Single or parlay?

[Fivestar4everMVP]

Parlay: 1.40 x 1.40 = 1.96 or Single bet at 1.96 ?

I actually tried this before, kind of like a small experiment, but it didn’t really last… I ended up losing anyway.

In my thinking, 1.40 odds should be “safer” since it has a higher chance of winning, but the problem is the payout is too low. So the idea is to combine two of them just to reach a decent odds like 1.96. But then again, once you combine it, you now need both bets to win. One mistake and everything is gone.

So now I’m not really sure anymore if that “safer odds” logic still holds when you turn it into a parlay.

Based on your experience, which one do you think actually gives better chance to be profitable? Do you stick with single bets even if the odds are higher, or do you still prefer combining lower odds to build value?

Very interesting question I must say, and from my personal experience, I think the risk for both that parley and the single bet either winning or losing are almost the same, but I will still go ahead and choose the single bet to be abit safer in this regard..

And my reason is because a single bet is a single bet, it's only one risk and once the match is over, you will immediately know whether you won or lost the match, and also another important thing to consider is that fact that even games with small odds lose most times too, so the small odds in the parley doesn't come with any guarantee either, and making the match x2 to form a parley increases risk significantly, because now, there is the possibility that one of the matches will win and the other lose, or both lose, or both win as will, but for the single bet, you just have to win or lose one game to know what your fate is.

[Bitcoin.com97]

I still prefer single bet , I have tired it before  but it didn’t go well with me , the single bet payout is really low but I just prefer it than combining the both , the single bet remains the safer aside the payout but in all its balls down to luck , if you are not lucky enough everything may still go wrong , but any strategy that works for you or you think is safer , you can adopt it , as for me single bet is a kind of safer .

[Charles-Tim]

I still prefer single bet , I have tired it before  but it didn’t go well with me , the single bet payout is really low but I just prefer it than combining the both , the single bet remains the safer aside the payout but in all its balls down to luck , if you are not lucky enough everything may still go wrong , but any strategy that works for you or you think is safer , you can adopt it , as for me single bet is a kind of safer .

Yes, everything is still about luck but parlay chance of winning is small than single bets. But parlay has its own advantage which is because the odds are higher, small amount of money can be used. Example is a single match of 1.35 odd, but compare it to having an odd of 2 to 3 odds. The higher odd can encourage some gamblers to just reduce the amount of money that they will use to stake.

[Darker45]

I think there's not much difference in my experience. The arithmetic is also saying they're pretty much the same, at least the probability of winning.

But I think 1.40 isn't too low to be bundled together with other bets into a parlay. You could place a single bet on it. If there's a way to make it a bit higher though, perhaps with a handicap, up to 1.50 or 1.60, that would be better.

There are some who are confident of their bets that they even include into a parlay those with much higher odds. For me, however, it's best to group together into a parlay bets with odds 1.30 or lower.

[Italian Panic]

It all depends on whether you plan to go for a big win or are content with winning small amounts but consistently. If you place single bets with reasonable odds, you will win more often and build your winnings slowly, if you bet on parlays (for example three bets in one) all three must win, the odds drop, and you have to be prepared to lose more often.
A stone rule: I set a limit and then go home once I’ve spent it, nothing excessive only entertainment.

[Cointxz]

It’s tricky since the 1.4 odds usually doesn’t reflect the theoretical winning probability which means even a 1.4 odds sometimes not easy high winning percentage depending on how the betting line move.

But assuming the 1.4 odds is a value bet then parlay with 2 of those same pick is much better than 1.96 single odds pick.

The answer relies on the quality of the pick that you choose.

[TopTort777]

I dont like parlays. I see them as act of a greed that never ends well. Even if gambler combines number of really low risk bets, they are still have high chances of losing, like it was said, there are no safe bets in gambling. I also follow such idea, that if you make parlays, then you are more into gambling than a person who would make only one bet calms down. More into gambling = increased chances of addiction or addiction is already on an early stage.

[iv4n]

So now I’m not really sure anymore if that “safer odds” logic still holds when you turn it into a parlay.

There are no safe odds & bets, and that's actually gambling. How can anyone be sure about anything? All we can do is follow our instincts based on team performance, stats, weather, some other factors, and simply place a bet and wait for results.

Based on your experience, which one do you think actually gives better chance to be profitable? Do you stick with single bets even if the odds are higher, or do you still prefer combining lower odds to build value?

Math says that we have a better chance with single games, but is there a point to chase single games with minimal bets? That's why we choose to combine odds to build value... How is that working for us?



Just one goal away from winning this combo... How many times did you lose because of that one goal, or one game? 

[cryptomaniac_xxx]

It all depends on whether you plan to go for a big win or are content with winning small amounts but consistently. If you place single bets with reasonable odds, you will win more often and build your winnings slowly, if you bet on parlays (for example three bets in one) all three must win, the odds drop, and you have to be prepared to lose more often.
A stone rule: I set a limit and then go home once I’ve spent it, nothing excessive only entertainment.

In the example though, it's the same odds, but one is parlay and one is a single bet. But I don't want to go with parlay, you need to win that 2 legged, otherwise your bet is going to be get rekt and we have seen a lot of gamblers here who go into that experience before and it doesn't sit well with them.

So in the given example, I will go with the single bet all the time. And if we look at what others have said, they prefer this way and so I'm not surprised that the majority of sports bettors here are in "smart" (based on the example of the OP).

[Rruchi man]

Based on your experience, which one do you think actually gives better chance to be profitable? Do you stick with single bets even if the odds are higher, or do you still prefer combining lower odds to build value?

There is a higher chance of winning playing one bet, but it is not always considered because the profit can be small, and to gamblers not betting with a huge amount of money, it becomes discouraging.

People may be quick to say gamblers who accumulate a lot of bets are all greedy; yes, some may be doing so out of greed, but there are others who, sometimes, just have a level of certainty about a couple of games and choose to add more bets instead of their regular single bet. In such cases, greed may be excluded from motive.

[Hispo]

I personally prefer to go with single bets and following money lines, instead of stacking multiple bets.
Also, I think staking multiple bets in order to bet the same odds as a single bet does not make much sense. In the case I decide to stake multiple bets, when I would do so for the sake of getting odds well above the average I can find in the market.

I am not surprised you lost your money anyways during the performance of your experiment, if it was easier one way or another, then the market would look very different from what it looks like today. Don't you think?

[Sandra_hakeem]

well in sport betting, we all know that nothing is certain. There are almost no safe spots in betting. You can analyze odds, probabilities, team form, and even injuries, but once the game starts, none of that really guarantees anything.

That’s why even odds like 1.40, which looks safe can still fail. And when you combine two of them, you’re only stacking uncertainties on top of each other. Personally, I still prefer staking on smaller odds in 2's, and bigger odds on a single ticket. Each for a different wager limits.

[rachael9385]

Parlay: 1.40 x 1.40 = 1.96 or Single bet at 1.96 ?

I actually tried this before, kind of like a small experiment, but it didn’t really last… I ended up losing anyway.

In my thinking, 1.40 odds should be “safer” since it has a higher chance of winning, but the problem is the payout is too low. So the idea is to combine two of them just to reach a decent odds like 1.96. But then again, once you combine it, you now need both bets to win. One mistake and everything is gone.

So now I’m not really sure anymore if that “safer odds” logic still holds when you turn it into a parlay.

Based on your experience, which one do you think actually gives better chance to be profitable? Do you stick with single bets even if the odds are higher, or do you still prefer combining lower odds to build value?

None of them guarantees profits, it is actually about preference and following what works best for you as a bettor. Personally it think that combining different games is more risky but playing singles can be more better but not everyone would take that risk because singles are mostly high value odds and the chances of winning when the odds are high is quite low but the most important thing is to stake responsibly.

[Dr.Bitcoin_Strange]

I bet mostly on parlay and single single game, there's no specific among the two. I could bet on a single game from the games I have on the parlay I have already accumulated and I will bet on both tickets at once, one of them must win and with that, I can cover the losses if the other tickets were unsuccessful. Sometimes too, I could win the single game and then take cash out from the parlay ticket. I do win but the strategy is not sustainable, no strategy is sustainable, it's just luck that always helps us.

[Questat]

Based on your experience, which one do you think actually gives better chance to be profitable? Do you stick with single bets even if the odds are higher, or do you still prefer combining lower odds to build value?

Do not forget that you are gambling with house edge, which means in a way the gambling is designed for almost all bettors to be losing. But I make most profit from single bets than parlay. So I will say it is better you go for single bets instead of parlay but that does not guarantee winning over a long period of time.

If that’s what you believe, that there is always a house edge, then any strategy won’t work, whether it’s single bets or parlays. But I think your assumption is a bit off, because we’re talking about sports betting here, not casino games where we’re trying to beat a fixed house edge.

In sports betting, it’s not as straightforward, since it’s more about finding value rather than just beating the house directly.

[rdluffy]

If the odds end up the same in both situations, whether it’s a single bet or a parlay, your chances of winning will likely be the same

There are matches and tournaments where I focus on single bet
In other tournaments, I place parlays

I’ve identified teams that lose very few games during the season, and I’m able to make good parlays, even with low odds, and by combining three, I get good odds in the end

It all depends, there’s no way to set a specific rule

[Cryptmuster]

Parlay: 1.40 x 1.40 = 1.96 or Single bet at 1.96 ?

I actually tried this before, kind of like a small experiment, but it didn’t really last… I ended up losing anyway.

In my thinking, 1.40 odds should be “safer” since it has a higher chance of winning, but the problem is the payout is too low. So the idea is to combine two of them just to reach a decent odds like 1.96. But then again, once you combine it, you now need both bets to win. One mistake and everything is gone.

So now I’m not really sure anymore if that “safer odds” logic still holds when you turn it into a parlay.

Based on your experience, which one do you think actually gives better chance to be profitable? Do you stick with single bets even if the odds are higher, or do you still prefer combining lower odds to build value?

And another topic about choosing between a single bet or a parlay. Well, okay, it can be discussed, but I think the point here is not just about the odds, it’s about what kind of events you’re able to pick. Because sometimes a bookmaker may offer odds of 1.96 for a team to win, but the opponent could be strong, making it obviously very difficult for that team to win. But there are also matches where the bookmaker overestimates the favorite. For example, take the recent matches between Real and City, where the bookmaker considered City the clear favorite in both games. So I think the choice should be based on the events themselves, not just the odds. If you’re interested in my personal opinion, I would choose a parlay with two events with total odds around 2, rather than placing a single bet with the same odds.

[freedomgo]

If the odds end up the same in both situations, whether it’s a single bet or a parlay, your chances of winning will likely be the same

On paper, yes, but we still have to try it to see which one is really better. The reason we take low odds is because we believe we have a higher chance of winning, so that still matters. Even if we’re combining multiple bets, it somehow feels easier to decide since it requires less analysis compared to picking a single bet with the same odds.

[aoluain]

Parlay: 1.40 x 1.40 = 1.96 or Single bet at 1.96 ?

Isnt that not a no-brainer? [assuming that the bet of 1.96 is close to the opposing team!]

a double of 1.40 + 1.40 to total 1.96 gives you 2 chances of losing and even if one loses its the same outcome
as a single bet at 1.96 but it also depends on the odds of the opposing team of the team prices at 1.96.

In my thinking, 1.40 odds should be “safer” since it has a higher chance of winning, but the problem is the payout is too low.

In that reckoning the two bets at 1.40 each should be safer but again depends on the moneyline of the two single bet teams.

[Pandu Geddon]

Do you stick with single bets even if the odds are higher, or do you still prefer combining lower odds to build value?

If you focus on the odds in parlay betting, what you are likely to do is add more matches to your parlay slip. 
I would consider the teams I will choose more than the odds. 
Some gamblers bet large amounts on low odds. We can place single bets. If you want a bigger return, just place a parlay bet. But carefully consider the teams you will choose.