Posted:
#326
poundcake... go f-yourself 
dont't be jealous.....
0
To hedge or not to hedge, here is the math and why hedging is a bad idea....
Posted:
#328
Great post vanzack, totally agree with you. Mathematically, you are 100% right. HOWEVER, something I learnt in Intermediate Microeconoics is UTILITY. For some people, a certain dollar amount after a certain "plateau" doesn't mean as much as the previous dollar earned. People tend to be risk-averse. Pretty ironic writing this statement on a gambling forum. But math isn't always considered when thinking short-term happiness. But let me ask you THIS:
You have $1,000,000. I offer you to flip a coin with me. If you win, give you an additional $2,000,000. If you lose, you lose your millon. would you take on the risk? Of course if it was a question of $100/$200, you would take the offer in a heart-beat.
Now I don't mean to defend these morons and their illogic but as a recreational player, I hedged a big parlay a few years back. Let me explain:
I had a 3-gamer, 5-gamer and a 6-gamer, both needed the same final leg on a Saturday night (10 PM) hockey game, which I was looking forward to watch all week. It was two highly offensive teams with little defence. I had the OVER 6.5. I was with my ex-gf and a bunch of friends, waiting for the game to start with anticipation. It was Thanksgiving long-weekend and I was just beginning to get wasted.
Now my total risk was only $56, the total payout was something like $3,400 (if I win). That's a LOT for any first-year university student. All my plays were ranging from Thursday night to Saturday afternoon college ball, to Saturday evening hockey, to LATE Saturday night hockey. My book pays out parlays in REAL ODDS.
Eg; A four-play parlay at -110, -110, Ev, +105 would pay out (1.909*1.909*2.00*2.05)-1 = 13.94 X Wager
I was not whilling to go depressed that night because something that has been going so well for 3 days get spoiled on a bad beat.So I hedged my play for $800 more, picking the Under at +110. I was happy because this meant my Over was more solid. This means if I win, I'll have $2,600 and if lose, I still make about $880 ($1680+ balance in my account).
Of course I wouldn't hedge 4-play parlays on a regular basis like some of the ignoramouses in here. But sometimesyou just go crazy and make crazy parlays risking little, not really expecting to win but have solid plays in it, and that's asides from your regular plays. And one day, once in a blue moon, all of a sudden you are in a spot where one game can make or break you for thousands of dollars.
Oh and for the curious ones, that hockey game was 3-2 until the home team tied it up with 29 seconds remainning. 3-3, automatic win as they'll play until someone wins. I did not regret hedging because my marginal utility was very little from $2,600 to $3,400. Like the next unit in profits didn't mean as much at that point as it would if you were up only $100.
0
Posted:
#330
no one can argue with van's math on the 3 or 4 team parlay - if you are planning to hedge the last leg, just don't bet the last leg - let all your winnings from the parlay ride on the last leg as a straight bet and you will make more money - there is no way anyone can logically argue that - the only argument you could have is that when you bet the parlay you knew that you wouldn't be "around" to "rebet" the last leg - i.e. no access to a phone, computer(doing stuff with the family, on the road, etc.) and then when you won the first few legs of the parlay you realized the hedge was there, so you "broke away" from whatever you were doing to somehow get a hedge bet "in"
i like to hedge on futures bets - if i have a team to win a championship or a series and hedging provides a locked in profit i will always almost do it, but the argument(math) van makes with parlays is the right way to go
0
Posted:
#331
Van - thanks for taking the time to write this out...very well said.
While mathematically you are correct, I do believe the variable of utility needs to come into play as stated by Canucks. As an economics grad, I commend Canucks for a well explained theory.
Mathematically and strategically you are 100% right Van. I would only add that utility/emotions/a mind rush comes into play.
In two for the money (movie), they say that it's not about the money we win or lose, rather it's the rush we get inside. With that said, to be a successful long term better, your strategy is right on the money.
I unfortunately do hedge, but I don't gamble professionally, more for recreation and select to certain times of the years/sports.
I ignored a lot of the stupid replies and gamblers who want to be successful long term should follow your strategy.
0
Posted:
#333
I think what Van is trying to say is if you have a parlay 4 and the last game is later one, just keep it out and play a parlay 3 and take that winning and slam it in the last game which is more profit. it's like winning 1000 compare to 1200 . So with Van's method, you're actually profiting 200. I never thought of this until i read this and it's a pretty smart idea.
0
Posted:
#335
Quote Originally Posted by PICKer1:
I think what Van is trying to say is if you have a parlay 4 and the last game is later one, just keep it out and play a parlay 3 and take that winning and slam it in the last game which is more profit. it's like winning 1000 compare to 1200 . So with Van's method, you're actually profiting 200. I never thought of this until i read this and it's a pretty smart idea.
I think what Van is trying to say is if you have a parlay 4 and the last game is later one, just keep it out and play a parlay 3 and take that winning and slam it in the last game which is more profit. it's like winning 1000 compare to 1200 . So with Van's method, you're actually profiting 200. I never thought of this until i read this and it's a pretty smart idea.
Actually that's not true with my bookie. As most bookies will have fixed odds for parlays (6x, 10x, 20x, etc), my bookies pays out in real odds. So the games are played as cumulative as you would when taking the proceeds from 1 game and running it into the next.
0
Posted:
#338
wow i cant believe how many people dont understand what Van has said.
If you plan on hedging the 4th game of a 4 team parlay to make sure you make profit, then my God just play a 3 teamer and make more money. Come on guys this is basic friggin math, has nothing to with making sure you lock in a profit.
Had you played that 3 teamers instead of a 4 teamer, you would have already won more then if you had a 4 teamer and was hedging the last game.
Doesnt get much easier then this.
0
Posted:
#347
I understand exactly what Van is saying and is probably a great idea. The only problem is most people dont expect to hit all 4 or 5 teams. I will do 2 and 3 team parlays once in awhile, but havent done a 4 or 5 team in a very long time. When i used to do the 5 team parlays or whatever, and it came down to the last game, i would only hedge my wager so that i didnt lose any money. Bet $100 to win $2000. Hit all 4 games and on the fifth, i'd hedge the $100 so i would either lose nothing or win, $1890. But with Vans idea i could hit the smaller parlay and play the last game and make a few hundred extra dollars without the possibility of losing money. I'll keep that in mind next time i do a big parlay, although it usually doesnt come down to the 5th game
0
Hot Forum Topics
