regardless of your bet amount on legs 2-6, your investment is only the initial $50, just like it would be if you bet the $50 6-leg parlay.  The investment is the same (you don't bet game #2 until game #1 is complete).  The beauty of a parlay is it allows you to bet games running at the same time.  Of course this increases your variance, but it does not affect your long-term profitability.  

    21 minutes ago, ztejas said:

    I'll use this as an example. $20 risked at -255 and $20 risked at -150 wins you about $20 and change if you win both. $20 risked on that ML parlay wins you $26 as displayed. 

    Again, you're confusing two different things.  In the first, you're risking $40 (two separate $20 bets) to win 21.18.  In the second (your parlay) you're risking half ($20) to win 26.  Risking $40 and risking $20 are not the same thing.  If you were to treat the separate bets the same as the parlay, you'd be risking $20 on game 1 @ -2.55, and then risking the payout of 27.84 @-150 to win 46 (really 46.40, but it seems your book rounds to the nearest dollar)

    • Hook 'Em 1
  2. Egos aside, there are certainly some popular misconceptions being regurgitated in the posts above, likely due to a lack of understanding of how parlay odds are calculated and what they actually mean to the bettor.  Before getting into it, though, if sports betting isn't your professional, like Baboobntyme said, treat it as entertainment & just fire way and have fun.  

     

    On 5/19/2021 at 12:48 AM, WhatTheBuck said:

    I’m not a sucker. The odds don’t pay off as well as betting the games separately. I would never make a parlay bet.

    But you’re welcome to join my poker game. 

    While I appreciate the confidence, WhatTheBuck, this simplistic misconception just isn't accurate.  In the true definition of a parlay, the odds pay off EXACTLY the same in a parlay as they do in two (or more) straight bets.  All parlays (should) truly do is increase the bettor's variance while offering opportunity, with long term results remaining equal.  What a parlay allows is a player to bet a second game before the first game is complete (all a parlay does is roll the implied winnings from game 1 into the bet for game 2).  Similarly, a "rolling IF" bet allows a player to place a second bet while the first is in play, whereas the parlay is placed on both (or more) games at the outset. While there are plenty of books out there that will take advantage of the recreational bettor (find a better book), there are more that pay out true odds.

    Parlay payouts will vary depending on the odds given on any included bet, but to provide some examples, let's assume traditional -110 lines.  A 2-team parlay (both legs at -110) should pay out 2.6446:1.  So if you bet 100 and win the parlay, your payout should be 364.46.
    dede13184c163ee9ceb3b632d3d87210.png

    This screenshot is from one of the many books I bet at.  To explain what I said above--that the parlay pays out EXACTLY the same as two separate bets, assume you did make two separate bets:  Bet 100 at -110, win, receive 190.91.  Then bet that 190.91 at -110 odds on the second game, win, receive the same 364.46 that you would have in the parlay.

    The same is true for parlays with more legs.  A 3-team parlays (all legs at -110) should pay 5.9579:1.  If you bet 100 on the parlay and win, your payout should be 695.79.
    76898d159e733ce8a4cd56ba3a4337d1.png

    Just like in the example above, if you bet three separate bets, the net payout is exactly the same as the parlay.  The first bet pays out 190.91.  Bet 190.91 @ -110 paying out 364.46.  Then bet 364.46 @ -110 (to win 331.33), paying out the same 695.79 as the parlay.

    Likewise, ztejas, your $50 parlay 6-team parlay isn't 6 separate 8 and change.  You're betting $50 on the first game (to pay 55.59), then 55.49 @ -220 to pay 80.71, then 80.71 @-400 to pay 100.89, the 100.89 @-640 to pay 116.65, then 116.65 @-840 to pay 130.54, then 130.54 @-600 to pay 152 (you're getting shorted 29 cents on your bet above).

    In summary, if you're getting worse odds on a parlay payout than you should be, it doesn't make parlays a sucker bet.  You're just a sucker for betting at that book who gives you bad odds.  Hope that explains parlays a little better.

    • Hook 'Em 1
    • Like 3
  3. tumblr_ljh0puClWT1qfkt17.gif

    I realize I'm a couple of weeks late to this discussion, but I figured I could offer my expertise to clear a few things up (for those that don't know I've been filing my taxes as a professional gambler for 15 years now).

  4. With the combination of COVID-19 crippling live poker, the GG online World Series going on, and the upcoming WCOOP series on PokerStars, the bigger names are starting to roll into town here in Mexico.  The infamous Shaun Deeb is staying with me for the next month and, say what you want about his untethered opinions, his penchant for finding drama, or his lack of Twitter punctuation, the guy's got some great poker stories.

    • Like 1
  5. R means rebuy, R/A means Rebuy & Add-on.  The rebuys obviously build bigger prize pools.  The optional "Add-on" is done after a certain number of levels have been played, usually 10-15, when the rebuy period ends.  It looks like the daily schedule is being tweaked right now, trying to find the perfect balance, but for the most part this is the standard daily schedule.  There are daily freerolls that aren't on it, and Sunday has a 500 rebuy, 300K gtd.  Tuesday has a 1K, 1 rebuy, no add-on with 250K gtd.

  6. On 7/6/2020 at 8:56 PM, Lurch said:

    I get that he has issues, but what he said and asking his followers to dox “him” as part of a physical threat was 100% the actions of a piece of shit.

    And definitely not conducive to adding more regs to the game

    I agree.  He's definitely got some loose screws and displays a significant amount of underlying crazy sometimes.  There are plenty of people in the poker world who are happy to prey on his bipolar weakness.  I'd rather he stay on his meds.

  7. Hahaha.  No pro bettor gives away or sells his picks.  Literally zero props selling picks on Twitter, online, on late night TV ads--ZERO, are worth a shit.  If they were winning on their own, they wouldn't offer their picks to the public.  Either they're complete frauds (some of whom are clueless, but good salesmen), or, more likely, they used to be winning bettors who either got lazy with their modeling, or just haven't been able to keep up with the evolution of the industry.  Things move fast, edges are small, and good outs are top secret.  Besides, by the time I've placed a bet, I've moved the line worldwide, so unless you've got a local PPH with static lines (if so, please let me know hahaha), following me would result in neutral-EV bets at best.

  8. 31 minutes ago, Chewbacca said:

    Matusow is a real piece of shit, isn't he?

    He's not a piece of shit.  He's just incredibly insecure, bad at NLH, and mentally unstable to the point where he thinks the world is against him every time he loses a flip.  Away from the table he's a genuinely nice guy.  Even on the table he's a nice guy.  People know he's fragile and yet still slow-roll him.  I think that tells you more about those people than it does about him.

  9. 13 hours ago, Bookman said:

    $0.50/$1.00 game. 6-handed.

    I call on the button and four see a flop. $4.00 in pot.

    I have K clubs five clubs. Flop is 7 clubs A spades 3 hearts.

    Check, check, the villain bets $1.00, and I float. The villain likes to make min-bets postflop -- often all three streets. He'll often fold to a raise.

    $6.00 in pot. Turn is 4 of clubs. Nice card for me. The villain bets $1.00 and I call.

    $8.00 in pot. River is 2 of clubs. I have the second nuts. Sweet. The villain is fixin' to get raised.

    But he overbets the pot -- $20.00 into $8.00. He has $160 left. I have him covered by a lot.

    What's the play here? Raise and fold to a 3-bet?

     

    You're never folding, and just calling is atrocious.  The question is, do you think he's capable of ripping over your raise with just a 5, blind to the backdoor flush because he's got the wheel?  Do you think he's capable of ripping over your raise with a flush that includes a 3 since he backdoored it?  Honestly if K5cc is in your range, every club combo from Q3cc down is in his.  Raising is the definite play, and never folding to a jam is correct when you're playing with 100bb effective stacks.  The only issue here, really, is that you're playing roughly 185bb deep.  That said, if he's bad enough to limp a suited ace, and then to both minbet it on the flop and again on the turn with top pair and a flush draw, he can have my 185bb if I got cold decked and he 3bet jams.

    • Like 1
  10. Yeah, I imagine most controls/regulations discourage the recreational player, and even the compulsive gambler when all the fun is sucked out of the experience.  Now you're left with decent to good grinders.

  11. On 6/19/2020 at 8:25 PM, Lurch said:

    Played one for about 3-4 hours in Hot Springs AR of all places.

    It did, indeed, suck. Fortunately, so did the players so I did quite well, iirc

    Dragging pots and stacking chips is one of the more enjoyable aspects of live play.

    100% agreed.  There's just something so satisfying about having a pile of chips pushed to you and then going through them in front of everyone meticulously picking out the big denominations and then building some chip towers.

     

    • Like 1
  12. I'm surprised there hasn't been a bigger push for digital tables (like those on a cruise ship).  I don't like them at all, but if the concern is not spreading disease, repeatedly passing around chips and cards probably isn't the solution.  (And yes, I'm aware the main means of spread is through the air, and not from physical contact with surfaces.  But it is certainly possible.)

  13. I'm not disregarding the economics at all.  In fact I specifically mentioned what is actually being discussed amongst the 15-20 biggest programs out there--which is delaying the start of the season only to allow for more people to be in the stands.  100K seats in DKR @ $100/pop is a cool $10mm per game even before concessions and parking.  They are very aware of the economics, as am I.  

    Much like Ford with the Pinto and it's poorly-located gas tank, Universities are keenly aware of potential lawsuits awaiting them.  This is both a health and business decision for them.

    The scales are certainly tilted in the direction of us having at least some football this Fall, but they certainly aren't tilted anywhere towards packed houses the first week of September.  A lot can change in three months, but that is the current state of affairs.

    • Like 1
  14. 18 hours ago, Veerbone said:

    It’s very likely by August 1st less than 15,000 healthy Americans under the age of 64 have died by C-19.   With all respect to every life, one either is in denial of our economic future or relativity in general if you think it’s “wishful thinking” for a packed house come September.

     

    I think you're disregarding some very important details here, the most obvious being that the scientific reason behind not having mass gatherings is to slow/control the spread of the virus.  Sure, we can hope everyone who comes to the game is under 60.  But that doesn't stop them from contracting it in a stadium full of people and then spreading it to the unassuming  restaurant patron 2-days later, or to their professor.

    More directly football related--there are more than 15 Division 1 head coaches over the age of 60.  Big names.  Nick Saban. Mack Brown.  Les Miles.  Not to mention assistant coaches and gameday support staff.  It's not just a bunch of 18-22 yr olds running around out there.

    Furthermore, and this is more prevalent in college football than any other sport, people travel from large distances every week to see their teams play.  Hell, I fly in from Mexico for home games.  Not to mention visiting fans from other states.  

    I've been on a call with, let's just say a high ranking member of a Top Tier FBS University's Chancellor's office, and there is a lot going on behind the scenes.  So many scenarios.  So many contingencies.  What if there's an outbreak within the K-State football team after week 3?  Do they quarantine for 2 weeks, and only play a 9-game schedule?  What if California doesn't allow gatherings of more than 30 people, so no California team can even practice?  Do big schools push to have the season start Oct 1 instead, in hopes of having more fans in the stands on gameday, and still having time to fit in a full schedule? All states aren't equal.  All conferences aren't equal.  It's currently a clusterfuck, with a lot of unanswered questions.

    But as of today, yes, it's wishful thinking that we'll have a packed house come Sept 5.

    • Like 7
  15. They're "reasoning" isn't really reasoning at all.  I've coached a number of players over the years, and some are just stuck in the "woe is me" stage instead of recognizing their leaks and improving their game.  It's many of those same player-types that complain about the poker gods being against them.  Some of these guys are naturally incredibly talented, too.  They just have some major leaks that keep them from making the next step.  Sometimes those leaks are just as simple as being emotional and tilting, or playing beyond their bankroll where inevitably variance and luck overcome skill.

    I, like many people, enjoy and prefer the interaction during a live poker game, but man it sure it nice to just play from your couch or bathroom or desk without having to put shoes and a shirt on.  With that I've just got to accept that I'm going to see some pretty absurd hands with chips so freely flying around.

×
×
  • Create New...