Do you think this is a good bet?

[PeterX]

A treble consisting of: Real Madrid to win or draw against BVB Bayern to win or draw against Barca and Chelsea to win against Basel. Odds of about 3.5. What do you think? Abit short?

[MPLouis]

Re: Do you think this is a good bet?

A treble consisting of: Real Madrid to win or draw against BVB Bayern to win or draw against Barca and Chelsea to win against Basel. Odds of about 3.5. What do you think? Abit short?

Can you state the odds for the individual bets?

[PeterX]

Re: Do you think this is a good bet?

Can you state the odds for the individual bets?

Real Madrid to win or draw against BVB. @ 1.14 Bayern to win or draw against Barca @ 1.87 and Chelsea to win against Basel. @ 1.50

[Jase82]

Re: Do you think this is a good bet? No I don't think it's a particularly good bet. These sort of accumulators are often seen as "safe" but most rarely are :lol

[PeterX]

Re: Do you think this is a good bet?

No I don't think it's a particularly good bet. These sort of accumulators are often seen as "safe" but most rarely are :lol

:cheers

[Fedar]

Re: Do you think this is a good bet?

:cheers

Congrats, but nevertheless, Jase was right and this was a poor bet (but lucky one). Out of the three components in the combo, only Bayern was good value at almost 1.90 for double chance. Chelsea was poor value at 1.50, given that they didn't really need to win the game, in order to qualify. And the double chance for Real for the ridiculous 1.14 is a complete joke, and after watching the game you should have realised this - if only one of the 4 or 5 clear-cut chances of BVB in the second half had gone in, your combo would have been ruined......by a 1.14 pick.

[PeterX]

Re: Do you think this is a good bet?

Congrats' date=' but nevertheless, Jase was right and this was a poor bet (but lucky one). Out of the three components in the combo, only Bayern was good value at almost 1.90 for double chance. Chelsea was poor value at 1.50, given that they didn't really need to win the game, in order to qualify. And the double chance for Real for the ridiculous 1.14 is a complete joke, and after watching the game you should have realised this - if only one of the 4 or 5 clear-cut chances of BVB in the second half had gone in, your combo would have been ruined......by a 1.14 pick.[/quote']ok if it's so lucky what would you suggest at odds of 3.5 or over?

[vicsuna]

Re: Do you think this is a good bet? Borrusia M - Schalke Handicap result Schalke-1 draw 3.75 ;)

[Jase82]

Re: Do you think this is a good bet?

ok if it's so lucky what would you suggest at odds of 3.5 or over?

Sorry only just saw this, and couldn't even remember the scores :lol I don't think it's a question of luck personally. It's whether or not the bet was value, and the ROI justified the risk, as I assume the risk financially would have been large. I just know from experience that these trebles / doubles offer pretty poor value and long term will put you out of pocket. I'd advise not doing them, but if you can make it work long term making a healthy profit then happy days :ok

[Fedar]

Re: Do you think this is a good bet? The main problem with combos is that the uncontrolled risk factor becomes much more significant in comparison with singles. By uncontrolled risk factor I mean something very unexpected and non-logical in the context of the game, which goes against your bet. For instance - a foolish referee mistake, a red card out of nowhere, one or two extremely lucky and undeserved goals. Such events might ruin your bet even if you perfectly analyzed and predicted the game development. When you play a single at coefficient 2.50, the chances that something very unexpected happen are relatively small, as they pertain strictly to this game. However, when you put three or four games in a combo, priced at the same 2.50, then there are several games in which something unexpected and out of the ordinary might happen in your disadvantage. In my experience, combos can be good in the cases where you discover value selections at low prices. For instance, many people believe that a Man City win over Wigan priced above 1.30 is good value, despite the low price. Supposedly, a Bayern win over Augsburg on Saturday, priced at 1.25, might also be considered not a bad value, as usually Bayern gets about 1.12 at home. If we assume that both picks are value, them by combining them, you get a good value pick at the decent price of 1.70.

[AlanJenkins2]

Re: Do you think this is a good bet? Your argument is good in theory - although Bayern are a longer price because they have already won the Bundesliga,and Augsburg need points to avoid relegation. The trouble with combos is that our brains fool us - we think that this bet will win,and that bet will win,so the double or accumulator will win.But each leg of the combo has a chance of losing,and the chances stack up.

[Fedar]

Re: Do you think this is a good bet?

Your argument is good in theory - although Bayern are a longer price because they have already won the Bundesliga,and Augsburg need points to avoid relegation. The trouble with combos is that our brains fool us - we think that this bet will win,and that bet will win,so the double or accumulator will win.But each leg of the combo has a chance of losing,and the chances stack up.

I absolutely agree with you. And combos in particular trigger the inherent and destroying human feature called greed. As you said, you tend to include more "certain bets" in your combo, and end up losing everything. Still, my experience shows that combos can be very efficient, but only if you play in the low price range and carefully select teams and games you are very well informed of (not like "Hey look, I never bet or watched Danish league in my life, but I see that the first plays the last, so this should be a clear win and I should take it"). But some rules must be obeyed: - never pick more than three selections, preferably two. - don't aim at total combo coefficient higher than 2. 1.70-1.80 is an optimal level.

[vicsuna]

Re: Do you think this is a good bet? wOw my tactic when I place accumulator is to NOT bet on games with odds lower than 1.5 because of this uncontrolled risk factor that Fedar mentioned. I don't think games with odds lower than 1.5 reward this inevitable risk in a 4-fold accumulator.

[Fedar]

Re: Do you think this is a good bet? At least in my view, doing accumulators with high individual odds is the worst strategy. Such bets carry higher risk and should be taken only individually. Thus, if your selections are good, you will most likely be better off in total, while if you put them in combo, you can easily lose everything, because of one simple loss. And I see no point to look for additional bets, when you got already a single with 1.70-1.80. Of course, such combos with high odds are the only way for recreational players, who bet very small amounts. But this is just for fun and they can never be profitable.

[Jase82]

Re: Do you think this is a good bet?

At least in my view, doing accumulators with high individual odds is the worst strategy. Such bets carry higher risk and should be taken only individually. Thus, if your selections are good, you will most likely be better off in total, while if you put them in combo, you can easily lose everything, because of one simple loss. And I see no point to look for additional bets, when you got already a single with 1.70-1.80. Of course, such combos with high odds are the only way for recreational players, who bet very small amounts. But this is just for fun and they can never be profitable.

When you say greater risk, what sort of risk do you mean? Financially I'd have said greater the odds generally the lower the risk financially. But as with most things a lot depends on an individuals skill at selecting and identifying value. The risk is only greater if you look at the odds as a percentage chance of this, this, and this occurring. And as accas aren't priced up as percentage chances it's hard to know if you're getting good value. It's long been an opinion of mine that if you're looking at the value in percentage terms of each single, you must look for a higher percentage in terms of value when adding selections into an accumulator. Many assume that because each single shows "value" in their eyes, putting them into an accumulator maintains the value, which I personally see as wrong because increasing the amount individual selections multiplies the threat to your total bet (basically everything you state above). You're asking for a lot of sequences to go your way in the causality of events that probably creates the greater risk. I wouldn't say don't do doubles or trebles though, good selections can yield profit, it just depends on timing.

[Fedar]

Re: Do you think this is a good bet?

When you say greater risk' date=' what sort of risk do you mean? [/quote'] I mean that usually pricing errors (so called "value") are usually within the range of 0.10-0.20 price units. So, when you make a value pick, priced by bookies at 2.0, you can hope potentially for a real price of around 1.80-1.85, which is still quite a risk (it is about 55% chance). When you discover value at a lower quoted price - say 1.25 - then the actual price might turn out to be as low as 1.060-1.070. I will still recall the San Marino no goal bet, which was quoted as high as 1.30-1.35, while its actual price might be deservedly 1.010. Now, this is the kind of deal which you might like to combine with similarly good offer, so that you don't need to overstake in order to get decent reward. In contrast, I will give example with value pick at higher price - the victory of Man Un against Liverpool at Trafford in early January. It was priced at 2.0 and was considered as very good value by the majority of punters in this forum. The way this game developed showed very obvious that in this particular moment the price of United shouldn't have been higher than 1.60-1.70, but it was actually as high as 2.0. Nevertheless, even with so much value in this pick, it still contained some good amount of risk, as this is still a big derby and Liverpool had wonderful opportunity to equalise with just 7 minutes left on the clock. So, theoretically, if you make several value picks, identical to this of United against Pool, it is very likely that one of them will fail. But you will be better off, as your picks are very good value. However, if you combine them and the "loser" gets into your combo, then you are left with absolutely nothing from your stake. In contrast, when you make a combo of low odds value, such as the San Marino clean sheet, you can easily run through a very big number of picks without a "loser". And just two such selections, priced at 1.30, give you a combo coefficient of 1.70, which is very good. And I think that San Marino clean sheet type of bet can survive over quite a few combos. Of course, it is hard to find so good picks as the San Marino one, but potentially there could be good value coefficients at around 1.20-1.30.

[pg_yid]

Re: Do you think this is a good bet?

I mean that usually pricing errors (so called "value") are usually within the range of 0.10-0.20 price units. So, when you make a value pick, priced by bookies at 2.0, you can hope potentially for a real price of around 1.80-1.85, which is still quite a risk (it is about 55% chance). When you discover value at a lower quoted price - say 1.25 - then the actual price might turn out to be as low as 1.060-1.070. I will still recall the San Marino no goal bet, which was quoted as high as 1.30-1.35, while its actual price might be deservedly 1.010. Now, this is the kind of deal which you might like to combine with similarly good offer, so that you don't need to overstake in order to get decent reward. In contrast, I will give example with value pick at higher price - the victory of Man Un against Liverpool at Trafford in early January. It was priced at 2.0 and was considered as very good value by the majority of punters in this forum. The way this game developed showed very obvious that in this particular moment the price of United shouldn't have been higher than 1.60-1.70, but it was actually as high as 2.0. Nevertheless, even with so much value in this pick, it still contained some good amount of risk, as this is still a big derby and Liverpool had wonderful opportunity to equalise with just 7 minutes left on the clock. So, theoretically, if you make several value picks, identical to this of United against Pool, it is very likely that one of them will fail. But you will be better off, as your picks are very good value. However, if you combine them and the "loser" gets into your combo, then you are left with absolutely nothing from your stake. In contrast, when you make a combo of low odds value, such as the San Marino clean sheet, you can easily run through a very big number of picks without a "loser". And just two such selections, priced at 1.30, give you a combo coefficient of 1.70, which is very good. And I think that San Marino clean sheet type of bet can survive over quite a few combos. Of course, it is hard to find so good picks as the San Marino one, but potentially there could be good value coefficients at around 1.20-1.30.

Good post.