OK, I'll ask....
What's a correlated parlay?
Nolan wrote this for us when he was working here.
http://www.madjacksports.com/nolan/article1012.shtml
CORRELATED PARLAYS and CORRELATED TEASERS
By Nolan Dalla
(All Rights Reserved)
______________________________________________________
Most parlays bets are extremely foolish. This is because winning parlays are not paid-off correctly according to the true odds of winning the bet. Consider that a two-team parlay should be paid-off at precisely 3-1. Instead, two-team parlays return only 13-5 to the winner. That's a difference of 2/15ths?..or a staggering 13.3 percent! It's a horrible wager. You might as well bet the FIELD or play the HARDWAYS at the craps table -- which are generally considered to be "sucker" bets. The odds against you are about the same. 13.3 percent vig --slot machines have higher payback scales than that!
If you prefer three-team parlays, your odds are not much better. Three-team parlays should be paid-off at precisely 7-1. But instead, three-team parlays return only 6-1 to the winner. That's a difference of 1/8th?..or about 12.5 percent! Starting to get the picture?
I've never met a professional sports bettor that bet serious money on parlays. There is absolutely NO financial incentive to do so. None whatsoever. Why would anyone bet multiple teams in a parlay so as NOT be paid-off according to the true odds? Of course, flat bets do not pay "correct odds" either (after all, we have to lay 11-10 on every bet). But the double-digit vig is just too high to overcome in the case of parlays. Conclusion: Parlays are a bad proposition.
That said, betting parlays can be very profitable in some instances. Before jumping to the conclusion that I am either crazy or contradicting myself, please read on.
Consider the implications of "correlated parlays." When betting parlays, most bettors take two (or more) teams and place them on a single ticket. The teams and games are totally independent of each other. For example, let's say Dallas is a 2-point favorite over Washington. In another game on the West Coast, San Francisco is a 4-point favorite over Atlanta. If both favorites are chosen, that means the parlay ticket consists of Dallas -2 and San Francisco -4. If both favorites cover, that's a 13-5 pay-off. The drawback is -- these are two completely INDEPENDENT wagers. One game has nothing to do with the other. So, if things go according to prediction and the 49ers roll-up the score on the Falcons, that's doesn't help the Dallas wager. Instead, a wise bettor should look for wagers that are related, or CORRELATED.
The correlation theory summed up in the following axiom of logic: If A happens, then B is likely to happen, also.
By "correlated" I mean the following: Look for parlays where IF things go according to prediction, THEN both wagers will probably win. A good example of this would be to bet Indianapolis (minus the points) when it plays a far weaker team. Also, bet the OVER on a two-team parlay (which can include totals), since the Colts are expected to score lots of points if they cover the spread. So, the parlay payoff at 13-5 (while theoretically the actual payback odds) is in a practical sense overcome, since most bettors would agree that if the Colts score in the 30s or 40s, they will -- (a) usually cover the spread, and (b) the total will go OVER. Another correlated parlay might be Baltimore and the UNDER, since many Ravens games are low-scoring and if the Ravens defense plays well -- (a) Baltimore usually covers, and (b) the game goes UNDER. There are just two of the most obvious examples. I'm not suggesting to parlay these teams and situations very week, only that some teams and totals seem to go hand-in-hand (i.e. are "correlated").
If you can parlay "proposition" bets, this angle is much stronger. High-profile games often have additional wagering possibilities -- such as most rushing yards, most passing yards, first team to score, and so forth. Last year's Super Bowl had something like 150 proposition bets. In his book. "Sharp Sports Betting" Stanford Wong brought up a wonderful correlated parlay from last year's Super Bowl. Wong parlayed the FIRST TEAM TO KICK A FIELD GOAL proposition with TEAM TO KICK LONGEST FIELD GOAL prop. Wong reasoned that, since the first field goal could very well be the ONLY field goal of the game, that might end up being the LONGEST field goal, as well. After all, about a quarter of the time, one team will not achieve a field goal in a game. Wong parlayed the FIRST FG with LONGEST FG and FIRST FG with SHORTEST FG (two parlay tickets). While the odds were not exactly 13-5 because the sportsbooks shaved the prop numbers to include variance in vig (i.e. having to lay perhaps -120 or -130 on the prop), both parlays seemed to be +EV situations. NOTE: Some books currrently will not allow you to parlay closely-related propositions (they are catching on to this angle). But you can still parlay "semi-correlated" props. An example would be -- FIRST TEAM TO SCORE with TEAM A TO WIN THE GAME (pick the same team obviously). Since it goes to reason that if TEAM A scores first, that means it will have a better chance of covering the spread. There are literally dozens, if not hundreds of situations where "correlated parlays" and "semi-correlated parlays" can be profitable. But, you must also be somewhat selective.
What about "correlated teasers?" This applies to taking both the side and total of a single game. It applies to 2-team teasers only. While I usually advise against 6-point teasers on NFL totals (the 6-point added are not significant enough to make a difference in most games), there are situations where a correlated teaser is a wise bet. Let's use the Baltimore Ravens as an example once again. Suppose the Ravens are playing the Cleveland Browns in a December game in Cleveland. Temperatures are expected to be very cold. The total on a game like this might be in the 33 range. Ravens would probably be a 8-9 point favorite (go with me here to prove the point). While you might not have enough confidence in Baltimore to lay 8 points on the road and the total doesn't seem to provide much of an advantage -- what about correlating the teaser? What if you could tease Baltimore down to -2 and tease the total up to 39? That might be worth a look. Of course, one could also look at different angles -- such as teasing the Browns +14 with the UNDER, which might be just as strong a wager. Every game is unique. You get the idea.
The important thing to remember is that most parlay bets are a terrible investment. But when they are correlated, parlays can be very strong wagers indeed (with positive expectation -- assuming your handicapping methods are solid). Teasers on their own can be profitable because they take advantage of picking up "key" numbers, which is critical in football handicapping. Correlated teasers can be just as profitable, because if the game goes according to prediction, the teaser on the side and total provides a sense of insurance for both wagers.
In conclusion, I will repeat once again why correlated bets are much wiser than parlays and teasers that are based on independent events (separate games):
If A happens, then B is likely to happen, also.
