2 team parlay 3:1 vs -110 straight up wager

how much of an edge/angle can be created if i can get 2 team parlays at 3:1 vs 13/5 opposed to straght up wagers being -110.. does this even make that much of a difference?

i have toyed with ideas like keying on 4 games and doing the following

team a + team b

team a + team c

team a + team d

team b + team c

team b + team d

team c + team d

is this a way to make the best of this, any input is appreciated, thank you very much.

At 3:1, parlaying is better than simply picking two -110 games. The question then becomes of whether to play 2 games straight up, or rotate 2/4 (like you mentioned) or 2/3 or 2/5 or whatever. I'd honestly say 2/3 is your best option as it is a middle ground for risk to payout... but I'm just assuming. If I was willing to do the math, you could figure out the optimum strategy to play this but I have very strong feelings that it is 2/3.

Where are you getting this?

GL

Even at 3:1 you'd still only wanna just use parlays if the events take place at the same time.

Let's say you have two games at different times you like, each at -110 and you have 110 dollars.

Scenario A:

Bet $110 on the first team. It wins. You now have $210.
Bet $210 on the second team. It wins. You now have $401.

Scenario B:

Parlay both teams. They win. You now have $400.

So it's still just a cent difference per dollar wagered. When you are getting 13:5 odds on parlays like most people you definitely only want to bet parlays if the events are at the same time. At least that's how I've come to view them.

You're right until your last little blurb... At 13:5 odds, you don't want to parlay at all.

Actually, you're not right at all.

Scenario A:

Bet $110 on the first team. It wins. You now have $210.
Bet $210 on the second team. It wins. You now have $401

Scenario B:

Parlay both with a $110 bet and you'll win $440