Teaser bets: Hidden value or another sucker bet?

[ParlayPrincess_88]

So I've been seeing a lot of people talking about teaser bets lately and I'm trying to understand if they're actually good bets or if they're just like parlays where the odds are stacked against you.
From what I understand, a teaser lets you move the line 6 points in your favor on two or more games but you have to win all of them to get paid. So like if the Chiefs are minus 7 you can tease them down to minus 1, and if another team is plus 2 you can tease them up to plus 8. That seems really valuable to move the lines that much in your favor right?

I tried a 6 point teaser last week with two NFL games and it hit and paid pretty well. But I've also seen people say that teasers are sucker bets just like parlays. So I'm confused about whether I should keep betting them or if I'm just going to lose money long term.

What's everyone's opinion on teasers? Are there situations where they're actually good value or should I avoid them completely?

 

[SharpEddie47]

Teasers are one of the most interesting bet types because unlike parlays, there are actually situations where they provide positive expected value. But you need to understand the math precisely and you need to be very selective about when you use them.

Let me start with why teasers are fundamentally different from parlays. With a parlay, you're combining independent events and the payout doesn't properly compensate you for the decreased probability of winning all legs. The book takes a bigger edge on parlays than on straight bets.

With teasers, you're paying to move the lines through key numbers in your favor. In NFL betting, certain numbers matter much more than others. Games land on 3, 7, 10, and 14 more frequently than other numbers because of how football is scored. Moving a line from minus 8 to minus 2 or from plus 1 to plus 7 is crossing multiple key numbers and that has real mathematical value.

The standard 6 point two team teaser in NFL pays minus 110 or sometimes minus 120 depending on the book. For this to be positive expected value, you need each leg to win at approximately 73% to 74% after the tease. The question is whether moving the line 6 points actually gives you that high of a win probability.

Here's where it gets interesting. Academic research and extensive historical data analysis has shown that Wong teasers, named after sharp sports bettor Stanford Wong, can be positive EV. A Wong teaser involves teasing NFL underdogs from plus 1.5 through plus 2.5 up to plus 7.5 through plus 8.5, and favorites from minus 7.5 through minus 8.5 down to minus 1.5 through minus 2.5.

The reason these specific ranges work is that you're crossing the two most important key numbers in football, 3 and 7. When you tease a favorite from minus 8 to minus 2, you've moved through 7, 6, 4, and 3. When you tease an underdog from plus 2 to plus 8, you've moved through 3, 6, and 7. This concentration of key numbers in the range you're moving through creates genuine value.

Historical data shows that teams in these Wong teaser ranges cover at approximately 75% to 78% after the tease, which is above the required 73% to 74% breakeven. That makes properly constructed Wong teasers positive EV, which is extremely rare in sports betting.
However, and this is crucial, teasing random games that don't fit the Wong parameters is negative EV just like parlays. Teasing a minus 3 to plus 3 or a plus 10 to plus 16 doesn't cross key numbers efficiently and you're not getting value. Most bettors who use teasers don't understand this and they tease games that don't fit the criteria, which is why teasers have a reputation as sucker bets.

@ParlayPrincess_88 to answer your question directly, teasers can be good bets but only if you're using Wong teaser parameters strictly. If you're randomly teasing games because it seems like a good idea, you're almost certainly giving the book an edge. The discipline to only tease games that fit the specific mathematical criteria is what separates +EV teaser betting from -EV gambling.

Trust the process, not your gut.

 

[CoachTony_Bets]

Eddie's breakdown of Wong teasers is excellent and mathematically correct. I want to add some practical perspective from actually using teasers in real betting situations.

I do bet teasers occasionally, maybe once or twice a month, but only when I find two games that fit the Wong parameters that Eddie described. The problem is those opportunities don't come up that often. Most weeks there might be zero or one game that fits the criteria, which means I can't construct a two team teaser.

When the opportunity does arise, teasers can be very profitable. I've had good success teasing favorites from minus 7.5 or minus 8 down through the 3 and getting them at minus 1.5 or minus 2. That extra cushion of crossing both 7 and 3 is massive. Similarly, taking an underdog from plus 2 and teasing them up to plus 8 has been profitable for me when done selectively.

The key word is selectively. I track my teaser bets separately from my straight bets and over the past three years I'm 31 and 15 on Wong teasers, which is about 67% of teasers hitting. Since I need both legs to win, that translates to roughly 45% of my teasers cashing, which at minus 110 odds is profitable.

But here's what's important. Those 46 teasers over three years means I'm only finding about one good teaser opportunity per month. If I was betting teasers every week or multiple times per week, I guarantee my results would be much worse because I'd be forcing teasers on games that don't fit the criteria.

The other thing I'll mention is that teaser value has declined somewhat over the past few years. Books have gotten smarter about pricing teasers and some have moved the odds from minus 110 to minus 120 or even minus 130 for two team six point teasers. At minus 120 the breakeven increases and the edge shrinks significantly. At minus 130 even perfect Wong teasers might be breakeven or slightly negative EV.

So you need to check what odds your book is offering. If you can get minus 110, Wong teasers are likely +EV. If they're offering minus 120, the edge is much smaller. If they're at minus 130, you should probably skip teasers entirely.

Princess I'd recommend being very cautious with teasers. The fact that your teaser hit last week doesn't mean it was a good bet. You need to look at whether the games you teased actually fit the Wong criteria. If they didn't, you just got lucky and that luck won't hold over time.

 

[FadeThePublic]

I have mixed feelings on teasers. Eddie's math about Wong teasers being +EV is correct based on historical data, but I wonder if that edge still exists now that Wong teasers are widely known and the books have adjusted.

The theory makes sense. You're buying points through key numbers and if you're disciplined about only teasing games in the right range, you should have an edge. But here's my concern. If thousands of bettors are all running the same Wong teaser strategy, the books are going to adjust either by changing the odds or by shading the opening lines on games that fit Wong teaser parameters.

I've noticed that games in the minus 7.5 to minus 8.5 range tend to get bet down pretty quickly, presumably by Wong teaser players trying to get their action in before the line moves. That suggests the market is aware of the strategy and is adjusting for it.

My personal approach is I avoid teasers entirely. Even if there's a small edge on perfectly constructed Wong teasers, I'd rather bet straight sides where I can find edges through my contrarian public fade approach. Teasers feel like they're adding complexity for minimal additional benefit.

That said, I'm not going to argue with Eddie's math. If the historical data says Wong teasers are +EV and you have the discipline to only bet them when the criteria are met, then go for it. But I suspect the edge is much smaller now than it was 10 or 15 years ago when Wong first published his research.

The other issue is that teasing ties up capital in multi leg bets just like parlays do. If you're teasing two games at minus 110 and one leg loses early, your entire bet is dead but your money is still tied up until both games finish. I'd rather have two separate straight bets where if one loses I can still win the other.

Princess my advice would be to focus on straight bets and maybe occasionally use teasers if you find perfect Wong teaser situations. But don't make teasers a regular part of your betting strategy unless you're prepared to be very disciplined about the parameters.

 

[ParlayPrincess_88]

Okay so from what I'm understanding, teasers can be good bets but only if you're teasing games in very specific ranges that Eddie described. You want favorites from minus 7.5 to minus 8.5 or underdogs from plus 1.5 to plus 2.5. And you're teasing them through the key numbers of 3 and 7 which happen a lot in football.

I'm trying to remember what games I teased last week. I think one was the Bills from minus 9.5 to minus 3.5 and the other was the Dolphins from plus 1 to plus 7. So the Dolphins one fits the criteria Eddie talked about because I went from plus 1 to plus 7 which crosses 3. But the Bills one was minus 9.5 to minus 3.5 which I guess doesn't fit because minus 9.5 is outside the minus 7.5 to minus 8.5 range?

This is more complicated than I thought lol. So I can't just tease any games I like, I have to find specific games that fit these parameters. That seems really limiting because most weeks there probably aren't two games that both fit the criteria.

Eddie or Tony, how do I identify games that fit the Wong teaser parameters? Do I just look at the opening lines on Sunday and see if any are in those specific ranges? And then if I only find one game that fits I just don't do a teaser that week?

Also what about 6.5 point teasers or 7 point teasers? Are those ever good or should I only do 6 point teasers?

 

[SharpEddie47]

Princess your Bills tease from minus 9.5 to minus 3.5 does not fit Wong parameters because you're starting outside the optimal range. You still crossed 7, 6, 4, and 3, but you didn't start in the sweet spot. The historical data shows that starting from minus 9.5 doesn't have the same win rate as starting from minus 7.5 or minus 8. Your Dolphins tease was correct.

To answer your question about identifying games, yes, you look at the lines midweek and identify games that fit the parameters. If you only find one game in the Wong range, you don't force a second game just to make a teaser. You either skip teasers that week or you find a different betting opportunity. This is the discipline issue I keep emphasizing.

Most weeks there will be zero to two games that fit Wong parameters. Some weeks there might be three or four. You need to be patient and only bet teasers when the opportunities present themselves. If you're betting teasers every single week, you're almost certainly including games that don't fit the criteria.

Regarding 6.5 or 7 point teasers, the math changes with different point values. A 7 point teaser gives you more cushion but the payout is worse, usually minus 130 or minus 140. You need to calculate the breakeven for whatever odds you're getting and determine if moving 7 points is worth the worse payout.

In general, 6 point teasers at minus 110 are the sweet spot for Wong teasers. You're crossing the key numbers efficiently and the payout is reasonable. Going to 6.5 or 7 points doesn't add enough value to justify the worse odds in most cases.

Fade raises a good point about market efficiency. It's possible that Wong teasers are less profitable now than they were historically because the strategy is well known. But the most recent data I've seen still shows an edge, albeit a smaller one than existed 15 or 20 years ago. The key is that you need to be betting at minus 110. If your book is offering minus 120 or worse, the edge might be gone entirely.

The broader principle here is the same as with parlays. You need to understand the math precisely and you need to be disciplined about only betting when the mathematical criteria are met. Most bettors don't have that discipline which is why teasers have a reputation as sucker bets. But for bettors who follow Wong parameters strictly, teasers can be a profitable addition to their betting strategy.

Tony's point about limited opportunities is accurate. If you're only finding one good teaser per month, that's normal. Don't force more teasers just because you like the concept. Wait for the right spots and bet them when they appear.

 

[CoachTony_Bets]

I want to add one more practical consideration about teasers that doesn't get talked about much. When you're betting a teaser, you're essentially saying you like both games enough to risk your entire stake on both of them winning.

Compare that to betting two separate straight bets. If you bet $100 on each game straight at minus 110, you're risking $220 to potentially win $200 if both hit, or you might split and lose just the juice. With a teaser you're risking $110 to win $100 but you lose it all if even one leg fails.
The teaser gives you better numbers on each game but it creates an all or nothing scenario. For me that's acceptable when both games are in the Wong sweet spot and I have high confidence in the teased lines. But it means I'm more selective about teasers than I am about straight bets.

Princess you asked how to identify games for Wong teasers. Here's my process. On Tuesday or Wednesday I look at the full slate of games for the upcoming week. I identify any favorites between minus 7 and minus 9 and any underdogs between plus 1 and plus 3. Those are my candidates.
Then I evaluate whether I actually like both sides from a handicapping perspective. Just because a game fits the Wong parameters doesn't mean it's automatically a good teaser leg. I still need to think the teased line has value based on my matchup analysis.

If I find two games that both fit the parameters and both make sense from a handicapping standpoint, I'll bet the teaser. But that only happens maybe once or twice a month like I said earlier. Most weeks I don't find two good candidates so I just skip teasers entirely.

The discipline to skip teasers when good opportunities aren't available is just as important as the discipline to recognize good opportunities when they are available. Don't force it.

 

[FadeThePublic]

I think we've covered the main points here. Teasers can be +EV if you follow Wong parameters strictly and get minus 110 odds, but opportunities are limited and the edge is probably smaller than it used to be. For most bettors it's probably not worth the added complexity.

The key takeaway is that teasers are not like parlays where you should avoid them entirely. There are specific situations where they provide value. But you need to be extremely disciplined about only using them in those specific situations.

Princess if you want to experiment with teasers, start by tracking every teaser opportunity you identify for a month without betting them. Write down which games fit the Wong parameters and what the outcomes would have been. After a month of paper tracking you'll have a better sense of how often good opportunities arise and whether you have the discipline to follow the strategy properly.

Then if you decide to actually bet teasers, track them separately from your other bets and calculate your ROI on teasers specifically. If you're not profitable after 20 or 30 teasers, stop doing them. The data will tell you whether this betting type works for you or not.

 

[ParlayPrincess_88]

This makes sense. So teasers aren't automatically bad like I thought parlays were, but they're only good in very specific situations. And I need to be disciplined about only betting them when games fit the Wong parameters Eddie described.

I like Fade's idea of tracking teaser opportunities for a month without actually betting them. That would help me learn what to look for and see how often good opportunities come up. Because right now I don't think I really understand how to identify games that fit the criteria.

I'm going to focus on straight bets for now and maybe start tracking teaser opportunities on the side. Once I feel like I understand when to use them I might try betting a few. But I'm definitely not going to just randomly tease games I like anymore because it sounds like that's -EV.

Thanks for explaining this everyone. I feel like I understand teasers way better now even though they're more complicated than I realized.

 

[SharpEddie47]

Princess that's the right approach. Master straight bets first, then add teasers as an occasional supplement when perfect opportunities arise. Don't make teasers a core part of your strategy unless you're prepared to be very systematic about it.

For everyone else reading this, the lesson is that not all bet types are created equal. Parlays are generally -EV and should be avoided except for entertainment. Teasers can be +EV in specific circumstances if you follow strict parameters. Straight bets are your bread and butter where you should focus most of your effort.

Understanding which bet types offer value and which don't is part of being a sophisticated bettor. Don't just bet things because they're available or because they seem fun. Bet things where the math supports positive expected value over time.