First of all, thank you Yngwie/Sawyer for sharing with us.
Im still a bit confused though, maybe I just don't understand it at all. (I have never done parlay arbing)
All of this still requires that the bets we play in our parlaybets are arbs/valuebet right? Which makes it harder than it sounds then.
Otherwise from a mathematically viewpoint it makes no sense in my head.
However most bookies offer accumulator, example does bet365 give 5% on a tripple bet.
Isn't the arb game dead?
- risilloch
- Has experience
- Karma: 25
Post
Re: Isn't the arb game dead?
Yngwie, i salute your genius.
This is a remarkable gift
For some time now, you have been banging on about how you love parlays. Now i see why.
This is a remarkable gift
For some time now, you have been banging on about how you love parlays. Now i see why.
- VidaBlue
- To become a Pro
- Contact:
- Karma: 70
Post
Re: Isn't the arb game dead?
Excellent explanation Yngwie.
I do a similar thing in value betting, parlaying when odds are small. In your example with the two games @ 1.35 (assumed true odd 1.25), I find it more valuable to do:
1 bet @ odd 1.82 (EV 16.6%)
rather than
2 bets @ odd 1.35 (EV 8.0%)
I'm just a bit puzzled by this statement:
Again, thank you for this insight Yngwie.
I do a similar thing in value betting, parlaying when odds are small. In your example with the two games @ 1.35 (assumed true odd 1.25), I find it more valuable to do:
1 bet @ odd 1.82 (EV 16.6%)
rather than
2 bets @ odd 1.35 (EV 8.0%)
I'm just a bit puzzled by this statement:
What is most important? Overall profit or hitting the jackpot? I thought that arbers were all about profits in the long run. Or maybe it is compensated by the decreased risk of limitation when doing parlays? Maybe I am missing something here ...Yngwie/Sawyer wrote: However, you reduce the overall profit little bit..but you keep your chance to hit the jackpot.
Again, thank you for this insight Yngwie.
-
ju
Post
your example is fantasy, maybe in the past with your Turkish bookmakers you were getting such massive pre-march arbs but this example you show now could only be on a small event from a small bookmaker with small bet amounts.
sorry but when I read this i think your example is unreallistic, to illustrate an example of massive pre-match arbs like this to do a parlay on the likes of Man city and liverpool is not impressive and would have liked to have seen a more reallistic example, where of course your profit would have been much smaller or negative.
in your example, if you were to simply put 3000 on both of them and arbed you'd make 223 x 2 , 446 profit as opposed to your 226 profit example and your roughly 6% chance of hitting the jackpot but 1.35 to bet and 1.25 to lay, this is old school.
of course you are one of the top earners on here, i don't criticise, but think you are talking of the past and not conditions nowadays?
Re: Isn't the arb game dead?
yngwie/sawyer, you've been the best contributor on here for years (in my opinion) and yes you're a very smart guy but i take issue with this, man city, liverpool, 1.35 to bet and 1.25 to lay, where on earth can you get pre-match odds like that? surely that is extremely uncommon, in the UK you can't get this on football, pre-match is dead now.Yngwie/Sawyer wrote:When you parlay two events scheduled at same or similiar time. You have chance to get x25 of your arb profit. Yes, x25!Of course I would like you to give an example from parley bets at the same time.
However, you reduce the overall profit little bit..but you keep your chance to hit the jackpot.
Allright, here's the parlay:
Man City 1,35 Saturday 17:00 (Lay is 1,25)
Liverpool 1,35 Saturday 17:15 (Lay is 1,25)
Stake: 3000€
The key is..We lay each bet seperate.
Risk for City is 1120,39€ Lay stake is 4481,56€.
Risk for Liverpool is 1120,39€. Lay stake is 4481,56€.
Let's have a look at scenarios now..
Both City and Liverpool win +226€ Profit
City wins, Lİverpool not winner +226€ Profit
Liverpool wins, City not winner +226€ Profit
What if both Liverpool and City does not win?
Well, you HIT THE JACKPOT in that case!
+5739€ profit if both Liverpool and City fail to win.
Parlay bet lost -3000€
City lay win +4481,56€ (+4369,52€ Net)
Liverpool lay win +4481,56€ (+4369,52€ Net)
Net Profit: +5739€
PS: Betfair comission is %2.5
PS2: This strategy works best with short odds. Doesn't work very well on bigger odds.
PS3: If you think winning 2 lay bets is very unlikely, Well, think again! It just happened this weekend! Liverpool lost 7-2 while Leeds-Man City match ended 1-1.
PS4: If two events were scheduled at different times, and you were arbing classic way. You would make +223€ profit if first leg lost and +524€ profit if first leg was winner.
PS5: In stores 12 November.
your example is fantasy, maybe in the past with your Turkish bookmakers you were getting such massive pre-march arbs but this example you show now could only be on a small event from a small bookmaker with small bet amounts.
sorry but when I read this i think your example is unreallistic, to illustrate an example of massive pre-match arbs like this to do a parlay on the likes of Man city and liverpool is not impressive and would have liked to have seen a more reallistic example, where of course your profit would have been much smaller or negative.
in your example, if you were to simply put 3000 on both of them and arbed you'd make 223 x 2 , 446 profit as opposed to your 226 profit example and your roughly 6% chance of hitting the jackpot but 1.35 to bet and 1.25 to lay, this is old school.
of course you are one of the top earners on here, i don't criticise, but think you are talking of the past and not conditions nowadays?
Last edited by justanarber on Tue Oct 06, 2020 9:39 am, edited 1 time in total.
- Wolfie
- Totally Pro
- Karma: 61
Post
229 + 226 = 455
So with this strategy you win 455 for each bet in log run which is still more than 446 for each bet
Re: Isn't the arb game dead?
0.04 X 5739 = 229 winnings for each bet in long run from jackpotjustanarber wrote:yngwie/sawyer, you've been the best contributor on here for years (in my opinion) and yes you're a very smart guy but i take issue with this, man city, liverpool, 1.35 to bet and 1.25 to lay, where on earth can you get pre-match odds like that? surely that is extremely uncommon, in the UK you can't get this on football, pre-match is dead now.Yngwie/Sawyer wrote:When you parlay two events scheduled at same or similiar time. You have chance to get x25 of your arb profit. Yes, x25!Of course I would like you to give an example from parley bets at the same time.
However, you reduce the overall profit little bit..but you keep your chance to hit the jackpot.
Allright, here's the parlay:
Man City 1,35 Saturday 17:00 (Lay is 1,25)
Liverpool 1,35 Saturday 17:15 (Lay is 1,25)
Stake: 3000€
The key is..We lay each bet seperate.
Risk for City is 1120,39€ Lay stake is 4481,56€.
Risk for Liverpool is 1120,39€. Lay stake is 4481,56€.
Let's have a look at scenarios now..
Both City and Liverpool win +226€ Profit
City wins, Lİverpool not winner +226€ Profit
Liverpool wins, City not winner +226€ Profit
What if both Liverpool and City does not win?
Well, you HIT THE JACKPOT in that case!
+5739€ profit if both Liverpool and City fail to win.
Parlay bet lost -3000€
City lay win +4481,56€ (+4369,52€ Net)
Liverpool lay win +4481,56€ (+4369,52€ Net)
Net Profit: +5739€
PS: Betfair comission is %2.5
PS2: This strategy works best with short odds. Doesn't work very well on bigger odds.
PS3: If you think winning 2 lay bets is very unlikely, Well, think again! It just happened this weekend! Liverpool lost 7-2 while Leeds-Man City match ended 1-1.
PS4: If two events were scheduled at different times, and you were arbing classic way. You would make +223€ profit if first leg lost and +524€ profit if first leg was winner.
PS5: In stores 12 November.
your example is fantasy, maybe in the past with your Turkish bookmakers you were getting such massive pre-march arbs but this example you show now could only be on a small event from a small bookmaker with small bet amounts.
sorry but when I read this i think your example is unreallistic, to illustrate an example of massive pre-match arbs like this to do a parlay on the likes of Man city and liverpool is not impressive and would have liked to have seen a more reallistic example, where of course your profit would have been much smaller or negative.
in your example, if you were to simply put 3000 on both of them and arbed you'd make 223 x 2 , 446 profit as opposed to your 226 profit example and your roughly 6% chance of hitting the jackpot but 1.35 to bet and 1.25 to lay, this is old school.
of course you are one of the top earners on here, i don't criticise, but think you are talking of the past and not conditions nowadays?
229 + 226 = 455
So with this strategy you win 455 for each bet in log run which is still more than 446 for each bet
Last edited by Wolfie on Tue Oct 06, 2020 1:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
ju
Post
I'm not doubting yngwie/sawyer, he's super smart, I'd just liked him to have used a more normal example, with the 20%+ arbs in his example any fool can make nice profits.
Re: Isn't the arb game dead?
wolfie, if you are getting the chance to bet at 1.35 when it is 1.25 to lay then even the worst arber in the world makes a big profit.Wolfie wrote:0.0625 X 5739 = 358.7 winnings for each bet in long run from jackpotjustanarber wrote:yngwie/sawyer, you've been the best contributor on here for years (in my opinion) and yes you're a very smart guy but i take issue with this, man city, liverpool, 1.35 to bet and 1.25 to lay, where on earth can you get pre-match odds like that? surely that is extremely uncommon, in the UK you can't get this on football, pre-match is dead now.Yngwie/Sawyer wrote: When you parlay two events scheduled at same or similiar time. You have chance to get x25 of your arb profit. Yes, x25!
However, you reduce the overall profit little bit..but you keep your chance to hit the jackpot.
Allright, here's the parlay:
Man City 1,35 Saturday 17:00 (Lay is 1,25)
Liverpool 1,35 Saturday 17:15 (Lay is 1,25)
Stake: 3000€
The key is..We lay each bet seperate.
Risk for City is 1120,39€ Lay stake is 4481,56€.
Risk for Liverpool is 1120,39€. Lay stake is 4481,56€.
Let's have a look at scenarios now..
Both City and Liverpool win +226€ Profit
City wins, Lİverpool not winner +226€ Profit
Liverpool wins, City not winner +226€ Profit
What if both Liverpool and City does not win?
Well, you HIT THE JACKPOT in that case!
+5739€ profit if both Liverpool and City fail to win.
Parlay bet lost -3000€
City lay win +4481,56€ (+4369,52€ Net)
Liverpool lay win +4481,56€ (+4369,52€ Net)
Net Profit: +5739€
PS: Betfair comission is %2.5
PS2: This strategy works best with short odds. Doesn't work very well on bigger odds.
PS3: If you think winning 2 lay bets is very unlikely, Well, think again! It just happened this weekend! Liverpool lost 7-2 while Leeds-Man City match ended 1-1.
PS4: If two events were scheduled at different times, and you were arbing classic way. You would make +223€ profit if first leg lost and +524€ profit if first leg was winner.
PS5: In stores 12 November.
your example is fantasy, maybe in the past with your Turkish bookmakers you were getting such massive pre-march arbs but this example you show now could only be on a small event from a small bookmaker with small bet amounts.
sorry but when I read this i think your example is unreallistic, to illustrate an example of massive pre-match arbs like this to do a parlay on the likes of Man city and liverpool is not impressive and would have liked to have seen a more reallistic example, where of course your profit would have been much smaller or negative.
in your example, if you were to simply put 3000 on both of them and arbed you'd make 223 x 2 , 446 profit as opposed to your 226 profit example and your roughly 6% chance of hitting the jackpot but 1.35 to bet and 1.25 to lay, this is old school.
of course you are one of the top earners on here, i don't criticise, but think you are talking of the past and not conditions nowadays?
358 + 226 = 584
So with this strategy you win 584 for each bet in log run which is still more than 446 for each bet
I'm not doubting yngwie/sawyer, he's super smart, I'd just liked him to have used a more normal example, with the 20%+ arbs in his example any fool can make nice profits.
Last edited by justanarber on Tue Oct 06, 2020 12:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- Alfa1234
- Totally Pro
- Karma: 64
Post
Re: Isn't the arb game dead?
Guys, it's the math. He just gave the perfect example. The first 2 bets don't even have to be a positive arb as long as the third is a big arb to make this work. You can "adjust" the first 2 odds to create a bigger arb by reducing the 3rd match to barely break even as well! It's gold!
-
ju
Post
he is staking 4481.56 each on 2 events, to simply arb these would give 333.83 x2 profit which is 667.66, far better than the 223 he gets from his parlay,
in my calculations he makes 226 if both win and 249 if one wins and 5739 when both lose 6% of the time, so in this example the "math" actually says the better profit is to bet and lay both teams as a single and make 667.66 each time.
I hope you can elaborate yngwie/sawyer? you are way smarter than me for sure but this time you have me scratching my head
Re: Isn't the arb game dead?
sorry it's not a good example at all, check the math Alfa123 and I am talking about betting 1.35 and laying 1.25, 2 teams as a double.Alfa1234 wrote: Guys, it's the math. He just gave the perfect example. The first 2 bets don't even have to be a positive arb as long as the third is a big arb to make this work. You can "adjust" the first 2 odds to create a bigger arb by reducing the 3rd match to barely break even as well! It's gold!
he is staking 4481.56 each on 2 events, to simply arb these would give 333.83 x2 profit which is 667.66, far better than the 223 he gets from his parlay,
in my calculations he makes 226 if both win and 249 if one wins and 5739 when both lose 6% of the time, so in this example the "math" actually says the better profit is to bet and lay both teams as a single and make 667.66 each time.
I hope you can elaborate yngwie/sawyer? you are way smarter than me for sure but this time you have me scratching my head
Last edited by justanarber on Tue Oct 06, 2020 12:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- VidaBlue
- To become a Pro
- Contact:
- Karma: 70
Post
From a bookmaker limit perspective, it may be different. In case the limits of the bet is proportional to potential winnings, which is the case with some books (bet365 and kambi for instance), the other option, 2 separate bets may be more lucrative because you're allowed to stake more.
That being said, parlay bets probably draw less attention than single bets.
Re: Isn't the arb game dead?
True. Putting 3000 on a parlay would on average give you more (584) than 3000 on each bet separately (446), because positive value is accumulated. From a perspective where bankroll is the bottleneck that is the best thing to do.Wolfie wrote: 0.0625 X 5739 = 358.7 winnings for each bet in long run from jackpot
358 + 226 = 584
So with this strategy you win 584 for each bet in log run which is still more than 446 for each bet
From a bookmaker limit perspective, it may be different. In case the limits of the bet is proportional to potential winnings, which is the case with some books (bet365 and kambi for instance), the other option, 2 separate bets may be more lucrative because you're allowed to stake more.
That being said, parlay bets probably draw less attention than single bets.
-
ju
Post
you have the risk of fluctuating odds too with this method as well as on average less profits and also more time consuming.
as I said his example/s were of too big arbs and any fool can manipulate their bets to make a profit with such large arbs,
will smaller regular arbs, this strategy is risky and would lose as often as it would win.
it's only benefit is for longevity? which of course is a very good reason but no way is it better financially in these individual examples.
let's see how it works with 2% arbs?
Re: Isn't the arb game dead?
in the example he was laying almost 5000 on each team, making arbing each individually a 333.83 profit, in the long run to arb each individually will produce the larger profitVidaBlue wrote:True. Putting 3000 on a parlay would on average give you more (584) than 3000 on each bet separately (446), because positive value is accumulated. From a perspective where bankroll is the bottleneck that is the best thing to do.Wolfie wrote: 0.0625 X 5739 = 358.7 winnings for each bet in long run from jackpot
358 + 226 = 584
So with this strategy you win 584 for each bet in log run which is still more than 446 for each bet
From a bookmaker limit perspective, it may be different. In case the limits of the bet is proportional to potential winnings, which is the case with some books (bet365 and kambi for instance), the other option, 2 separate bets may be more lucrative because you're allowed to stake more.
That being said, parlay bets probably draw less attention than single bets.
you have the risk of fluctuating odds too with this method as well as on average less profits and also more time consuming.
as I said his example/s were of too big arbs and any fool can manipulate their bets to make a profit with such large arbs,
will smaller regular arbs, this strategy is risky and would lose as often as it would win.
it's only benefit is for longevity? which of course is a very good reason but no way is it better financially in these individual examples.
let's see how it works with 2% arbs?
Last edited by justanarber on Tue Oct 06, 2020 1:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- Alfa1234
- Totally Pro
- Karma: 64
Post
Re: Isn't the arb game dead?
And how long do you think your account will last if you bet them as singles...and how long as as triple parlay?justanarber wrote:sorry it's not a good example at all, check the math Alfa123 and I am talking about betting 1.35 and laying 1.25, 2 teams as a double.Alfa1234 wrote: Guys, it's the math. He just gave the perfect example. The first 2 bets don't even have to be a positive arb as long as the third is a big arb to make this work. You can "adjust" the first 2 odds to create a bigger arb by reducing the 3rd match to barely break even as well! It's gold!
he is staking 4481.56 each on 2 events, to simply arb these would give 333.83 x2 profit which is 667.66, far better than the 223 he gets from his parlay,
in my calculations he makes 226 if both win and 249 if one wins and 5739 when both lose 6% of the time, so in this example the "math" actually says the better profit is to bet and lay both teams as a single and make 667.66 each time.
I hope you can elaborate yngwie/sawyer? you are way smarter than me for sure but this time you have me scratching my head
-
ju
Post
but please don't tell me it's all in the "math" when you don't even check the math, with massive arbs in the examples any fool can find a way to make a profit.
the benefit would be longevity of accounts if achieved? but the actual "math" says it's better to bet each team indidually for most profit.
Re: Isn't the arb game dead?
no one can answer that question, not even you Alfa1234, personally I prefer be betting live on single bets as opposed to be looking for 1.35 odds to lay at 1.25 to put in doubles or trebles but each to his ownAlfa1234 wrote:And how long do you think your account will last if you bet them as singles...and how long as as triple parlay?justanarber wrote:sorry it's not a good example at all, check the math Alfa123 and I am talking about betting 1.35 and laying 1.25, 2 teams as a double.Alfa1234 wrote: Guys, it's the math. He just gave the perfect example. The first 2 bets don't even have to be a positive arb as long as the third is a big arb to make this work. You can "adjust" the first 2 odds to create a bigger arb by reducing the 3rd match to barely break even as well! It's gold!
he is staking 4481.56 each on 2 events, to simply arb these would give 333.83 x2 profit which is 667.66, far better than the 223 he gets from his parlay,
in my calculations he makes 226 if both win and 249 if one wins and 5739 when both lose 6% of the time, so in this example the "math" actually says the better profit is to bet and lay both teams as a single and make 667.66 each time.
I hope you can elaborate yngwie/sawyer? you are way smarter than me for sure but this time you have me scratching my head
but please don't tell me it's all in the "math" when you don't even check the math, with massive arbs in the examples any fool can find a way to make a profit.
the benefit would be longevity of accounts if achieved? but the actual "math" says it's better to bet each team indidually for most profit.
Last edited by justanarber on Tue Oct 06, 2020 1:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- Alfa1234
- Totally Pro
- Karma: 64
Post
Re: Isn't the arb game dead?
It was an example how to bet a parlay while the games are being played simultaneously. I don't understand why you guys are getting so worked up about the size of the arb in the example. That's all it was, an example how to do it...if also works if the arbs were 1.28 to lay 1.25.
-
ju
Post
you say alfa1234 "it's all in the math" but these examples are about account longevity not "math", the "math" favours single bets.
Re: Isn't the arb game dead?
if the guys on here need an example of how to parlay and still make a profit when the lay odds are 1.25 and the bet odds are 1.35 then they are in the wrong job, numbers and how they work has to be a prerequisite of this job. The example of the parlay was of 2 arbs more than 20% but you don't think the size of the arb is important in the example Alfa1234, we can agreee to disagree on that, to me it's very important.Alfa1234 wrote: It was an example how to bet a parlay while the games are being played simultaneously. I don't understand why you guys are getting so worked up about the size of the arb in the example. That's all it was, an example how to do it...if also works if the arbs were 1.28 to lay 1.25.
you say alfa1234 "it's all in the math" but these examples are about account longevity not "math", the "math" favours single bets.
- Alfa1234
- Totally Pro
- Karma: 64
Post
Re: Isn't the arb game dead?
I hate to say it, but if you don't see an advantage into being able to arb a parlay where 2 games are being played at the same time...you need to start opening your mind to bigger possibilities and broaden your horizons. Forget the 1.35/lay 1.25 for a minute and think about the actual mechanics. It's pure gold. I don't understand you are unable to see this.justanarber wrote:if the guys on here need an example of how to parlay and still make a profit when the lay odds are 1.25 and the bet odds are 1.35 then they are in the wrong job, numbers and how they work has to be a prerequisite of this job. The example of the parlay was of 2 arbs more than 20% but you don't think the size of the arb is important in the example Alfa1234, we can agreee to disagree on that, to me it's very important.Alfa1234 wrote: It was an example how to bet a parlay while the games are being played simultaneously. I don't understand why you guys are getting so worked up about the size of the arb in the example. That's all it was, an example how to do it...if also works if the arbs were 1.28 to lay 1.25.
you say alfa1234 "it's all in the math" but these examples are about account longevity not "math", the "math" favours single bets.