Ontario

Atlantic

Quebec

Western

British Columbia

Users Forum

Join Now

Log In

Account Status

Why Join?

Poindexter Interview

Math 101

Pointspread Basics

Offshore Guide

Scores Archive

Win Expectancies

Pointspread Odds

Nhl Overtime

Proline Tools

Parlay Maker

Don Best

Odds Portal

Ontario

Atlantic

Quebec

Western

British Columbia

Atlantic

Quebec

Western

British Columbia

Users Forum

Join Now

Log In

Account Status

Why Join?

Poindexter Interview

Math 101

Pointspread Basics

Offshore Guide

Scores Archive

Win Expectancies

Pointspread Odds

Nhl Overtime

Proline Tools

Parlay Maker

Don Best

Odds Portal

Ontario

Atlantic

Quebec

Western

British Columbia

The Point Spread charts give the odds and expected loss rates for different parlay combinations in the various provinces. The 'Req'd Win Pc' column heading is the winning percentage required to break even at the corresponding odds. The 'Per Game Odds' breaks the probabilities, payouts and win expectancies into a per game basis. I have not seen this data provided anywhere else and in my opinion an awareness of the different payouts and required win percentages per game is essential for a point spread player. Especially for OLGC players as the percentages vary wildly depending on the number of games played.

I've highlighted what I consider the primary combinations that should be played in yellow. How many games to play on a Point Spread parlay can at times be a tricky decision. The more games generally the higher the payout per game, but the probability of hitting a winner goes down. After each section I've included a few thoughts on what I consider the best playing strategy. This only represents my opinion and I have no mathematical basis or proof for these recommendations.

PARLAY ODDS | PER GAME ODDS | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|

Size | Odds | Win Prob | Win Expect | Req'd Win Pc | Odds | Win Expect | Req'd Win Pc | |

2 | 2 | 1 / 4 | -50.0% | 50.0% | 1.41 | -29.3% | 70.7% | |

2 Box | 2.5 | 1 / 4 | -37.5% | 40.0% | 1.58 | -20.9% | 63.2% | |

3 | 5 | 1 / 8 | -37.5% | 20.0% | 1.71 | -14.5% | 58.5% | |

4 | 10 | 1 / 16 | -37.5% | 10.0% | 1.78 | -11.1% | 56.2% | |

5 | 20 | 1 / 32 | -37.5% | 5.0% | 1.82 | -9.0% | 54.9% | |

6 | 35 | 1 / 64 | -45.3% | 2.9% | 1.81 | -9.6% | 55.3% | |

6 Box | 37.5 | 1 / 64 | -41.4% | 2.7% | 1.83 | -8.5% | 54.7% | |

7 | 75 | 1 / 128 | -41.4% | 1.3% | 1.85 | -8.5% | 54.0% | |

8 | 150 | 1 / 256 | -41.4% | 0.7% | 1.87 | -6.5% | 53.5% | |

9 | 300 | 1 / 512 | -41.4% | 0.3% | 1.88 | -5.8% | 53.1% | |

10 | 400 | 11 / 1024 | -41.4% | 1.8% | 1.89 | -5.6% | 52.9% | |

11 | 600 | 12 / 2048 | -54.6% | 1.3% | 1.85 | -7.4% | 54.0% | |

12 | 1000 | 79 / 4096 | -44.8% | 3.5% | 1.89 | -5.6% | 53.0% |

How many games to play? I have no easy answer for that question. Very often plays will have a positive player value at the higher levels but a negative player value at the lower levels. In general one should aim for a higher win probability and a higher payout per game. In this case these two objectives are in direct conflict with each other.

Playing 2 team parlays is not an option because of the very low return per game. Also there is no reason to play a 6 team parlay as the return per game is lower than a 5 teamer. In both these cases one can achieve a better payout by simply boxing in an additional game. Just an observation - I don't actually recommend this as the best strategy.
The improved payouts by boxing in an additional game on the 2 and 6 team parlays are shown in the lines marked Box.

My personal method in football is to find all the positive value plays I can using the 1.88 payout as a guide. I will then make all the possible parlay combinations of 4-5-7-8-9 teamers. Each parlay is then verified for a positive player value at it's actual payout level. This would involve an unrealistic amount of time but a computer program is used to do the actual work. I hope to have a list of positive value parlays available each week on the web site by the time the Nfl season starts.

(with thanks to MattyKGB of the forum for correcting the 10-11-12 team values)

PARLAY ODDS | PER GAME ODDS | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|

Size | Odds | Win Prob | Win Expect | Req'd Win Pc | Odds | Win Expect | Req'd Win Pc | |

2 | 2.5 | 1 / 4 | -37.5% | 40.0% | 1.58 | -20.9% | 63.2% | |

3 | 5 | 1 / 8 | -37.5% | 20.0% | 1.71 | -14.5% | 58.5% | |

4 | 9 | 1 / 16 | -43.8% | 11.1% | 1.73 | -13.4% | 57.7% | |

5 | 16 | 1 / 32 | -50.0% | 6.2% | 1.74 | -12.9% | 57.4% | |

6 | 30 | 1 / 64 | -53.1% | 3.3% | 1.76 | -11.9% | 56.7% | |

7 | 50 | 1 / 128 | -60.9% | 2.0% | 1.75 | -12.6% | 57.2% | |

8 | 90 | 1 / 256 | -64.8% | 1.1% | 1.76 | -12.2% | 57.0% | |

9 | 150 | 1 / 512 | -70.7% | 0.7% | 1.74 | -12.8% | 57.3% | |

10 | 200 | 11 / 1024 | -70.7% | 3.7% | 1.77 | -11.5% | 56.5% | |

11 | 400 | 12 / 2048 | -72.4% | 2.1% | 1.78 | -11.0% | 56.2% | |

12 | 500 | 79 / 4096 | -73.9% | 7.4% | 1.79 | -10.6% | 55.9% |

Although the payout per game slightly increases for 4/5/6 team parlays, I would recommend playing primarily 3 team parlays.

PARLAY ODDS | PER GAME ODDS | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|

Size | Odds | Win Prob | Win Expect | Req'd Win Pc | Odds | Win Expect | Req'd Win Pc | |

3 | 5 | 1 / 8 | -37.5% | 20.0% | 1.71 | -14.5% | 58.5% | |

4 | 8 | 1 / 16 | -50.0% | 12.5% | 1.68 | -15.9% | 59.5% | |

5 | 15 | 1 / 32 | -53.1% | 6.7% | 1.72 | -14.1% | 58.2% | |

6 | 25 | 1 / 64 | -60.9% | 4.0% | 1.71 | -14.5% | 58.5% |

In this case I see no point in playing anything except 3 team parlays. Although the return per game is slightly higher at 5 teams I believe that this gain would be more than offset by the lower probability of a win.

PARLAY ODDS | PER GAME ODDS | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|

Size | Odds | Win Prob | Win Expect | Req'd Win Pc | Odds | Win Expect | Req'd Win Pc | |

2 | 2 | 1 / 4 | -50.0% | 50.0% | 1.41 | -29.3% | 70.7% | |

3 | 4 | 1 / 8 | -37.5% | 25.0% | 1.59 | -20.6% | 63.0% | |

4 | 8 | 1 / 16 | -50.0% | 12.5% | 1.68 | -15.9% | 59.5% | |

5 | 15 | 1 / 32 | -53.1% | 6.7% | 1.72 | -14.1% | 58.2% | |

6 | 30 | 1 / 64 | -53.1% | 3.3% | 1.76 | -11.9% | 56.7% | |

7 | 50 | 1 / 128 | -60.9% | 2.0% | 1.75 | -12.6% | 57.2% | |

8 | 90 | 1 / 256 | -64.8% | 1.1% | 1.76 | -12.2% | 57.0% | |

9 | 150 | 1 / 512 | -70.7% | 0.7% | 1.74 | -12.8% | 57.3% |

The 4 to 6 game range seems to offer the best return. I would suggest playing combinations of 4-5-6 team parlays in an attempt to maximize both the payout per game and the probability of hitting winning combinations.

PARLAY ODDS | PER GAME ODDS | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|

Size | Odds | Win Prob | Win Expect | Req'd Win Pc | Odds | Win Expect | Req'd Win Pc | |

2 | 2.5 | 1 / 4 | -37.5% | 40.0% | 1.58 | -20.9% | 63.2% | |

3 | 5 | 1 / 8 | -37.5% | 20.0% | 1.71 | -14.5% | 58.5% | |

4 | 9 | 1 / 16 | -43.8% | 11.1% | 1.73 | -13.4% | 57.7% | |

5 | 16 | 1 / 32 | -50.0% | 6.2% | 1.74 | -12.9% | 57.4% | |

6 | 30 | 1 / 64 | -53.1% | 3.3% | 1.76 | -11.9% | 56.7% | |

7 | 50 | 1 / 128 | -60.9% | 2.0% | 1.75 | -12.6% | 57.2% | |

8 | 90 | 1 / 256 | -64.8% | 1.1% | 1.76 | -12.2% | 57.0% | |

9 | 150 | 1 / 512 | -70.7% | 0.7% | 1.74 | -12.8% | 57.3% |

The 3 and 4 game parlays seems to offer the best combination of maximizing the return per game and the probability of winning.

PARLAY ODDS | PER GAME ODDS | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|

Size | Odds | Win Prob | Win Expect | Req'd Win Pc | Odds | Win Expect | Req'd Win Pc | |

2 | 2 | 1 / 4 | -50.0% | 50.0% | 1.41 | -29.3% | 70.7% | |

3 | 4 | 1 / 8 | -37.5% | 25.0% | 1.59 | -20.6% | 63.0% | |

4 | 8 | 1 / 16 | -50.0% | 12.5% | 1.68 | -15.9% | 59.5% | |

5 | 15 | 1 / 32 | -53.1% | 6.7% | 1.72 | -14.1% | 58.2% | |

6 | 25 | 1 / 64 | -60.9% | 4.0% | 1.71 | -14.5% | 58.5% | |

7 | 45 | 1 / 128 | -64.8% | 2.2% | 1.72 | -13.9% | 58.1% | |

8 | 85 | 1 / 256 | -66.8% | 1.2% | 1.74 | -12.9% | 57.4% | |

9 | 130 | 1 / 512 | -74.6% | 0.8% | 1.72 | -14.1% | 58.2% |

I recommend playing only 4 and 5 team parlays. Increasing the number of games beyond that offers very little benefit for the increased risk.