Topic: Why a single bet is better than a multi bet. - page 4. (Read 1107 times)

Single bets increase your chances of winning, it's hard to argue with that, but at the same time it is important that the odds be around 2, because even when betting on single bets with odds of 1.1-1.2 it is difficult to be profitable. You correctly said that everyone has their own strategy and it is important to follow the rules that help you not to do stupid things. If there is no strategy and the player is constantly changing something, then there will be more and more losing bets.

Of course, every action taken must have its own preferences and beliefs, on the other hand we are also ready when we lose completely there because the risk of multi bets is certainly very large, even 70% of them are definitely losses if we are not really careful in betting. .
Every bettor must be aware of this when they really want to do multi bets but as I said before the losses and profits of course will be very different when we do multi bets and single bets

But if users don't have a good knowledge base in analyzing, I'm afraid they will just choose the wrong team, which means they can get a loss. It would be fine if they only chose single bets, but what if they were forced to select multi bets where they wouldn't have a big chance of winning.

Researching a team takes time, and without previous experience, it will be difficult to do, and we will have a hard time analyzing it. So we need to know our own ability to analyze so that we don't choose the wrong team.

The purpose of multi bets was either to net in as much profit as the user wants, or simply try to diversify the bet you want, just like how you diversify your portfolios. Though it still depends on the odds ofc, so it still requires a bit of judgment on that point. Honestly researching a team should automatically allow you to identify they're capabilities, letting you bet on multi-bets (or just deciding to go for single ones since you see no possible wins for multis).

Sorry, yes, accumulator = acca = parlay = multibet. I'm not sure on the exact origins but my very first experience on sports was using UK books, they always used accumulator or acca for short. Then my first crypto books were North American and I noticed they used parlays. I think multi is a lot more popular these days but I actually only started seeing the term in the past few years. I could be wrong =) I probably still think "acca" or "parlay" a lot, but I suspect multi is a better term to avoid British and US ambiguations!

FJ does a regular "4+1" so you would need to bet 4 accas on UCL and the big leagues, NFL, NBA (to my memory) so that's all the big leagues covered anyway, and then you'd get a freebet back, based on the average amount of your past 4 accas. Essentially, a 25% cashback as a freebet, which is better than a lossback (which tends to be lower). Sorry for not being more descriptive. It's not active now but every season it comes by at least twice -- again, memory! Accas do need to have 1.3 min odds per leg, but that's easy.

Sportsbet does seem better yes, and every leg tacked on to the 5 gives you an additional boost... up to 100% boost on 10 legs maybe? But I think you lose out on the insurance advantage, and it has a 1.5 min odds per leg too, making your options a bit narrower.

It depends on how much you bet and where you want to support. In sports gambling of course you need to take a time where is ideal to make a bet like having research on the team, strategy, best plays and current lineup. When I make a bet too I do a single bet because at that time I can now watch the current live game and don't need to pressure too many indifferent bets. If you can handle in different game good but if you want to watch those games and get entertain go for a single bet at the end of the day still profit is the ideal thing.

I suppose this is a central point in this discussion here: In a multibet you can bet with smaller amounts of money and still get huge gains. The fee might be higher but you also leverage your money in a sense. So for the occasional bet with small money a multibet is very attractive. It is a different story if you want to place large bets, then fees become more important and often large bets are for a single event only

snip

I'm a huge fan of the multi bet.  Especially if you closely follow a sport.  I feel like I can hit a 5 game parlay with much better than the odds presented based on how much information I consume regarding NBA basketball.  I frequently make tiny bets, and while most of them are in fact losers, I win with a much higher % than the odds I am given.  1 large parlay can make up for weeks of losses with a very small bet.  Everything to me is risk reward.  I don't want to take a risk to double my money, I want to take a risk to 50x my money.  If it's an educated risk, all the better. 

snip

I have to say you do not have to win every time neither. I mean the parlay one pays a lot better, if you do 4 different ones versus 4 in a parlay the amount of money you could win grows exponentially as well. This means you could have a bigger leeway to lose and then win once in a while as well.

So, assuming you could play single bets, you could end up losing money as well, not like you are going to end up with all wins. Assuming you have 10 bets, 9 of them wins and one of them losses, you will be in profit probably, and in parlay you will lose. But if you do this 10 times, and one parlay wins, then you are going to win even more than the single bets. That is why people prefer that one over single, well the ones that prefer it at least.

You are absolutely right. How many times I have not made parlay bets I have never been able to win. After that I prefer to use single bets only. Although an acquaintance of mine still makes parlay bets for small amounts and sometimes wins. I prefer to minimize the risks, so I only choose single bets.  

One good resume can be. If you wanna win big money without having a big bank, go for multibets.
If you wanna win big money and have a BIG bank go for singles bets with a ton of knowledge.

And you need to know your psychology. Why? because for example i really struggled a lot to put a big ammount of money in one single Bet. Its a thing i cant do, also if i have a ton of insurance in the bet.

I do also suck on parlays on which either having 3-4 games consecutive on which the first 3 was win and the last was lost which is really that frustrating.Its true that people would most likely
be seeing on the odds offered which is really big whenever you do look at it but if you are really good on calculations and trying out to compare with single bets then you could really see the
differences and its true that single bets is much more interesting to me and not really that kind of stressful thing since you wouldnt really need to make out some multiple research.

Yes, I also prefer single bets for a reason, because I'm lazy to find a lot of information about parlay betting for the purpose of making all the right choices, and it's really hard and always loses.
single bet is easier and only looks for two accurate information to determine the answer, although not always accurate but sometimes wins, depending on research to find the overall information.
It is better to win small but win more often, than to expect to win big but the chances of winning are very small and always lose.

You are absolutely right. How many times I have not made parlay bets I have never been able to win. After that I prefer to use single bets only. Although an acquaintance of mine still makes parlay bets for small amounts and sometimes wins. I prefer to minimize the risks, so I only choose single bets.