Football Acca strategy

Just wanted to share a strategy I am starting on the footie accas to see if I can get some initial feedback from the more experienced among you.

I am not completely new to the consecutive lay method, and have completed around 40 of these in the last few months, using the previously posted Excel spreadsheet, with a mixture of results, but wanted to employ a simpler and (hopfully) more lucrative method which will be less time consuming.

Here’s the plan:
Select 5 teams using games that do not overlap, ensuring above the min odds as per the bookie offer. Example below:
Game 1 – odds 4.5
Game 2 – odds 1.22
Game 3 – odds 1.24
Game 4 – odds 1.20
Game 5 – odds 1.25

The aim here is to fully lay Game 1 as you expect/want this match to lose to get your full stake back. Clearly this needs close odds match but not too difficult to find if you look hard enough.

Scenario 1 – Game 1 loses, you get your stake back and you can then let the following 4 games to run without laying. If they all win you get your full Free Bet.

Scenario 2 – Game 1 wins, you then need to continue to sequentially Lay until either another team loses or the Acca wins. Either way you ‘should’ have minimal qualifying loses by the end of the bet as they are all low liability bets.

Would be great to get some thoughts to this approach before I go all gung-ho and blow my budget……

+0

sub_tone
0

September 22, 2016 at 8:29 pm

New to matched betting?

My Matched Betting Academy is the best place to get started. Learning the fundamentals takes 10-15 minutes and you’ll make £15 in the process.

Learning the fundamentals takes 10-15 minutes and you’ll make £15 in the process.

Learn Matched Betting

beesty2016 3 September 22, 2016 at 8:41 pm

I like the strategy but one of the things to consider is if game 1 wins then your sequential lays will have to be a lot higher than if say you did the accy the other way round. Commission could eat you up a lot more. Maybe if you laid the first game to make say 80-90% of your stake. That could be profitable.

+0

sub_tone 0 September 22, 2016 at 9:42 pm

Thanks Beesty, appreciate you taking the time to share your thoughts.

I have been doing the accas the other way round far a while now i.e. match 1 to 4 low odds and match 5 long, but I just find them really time consuming and the liability on the last leg tends to be rather big.

I have also noticed that by the time the final leg is played, the odds have a tendency to drift if it an outsider, had one the other day that had gone from 6.0 when I placed the acca to 7.2 by the time the final leg came into play.

I was hoping that there would be much less likelyhood of the ‘short’ odds drifting, and if anything may tighten the later the acca goes on.

Love the idea of getting my stake back on the first leg and then just leaving the rest to run.

+0

arb 4 October 14, 2016 at 8:10 am

Just to check that I’m understanding the principle behind the various approaches for sequentially laying these accas, it’s all down to value in the free bet refund if a single leg loses? So, using sub_tone’s approach, if you lay the first leg to return your stake, you are getting a breakeven opportunity for a free bet, rather than locking in any actual profit? If you get “unlucky” and have to lay every leg, you are seeking to break even until the final leg at which point you may underlay to lock in a profit as a loss in the final leg would result in the free bet being earned. This, of course, assumes you aren’t alreay in negative territory from the commission and QLs from the previous 4 legs. And also underlaying at low odds is unlikely to offer much opportunity for profit anyway.

Is that broadly correct? Am I missing something?

+0

sub_tone 0 October 14, 2016 at 8:52 am

Spot on Arb

Key is in getting as close as Match (if not an arb) on the 1st match, I have managed to get 3.5/3.45 on draws in the past, and then let the Acca run if it loses, or then underlay the rest if the first match wins.

Either way, as long as you are picking matches from the top leagues or Internationals, your guaranteed a return.

+0

Big Mick 0 October 14, 2016 at 9:08 am

In theory I like this strategy, seems a good idea. From the calculations though I have the same reservations as beesty, for the scenario if Game 1 wins.

If you’ve fully layed game 1 and the selection wins, you’re going to be a fair amount down on the exchange, which I don’t think is possible to recoup if all selections in the acca win – and bearing in mind the final 4 games are very low odds, this scenario would then be very possible.

I guess that this method isn’t about guaranteeing profit each time, but more about the stats say you should win more than you lose for less effort?

+0

MbPunter 24 October 14, 2016 at 9:45 am

Taaarm, have you been trying to chase back full stakes back in each subsequent leg? You would definitely be losing more money that way should the acca continue to win.

+0
Get regular offer updates, tip and tricks, big offer alerts and more straight to your inbox.

Δ

Email*

CAPTCHA
Big Mick 0 October 14, 2016 at 9:59 am

Initially I was, yes – it soon became clear this wasn’t a risk free method! There are a number of ways of dealing with ‘what happens if event 1 wins’ and I guess this is a question sub_tone is interested in too? From playing around with my spreadsheet so far it seems settling for a ~20% loss when laying events 1-4 means*
a) you can guarantee decent profit on the last leg if it gets that far
b) you still have a chance to recoup that loss if all other events come through (assuming you can extract ~80% from the free bet)
*assuming 5-fold acca

+0

anondeplume 0 October 14, 2016 at 3:33 pm

With current prices, I tried working through a potential acca if bet 1 wins, by recouping the total lost in each subsequent bet. Like you’ve pointed out above, that’s not really gonna fly. So…

I’m not spreadsheet saavy at all though so I’m hoping, really hoping, someone can post one that works for this strategy. No way am I gonna attempt it on my own.

Leicester to win prices are pretty tight at the minute so that looks like a reasonable choice for bet 1…

+0

sub_tone 0 October 14, 2016 at 4:56 pm

Montpellier vs Caen at 4.5/4.5 would be a better Match 1……. Paddy & Smarkets current price for a Caen win.

Underlay at £50 for a £1 loss if this match loses, or break even if it wins.

If it wins, slightly underlay consequent matches and you should make a slight profit.

+0

sub_tone 0 October 15, 2016 at 9:58 pm

Just a quick heads up incase you have missed it, BetVictor changed the terms on their 5+ Acca Insurance yesterday (14th), now not really worth doing as they only pay out up to £10, and funds have to be used on another 5+ Acca……

+0

arb 4 October 16, 2016 at 6:21 am

Thanks for the note, sub_tone. It’s a shame. At this rate all the insurance offers will have been ruined before I get round to actually committing real money to this.

+0

DelJo 0 October 17, 2016 at 9:21 am

Worked a treat for me this weekend. First attempt at this, lost £3.48 on the qualifier next 4 won. £50 free bet so happy but a word of caution my outsider nearly won. So don’t over commit on this unless you have the funds to lay them all the way.
Picked my free bet slip up no probs what so ever just printed out automatically PP.

+0

clivewpowney 0 October 18, 2016 at 9:24 am

@sub-tone – sorry if this is a stupid question, but in the main , this spreadsheet seems to result in a win under most circumstances , even though a small win – is that right?

+0

arb 4 October 26, 2016 at 8:44 am

Did my first one of these last week. Naturally Bet #1 won in the 92nd minute, and so did all of the rest, so now I have a big balance somewhere I didn’t want one and made a loss overall.

As I see it, there’s no way to avoid some kind of loss if it goes this way, as even if the short odds get shorter the opportunity to under-lay for profit is minimal at those kind of odds. In my case, all but one of the 4 favourites’ odds were longer when I came to have to match them, which made for growing QLs on fairly big bets.

I’ll give it another crack and see if I get lucky the next time, as I think statistically there’s value in it.

+0