Pointspread - how many plays?

[ProlinePlayer]

I've made numerous posts in which I have stated my opinion that playing 3 team pointspread tickets is a mistake. A mistake which I feel almost guarantees that the player will in the long run lose - regardless of how good a capper he may be. But I beleive that there is a simple fix - play more teams per ticket. Play 4, 5 even 7-8-9 teams per ticket. It has always been an accepted belief that the best choice was to keep the number of plays to a minimum per ticket, and the concept that more plays actually improves your chances of winning is a hard one to sell.

The math required is not that difficult and I'll go through it in this thread and invite any questions you may have on any of the points.

For that purpose I'm going to use the posts between myself and PV and several others from last Saturday (hope you don't mind). Nothing here is intended as negative comment on either PV or his plays (which in fact I agreed with). But because they are solid plays they serve to highlight very well the improvement that can be achieved by playing more games.

Here are the plays and the combos as orginally played
--keys
Kansas St - 2.5
UCLA -.5
--with 1 of
South Carolina +1.5
Arkansas +.5
Colorado -.5
Villanova -1.5

This gives us 4 three team parlays. My opinion is that the rotation used is an error and changing to something like a 4 of 6 or a 5 of 6 rotation would be a big improvement.

[ProlinePlayer]

PV picked these plays based on the disceptancy between the offshore line and the OLG line. A method I use myself. For the purposes of the thread I've added some additional information to the above.

33v Kansas State -2.5 (-4.0 -110) 57.3%
42v UCLA -0.5 (-2.5 -104) 57.0%
34v SoCarolina +1.5 (-1.5 -110) 57.0%
36h Arkansas +0.5 (-1.5 -108) 54.2%
48h Colorado -0.5 (-2.0 -110) 56.1%
32v Villanova -1.5 (-2.5 -105) 53.8%

The value in brackets is the Pinnacle line for the game. The last number is the probably of the pointspread play winning because of the inefficeint (sp?) line used by the OLG.

I want to stress that this is not about how the plays were made or if you agree with the percentages given. We are going to need them for the math but any method of selecting plays or setting those percentages would lead to the same conclusions.

[ProlinePlayer]

its an edge no matter how many i play when UCLA is actually a fav and im getting them straight up same with kstate they r favs by 4 to 5 in reality and i get them at 2.5 ill take it call it what u want.

I suggested that if played as 3 teamers that these were not really edge (or +ev) plays as all. I think PV's comment on that is the general opinion. After all it's either a good play or isn't, right? What difference does it make if I play it in 3 teamer or a 4 teamer?

Well that's the whole point of the matter. Strangely enough, whether or not something is a good play, the answer can change depending on how it's being played.

We'll look at UCLA. Is this a +ev play? It obviously wins over 50% but that is not what makes a good play. In order to be a money maker it needs to win often enough to cover the vig. The question can be answered by determing what win % is required to hit a break even point.

First we need to determine the OLG payout on the game. A 3-team 5.00 payout breaks down to 1.71 per game.
To double check : 1.71 * 1.71 * 1.71 = 5.0

If we recieve a 1.71 payout we can next calculate what percentage of the time we need to win in order to break even. That works out to 58.5%
To double check : if we made the play 100 times (total invested 100) we would get back 58.5 * 1.71 = 100 for even.
It should be clear now that we do not have a good play as UCLA at 57.0% does not meet the break even point. In fact playing UCLA gives an approx loss rate of 2.5%.

Now let's try it again. Only this time with the intent of playing 4-teamers
Again we determine the OLG payout on the game. A 4-team 10.00 payout breaks down to 1.78 per game.
To double check : 1.78 * 1.78 * 1.78 * 1.78 = 10.0

Now using the 1.78 payout we again calculate the percentage of the time we need to win in order to break even. That works out to 56.2%
To double check : if we made the play 100 times (total invested 100) we would get back 56.2 * 1.78 = 100 for even.
Is UCLA a good play? Since their win probability of 57.0% is higher than the break even point the answer is now yes. Playing this game gives an expected profit.

In this case the answer to the question of is UCLA a good play actually changes depending on the number of games. This will of course not usually be the case. But one would always receive a higher expected value by playing the extra game.

[ProlinePlayer]

I thought you were adamant that cannot make money on 3 gamers, all of these are 3 gamers in rotation

Thanks for creating this thread. I appreciate that mathematically you are convinced beyond the shadow of a doubt that 4 teamers are they way to go....in particular when you said earlier this week that if you want a shot at winning the first thing you have to do is stop playing 3 teamers.

The above or variations of this have been mentioned several times in different threads. The difference is one is proline and the other is pointspread.

The previous part has probably answered this but since it is the key element of the whole thing I'll answer again here.

In proline if the Islanders are on the list at 2.20 that means in a 3 team parlay the OLG will pay me 2.20 on the play. In a 4 team parlay it's 2.20. and so on ....

But in pointspread if Syracuse is on the list at -1.5 that means in a 3 team parlay the OLG will pay me 1.71 on the play. In a 4 team parlay they'll up that to 1.78. In a 5 team parlay 1.82. and so on ...

And there's why more is better. Like most here, my personal choice is to play as few games as possible. But I'm not going to stick with that if the OLG wants to give me a bonus for playing more.

[ProlinePlayer]

if i change it to 4 of 5 rotation i have to win 4 of 5 games to turn a profit......i say it is much harder to do on a regular basis than going 3 of 5

An oft cited point is the obvious one that by playing 4 teamers instead of 3 teamers you will win less often. I get it - I too would prefer as high a rate of winning tickets as possible.

But the important issue is not often you will win, but will you win often enough so that the payouts will cover the losses and leave a profit. And to that question it is quite possible that using the same plays the answer will be no with 3 teamers and yes with 4 teamers.

Again the plays listed in the orginal post are perfect to demonstrate this very clearly. I've used the plays above with their win probabilities and entered them into my ParlayMaker program. I could go through the math here but it would take a bit of time and my program will spit out the final answers quickly.

First here are the parlays using the key the first 2 and add 1 rotation :

33V - 42V - 32V 17.57 -12%
33V - 42V - 34V 18.62 -7%
33V - 42V - 36H 17.70 -11%
33V - 42V - 48H 18.32 -8%

after the parlay, the first number gives the probability of the parlay winning, and the second number is the calculated expected value (ev) based on the parlay's payout and win probability

Now here's the parlays using a 4 of 6 rotation

33V - 34V - 36H - 32V 9.52 -5%
33V - 34V - 36H - 48H 9.93 -1%
33V - 34V - 48H - 32V 9.86 -1%
33V - 36H - 48H - 32V 9.37 -6%
33V - 42V - 34V - 32V 10.02 0%
33V - 42V - 34V - 36H 10.09 +1%
33V - 42V - 34V - 48H 10.44 +4%
33V - 42V - 36H - 32V 9.52 -5%
33V - 42V - 36H - 48H 9.93 -1%
33V - 42V - 48H - 32V 9.86 -1%
34V - 36H - 48H - 32V 9.32 -7%
42V - 34V - 36H - 32V 9.47 -5%
42V - 34V - 36H - 48H 9.88 -1%
42V - 34V - 48H - 32V 9.81 -2%
42V - 36H - 48H - 32V 9.32 -7%

And lastly the same plays using a 5 of 6 rotation

33V - 34V - 36H - 48H - 32V 5.34 +7%
33V - 42V - 34V - 36H - 32V 5.43 +9%
33V - 42V - 34V - 36H - 48H 5.66 +13%
33V - 42V - 34V - 48H - 32V 5.62 +12%
33V - 42V - 36H - 48H - 32V 5.34 +7%
42V - 34V - 36H - 48H - 32V 5.31 +6%

You can see the difference.
The 3 teamers are going to result in an expected loss rate of about 10%. None of the parlays are +ev.
The 4 teamers do much better. Most of the expected results are hovering close to the break even point.
And with the 5 teamers the gain is huge. You've now changed from a player who has an expected loss rate of 10% to a player who will win at that rate. Make plarlays like this all year long and you will end up with some of OLG's money in your pocket.

I think you'll agree that using the same plays and only changing the rotation used, the improvement is quite dramatic.

[ProlinePlayer]

Sorry it was so long but because this keeps on coming up I wanted to do as detailed coverage as I could.

Again, all of the above applies to OLG Pointspread only. Not proline, not offshore and not even pointspread in other provinces. The reason why this works is that the OLG's payout chart is screwed up. How they came up with it I have no idea but you should take advantage of it by increasing the size of your parlays.

When I say that no one can win betting 3 teamers perhaps that's a bit too absolute. I just think that you are trying do something whcih is out of reach for almost anyone (and yes I include myself in that).

After all, what percentage do you realisticly think you can hit? If we were talking offshore and you said 55% I'd be skeptical. I beleive that there are people who could do that but we're probably talking 1 in a 1000 and they not only sports bettors but very rich from doing it.

Now we are talking the OLG and because of their weaker spreads 55% and even somewhat higher may very well be attainable. But I think 58.5%, the break even point for 3 teamers, is probably out of reach. You've set the bar a litle too high.

Hope this explains my views and if anything needs to be clarified I'll be glad to answer any questions.

PLP

[Slammer]

With the payout structure as it is, it does make more sense to play more games. How often you win is irrelevant, playing three teams might make you feel better because your % of winning tickets goes up, but your overall rate of return will drop.

Getting paid 1.71 per play for three plays is much worse than getting paid 1.83 per play for six plays.

[Allbutbroke]

Thanks PLP....I have really struggled with the concept of parlays beyond 3 teams so your thread here is invaluable. You certainly did not have to create this thread for us and the fact that YOU share your knowledge for the benefit of all speaks to your character. I intend to use your information to improve. Tip of the hat to you.

[willm61]

I concur with ABB. Excellent contribution sir and very much appreciated.
Thankyou

[Prolineus Veneficus]

Thanks for the explanation PLP, indeed your strategy would of turned me a profit if i employed it instead of what i did that day, my concern is if ucla had covered and i correctly picked 4 of 6 i would of had 2 tickets paying at 5-1...if they covered using your explanation i would of had 1 at 10-1, same profit margin, my feeling was that i am risking less by playing 3 teamers because if my double key had hit the probability of me at least winning my money back plus 20% is fairly high. my question to you is do you ever key a certain game or multiples? or do u just rotate all of them? i always find myself more comfortable with picking 1 or 2 and putting it on all of them and rotating from there.

im going to try this out for a bit on the days when i like 5-6 games

hopefully we can find a way to bust these guys because we can all agree they make more mistakes than any book out there we just have to seize the opportunities.

[Grizzly Joe]

Originally Posted by ProlinePlayer

When I say that no one can win betting 3 teamers perhaps that's a bit too absolute. I just think that you are trying do something whcih is out of reach for almost anyone (and yes I include myself in that).

Well now that's a better way of sayin' it plp.

That havin' been said, i'ma still on a mission to achieve it overall by the end of Feb.

Thanks for your detailed explanations, posted plays, and change of tone, it will earn you much respect and possibly more subscribers too.

[Carlito Brigante]

Thanks for the explanations and info PLP. Much appreciated.

[Grizzly Joe]

fer further info, check out plp's site explanation includin' chart at:

Proline Player - Point Spread odds and player win expectancies

btw, plp has a link to cappersmall on his home page, so there should be no problem with includin' this link on here, also there hasn't ever been in the past... just clarifyin' things with any mod...

[cashgrab]

Thanks PLP I really appreciate the time you took to explain all of this and it makes complete sense. I play 5 teamers and 8 and 9, 10 and 12 Teamers only all the time and in rotations and when I win I win big. and usually pick up these big wins about twice a week consistantly,,, many nights though you will be sitting there with your 9 teamer and lose the last game by half a point as i did last night on georgia +12.5 they miss the 3 pointer with 2 seconds but when you hit you hit BIG!

THANKS AGAIN!
GL ALL

[Allbutbroke]

Originally Posted by Slammer

With the payout structure as it is, it does make more sense to play more games. How often you win is irrelevant, playing three teams might make you feel better because your % of winning tickets goes up, but your overall rate of return will drop.

Getting paid 1.71 per play for three plays is much worse than getting paid 1.83 per play for six plays.

Please explain how often you win as not being relevant? Regardless of whether you play 3 or more team parlays, winning with some sort of frequency matters.