Sports Betting Tips - If Bets and Reverse Teasers

"IF" Bets and Reverses

I mentioned last week, that when your book offers "if/reverses," it is possible to play those rather than parlays. Some of you might not understand how to bet an "if/reverse." A complete explanation and comparison of "if" bets, "if/reverses," and parlays follows, combined with the situations in which each is best..

An "if" bet is exactly what it appears like. Without a doubt Team A and IF it wins you then place the same amount on Team B. A parlay with two games going off at differing times is a kind of "if" bet where you bet on the initial team, and if it wins without a doubt double on the next team. With a true "if" bet, instead of betting double on the next team, you bet the same amount on the next team.

It is possible to avoid two calls to the bookmaker and secure the current line on a later game by telling your bookmaker you need to make an "if" bet. "If" bets can also be made on two games kicking off at the same time. The bookmaker will wait until the first game has ended. If the initial game wins, he will put an equal amount on the second game though it has already been played.

Although an "if" bet is really two straight bets at normal vig, you cannot decide later that you no longer want the second bet. Once you make an "if" bet, the next bet cannot be cancelled, even if the second game have not gone off yet. If the first game wins, you should have action on the next game. For that reason, there's less control over an "if" bet than over two straight bets. When the two games without a doubt overlap in time, however, the only method to bet one only when another wins is by placing an "if" bet. Needless to say, when two games overlap in time, cancellation of the next game bet is not an issue. It should be noted, that when both games start at different times, most books will not allow you to fill in the second game later. You need to designate both teams when you make the bet.

You possibly can make an "if" bet by saying to the bookmaker, "I want to make an 'if' bet," and then, "Give me Team A IF Team B for $100." Giving your bookmaker that instruction would be the identical to betting $110 to win $100 on Team A, and then, only if Team A wins, betting another $110 to win $100 on Team B.

If the first team in the "if" bet loses, there is no bet on the next team. No matter whether the next team wins of loses, your total loss on the "if" bet will be $110 once you lose on the first team. If the initial team wins, however, you'll have a bet of $110 to win $100 going on the next team. In that case, if the next team loses, your total loss would be just the $10 of vig on the split of both teams. If both games win, you'll win $100 on Team A and $100 on Team B, for a total win of $200. Thus, the utmost loss on an "if" will be $110, and the utmost win would be $200. This is balanced by the disadvantage of losing the entire $110, rather than just $10 of vig, each time the teams split with the initial team in the bet losing.

As you can see, it matters a great deal which game you put first in an "if" bet. In the event that you put the loser first in a split, then you lose your full bet. In the event that you split but the loser may be the second team in the bet, you then only lose the vig.

Bettors soon found that the way to steer clear of the uncertainty caused by the order of wins and loses would be to make two "if" bets putting each team first. Instead of betting $110 on " Team A if Team B," you'll bet just $55 on " Team A if Team B." and make a second "if" bet reversing the order of the teams for another $55. The second bet would put Team B first and Team A second. This kind of double bet, reversing the order of the same two teams, is called an "if/reverse" or sometimes only a "reverse."

A "reverse" is two separate "if" bets:

Team A if Team B for $55 to win $50; and

Team B if Team A for $55 to win $50.

You don't have to state both bets. You merely tell the clerk you want to bet a "reverse," the two teams, and the amount.

If both teams win, the effect would be the same as if you played a single "if" bet for $100. You win $50 on Team A in the first "if bet, and then $50 on Team B, for a complete win of $100. In the next "if" bet, you win $50 on Team B, and $50 on Team A, for a total win of $100. Both "if" bets together create a total win of $200 when both teams win.

If both teams lose, the effect would also be the same as in the event that you played a single "if" bet for $100. Team A's loss would set you back $55 in the initial "if" combination, and nothing would go onto Team B. In the next combination, Team B's loss would cost you $55 and nothing would look at to Team A. You would lose $55 on each of the bets for a total maximum lack of $110 whenever both teams lose.

The difference occurs when the teams split. Rather than losing $110 when the first team loses and the next wins, and $10 once the first team wins but the second loses, in the reverse you will lose $60 on a split no matter which team wins and which loses. It works out in this manner. If Team A loses you will lose $55 on the initial combination, and have nothing going on the winning Team B. In the next combination, you'll win $50 on Team B, and have action on Team A for a $55 loss, producing a net loss on the second mix of $5 vig. The loss of $55 on the first "if" bet and $5 on the second "if" bet gives you a combined lack of $60 on the "reverse." When Team B loses, you'll lose the $5 vig on the initial combination and the $55 on the next combination for the same $60 on the split..

We've accomplished this smaller loss of $60 instead of $110 when the first team loses without decrease in the win when both teams win. In both the single $110 "if" bet and the two reversed "if" bets for $55, the win is $200 when both teams cover the spread. The bookmakers could not put themselves at that type of disadvantage, however. The gain of $50 whenever Team A loses is fully offset by the extra $50 loss ($60 rather than $10) whenever Team B may be the loser. Thus, the "reverse" doesn't actually save us any money, but it has the benefit of making the risk more predictable, and avoiding the worry as to which team to place first in the "if" bet.

(What follows is an advanced discussion of betting technique. If charts and explanations give you a headache, skip them and simply write down the rules. I'll summarize the guidelines in an easy to copy list in my own next article.)

As with parlays, the overall rule regarding "if" bets is:

DON'T, if you can win a lot more than 52.5% or even more of your games. If you cannot consistently achieve an absolute percentage, however, making "if" bets once you bet two teams can save you money.

For the winning bettor, the "if" bet adds an element of luck to your betting equation it doesn't belong there. If two games are worth betting, they should both be bet. Betting using one should not be made dependent on whether you win another. Alternatively, for the bettor who includes a negative expectation, the "if" bet will prevent him from betting on the second team whenever the initial team loses. By preventing some bets, the "if" bet saves the negative expectation bettor some vig.

The $10 savings for the "if" bettor results from the truth that he could be not betting the next game when both lose. Compared to the straight bettor, the "if" bettor has an additional expense of $100 when Team A loses and Team B wins, but he saves $110 when Team A and Team B both lose.

In summary, anything that keeps the loser from betting more games is good. "If" bets decrease the number of games that the loser bets.

The rule for the winning bettor is exactly opposite. Whatever keeps the winning bettor from betting more games is bad, and for that reason "if" bets will definitely cost the winning handicapper money. When the winning bettor plays fewer games, he's got fewer winners. Remember that the next time someone lets you know that the best way to win would be to bet fewer games.  188bet  wants to bet fewer games. Since "if/reverses" work out exactly the same as "if" bets, they both place the winner at an equal disadvantage.

Exceptions to the Rule - When a Winner Should Bet Parlays and "IF's"
As with all rules, you can find exceptions. "If" bets and parlays should be made by successful with a positive expectation in mere two circumstances::

If you find no other choice and he must bet either an "if/reverse," a parlay, or a teaser; or
When betting co-dependent propositions.
The only time I could think of which you have no other choice is if you are the best man at your friend's wedding, you are waiting to walk down that aisle, your laptop looked ridiculous in the pocket of your tux and that means you left it in the automobile, you only bet offshore in a deposit account without credit line, the book includes a $50 minimum phone bet, you prefer two games which overlap with time, you grab your trusty cell five minutes before kickoff and 45 seconds before you need to walk to the alter with some beastly bride's maid in a frilly purple dress on your arm, you try to make two $55 bets and suddenly realize you only have $75 in your account.

Because the old philosopher used to state, "Is that what's troubling you, bucky?" If that's the case, hold your head up high, put a smile on your own face, look for the silver lining, and make a $50 "if" bet on your own two teams. Needless to say you could bet a parlay, but as you will notice below, the "if/reverse" is a good substitute for the parlay for anyone who is winner.

For the winner, the best method is straight betting. In the case of co-dependent bets, however, as already discussed, there exists a huge advantage to betting combinations. With a parlay, the bettor gets the advantage of increased parlay probability of 13-5 on combined bets which have greater than the standard expectation of winning. Since, by definition, co-dependent bets must always be contained within exactly the same game, they must be produced as "if" bets. With a co-dependent bet our advantage comes from the point that we make the next bet only IF one of many propositions wins.

It could do us no good to straight bet $110 each on the favourite and the underdog and $110 each on the over and the under. We'd simply lose the vig no matter how usually the favorite and over or the underdog and under combinations won. As we've seen, if we play two out of 4 possible results in two parlays of the favourite and over and the underdog and under, we can net a $160 win when among our combinations will come in. When to choose the parlay or the "reverse" when coming up with co-dependent combinations is discussed below.

Choosing Between "IF" Bets and Parlays
Predicated on a $110 parlay, which we'll use for the purpose of consistent comparisons, our net parlay win when among our combinations hits is $176 (the $286 win on the winning parlay minus the $110 loss on the losing parlay). In a $110 "reverse" bet our net win would be $180 every time among our combinations hits (the $400 win on the winning if/reverse without the $220 loss on the losing if/reverse).

When a split occurs and the under comes in with the favorite, or higher will come in with the underdog, the parlay will eventually lose $110 while the reverse loses $120. Thus, the "reverse" has a $4 advantage on the winning side, and the parlay includes a $10 advantage on the losing end. Obviously, again, in a 50-50 situation the parlay will be better.

With co-dependent side and total bets, however, we are not in a 50-50 situation. If the favorite covers the high spread, it is much more likely that the game will review the comparatively low total, and when the favorite does not cover the high spread, it really is more likely that the overall game will under the total. As we have previously seen, if you have a positive expectation the "if/reverse" is really a superior bet to the parlay. The specific possibility of a win on our co-dependent side and total bets depends on how close the lines privately and total are to one another, but the fact that they are co-dependent gives us a positive expectation.

The point where the "if/reverse" becomes an improved bet compared to the parlay when making our two co-dependent is really a 72% win-rate. This is not as outrageous a win-rate as it sounds. When making two combinations, you have two chances to win. You merely have to win one from the two. Each one of the combinations comes with an independent positive expectation. If we assume the chance of either the favourite or the underdog winning is 100% (obviously one or another must win) then all we need is really a 72% probability that when, for instance, Boston College -38 � scores enough to win by 39 points that the game will go over the total 53 � at least 72% of the time as a co-dependent bet. If Ball State scores even one TD, then we have been only � point away from a win. That a BC cover will result in an over 72% of the time is not an unreasonable assumption beneath the circumstances.

As compared with a parlay at a 72% win-rate, our two "if/reverse" bets will win a supplementary $4 seventy-two times, for a complete increased win of $4 x 72 = $288. Betting "if/reverses" may cause us to lose a supplementary $10 the 28 times that the results split for a complete increased lack of $280. Obviously, at a win rate of 72% the difference is slight.

Rule: At win percentages below 72% use parlays, and at win-rates of 72% or above use "if/reverses."