What am I missing

Dear All

Scrap the previous question.

The bet is now 1 from 4 with 1 from 4 with 1 from 4

A bookies in the uk is offering 50's on the following bet.

The odds of England being drawn Poland (1 from 4) with Greece (1 from 4) with ROI (1 from 4)

Should this not be 27's

What am I missing?

beachboy

4 x 4 x 4 = 64.

1 in 64 that it hits. Not sure why you get 27's?

why 4's surely 3 to 1 on each outcome?

I agree with 1/64. There are 4 opponents in each pot so the odds of drawing any given opponent out of that pot is 1/4.

To each outcome there are 3 opponebts and 1 desired outcome, surely 3 to 1 odds apply?

1 desired outcome, and 3 non-desired. 4 total outcomes, of which 1 will pay you.


Edit: This is better:

If orange juice concentrate is to be diluted with water in the ratio 1:4, then one part of concentrate is mixed with four parts of water, giving five parts total; the fraction of concentrate is 1/5 and the fraction of water is 4/5.

For a proposition with a 1 in 4 chance of winning, or 25%, paying off at 3 to 1 odds is a fair gamble. However, you cannot simply multiply the odds ratios for a parlay when stated as "n to 1" or you'll end up with the misconception held by the original poster. The odds of a 3-team parlay at 1 in 4 each is 1 in 64 (1 in 4^3), so fair odds would be 63 to 1. Paying at 50 to 1 is a sizable house edge. Multiplying "3 to 1" three times yields 27 to 1, which is not at all accurate.

To properly figure odds for a parlay, you need to convert the odds into "m for 1", where m = n+1 and n is from the original "n to 1" statement. Thus, the odds are "4 for 1", which cubed yields "64 for 1". Converting back to "to 1" yields 63 to 1. Anything under 63 produces a house edge.