|
|
Post by iainbhx on Feb 7, 2017 14:50:19 GMT
The betting markets reflect reality. No, they reflect the amount of money that has been placed against each candidate. Richmond Park? Dunfermline and West Fife? Both partially refute your hypothesis. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 7, 2017 14:58:15 GMT
The betting markets reflect reality. No, they reflect the amount of money that has been placed against each candidate. Richmond Park? Dunfermline and West Fife? Both partially refute your hypothesis. Old Forum. Glenrothes by election Labour 3/1 SNP odds on. Labour got over 50% of the vote |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 7, 2017 15:22:20 GMT
But UKIP certainly did give the impression of running Labour close at Oldham . Farage was talking of the majority being within 1000 votes. I imagine too that there were many seats at the last election where the Bookies had Labour as clear favourites which the Tories went on to win. The betting markets did not reflect this, however. The shortest odds you could have got on UKIP were 7/2, and this was some time before polling day itself. On polling day, I think you could have got five, six or even seven to one. The smart money was never on UKIP to win. Of course, Farage would say it was going to be close. He couldn't really have claimed otherwise. To do so would have been to throw in the towel. Regarding your second point, the bookies do not know the victor of any given contest. The odds reflect probabilities rather than certainties. At the time of writing, Labour are given a 52% to 48% chance of victory. Even were the probability to go down to 5%, UKIP would have a one in twenty chance. I'd suggest that it is one thing to boldly claim your side is on course for a triumph, quite another to put your money where your mouth is. I'm not aware of Farage putting money on UKIP to win in Oldham, but he has done in Stoke, as he did during the referendum and the American presidential election. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 7, 2017 15:24:47 GMT
The betting markets reflect reality. No, they reflect the amount of money that has been placed against each candidate. Richmond Park? Dunfermline and West Fife? Both partially refute your hypothesis. Of course, they reflect this. However, you would have got far higher odds on UKIP winning Newark or Oldham than on the LibDems winning Richmond. |
|
Adrian
Co-operative Party
Posts: 1,742 
|
Post by Adrian on Feb 7, 2017 16:43:05 GMT
Why have the Independents stayed out of this fight? I mean the council-running Independents, not the ones on the ballot paper, e.g. the remarkable Barbara Fielding abolishmcrm.com/ |
|
|
|
Post by finsobruce on Feb 7, 2017 16:53:48 GMT
No, they reflect the amount of money that has been placed against each candidate. Richmond Park? Dunfermline and West Fife? Both partially refute your hypothesis. Of course, they reflect this. However, you would have got far higher odds on UKIP winning Newark or Oldham than on the LibDems winning Richmond. For the very good reason that the Lib Dems had held the constituency before (and have had multiple councillors in the area for decades). |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 7, 2017 18:22:06 GMT
But UKIP certainly did give the impression of running Labour close at Oldham . Farage was talking of the majority being within 1000 votes. I imagine too that there were many seats at the last election where the Bookies had Labour as clear favourites which the Tories went on to win. Probably at least 1 or 2 examples of the opposite too. |
|
Sibboleth
Labour
'Sit on my finger, sing in my ear, O littleblood.'
Posts: 16,025
|
Post by Sibboleth on Feb 7, 2017 18:26:39 GMT
And a lot of examples of seats with what turned out to be... er... unrealistic... UKIP odds. The idea that bookmakers know any more than anyone else is absurd, but this is hardly new ground...
|
|
|
|
Post by No Offence Alan on Feb 7, 2017 18:45:08 GMT
I had a tenner on Trump at 9/4 about a week before the election, FWIW.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 7, 2017 19:32:08 GMT
And a lot of examples of seats with what turned out to be... er... unrealistic... UKIP odds. The idea that bookmakers know any more than anyone else is absurd, but this is hardly new ground... There have been NO examples of UKIP being odds-on in any byelection before, other than the two they actually won. As they live in the real world, and not some overgrown teenage SJW internet bubble, I'm pretty sure they do know more than you, which isn't really saying a great deal as this applies to the vast majority of the popuation. Cooks make money from cookery, taxidermists from taxidermy and con artists from con-tricks. Bookmakers make money from betting. It's their job, you see. |
|
|
|
Post by Adam in Stroud on Feb 7, 2017 20:37:53 GMT
Why have the Independents stayed out of this fight? I mean the council-running Independents, not the ones on the ballot paper, e.g. the remarkable Barbara Fielding abolishmcrm.com/If I was a Stoke Independent I'd be a lot more interested in running the council than on being one out of 650 MPs. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 7, 2017 20:38:41 GMT
And a lot of examples of seats with what turned out to be... er... unrealistic... UKIP odds. The idea that bookmakers know any more than anyone else is absurd, but this is hardly new ground... There have been NO examples of UKIP being odds-on in any byelection before, other than the two they actually won. As they live in the real world, and not some overgrown teenage SJW internet bubble, I'm pretty sure they do know more than you, which isn't really saying a great deal as this applies to the vast majority of the popuation. Cooks make money from cookery, taxidermists from taxidermy and con artists from con-tricks. Bookmakers make money from betting. It's their job, you see. Yes, and no-one seriously thought they'd win Castle Point, Basildon South & East Thurrock or Rother Valley in 2015. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 7, 2017 20:39:57 GMT
Why have the Independents stayed out of this fight? I mean the council-running Independents, not the ones on the ballot paper, e.g. the remarkable Barbara Fielding abolishmcrm.com/If I was a Stoke Independent I'd be a lot more interested in running the council than on being one out of 650 MPs. Easy to forget the Tories actually run Stoke... |
|
Richard Allen
Banned
Four time loser in VUKPOTY finals
Posts: 19,052
|
Post by Richard Allen on Feb 7, 2017 20:44:11 GMT
And a lot of examples of seats with what turned out to be... er... unrealistic... UKIP odds. The idea that bookmakers know any more than anyone else is absurd, but this is hardly new ground... There have been NO examples of UKIP being odds-on in any byelection before, other than the two they actually won. As they live in the real world, and not some overgrown teenage SJW internet bubble, I'm pretty sure they do know more than you, which isn't really saying a great deal as this applies to the vast majority of the popuation. Cooks make money from cookery, taxidermists from taxidermy and con artists from con-tricks. Bookmakers make money from betting. It's their job, you see. Well yes, overall the bookies do pretty well but there are always individual markets that they get wrong. Politics is also an area where they have a pretty sketchy record. Unlike sporting events where there is normally masses of data to go off a parliamentary by election in an individual constituency has much less relevant data on which to calculate odds. Also unlike sporting events there are people willing to place bets to manipulate the odds to create good headlines. With fairly light betting on such contests a reasonably wealthy person can swing the odds quite substantially if they wish. Based on all of the above I don't think the odds tell us all that much. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 7, 2017 21:00:22 GMT
Why have the Independents stayed out of this fight? I mean the council-running Independents, not the ones on the ballot paper, e.g. the remarkable Barbara Fielding abolishmcrm.com/If I was a Stoke Independent I'd be a lot more interested in running the council than on being one out of 650 MPs. They apparently are not too interested in doing that. |
|
|
|
Post by schofield2016 on Feb 7, 2017 23:36:32 GMT
Voted Labour all my life, but if I was in stoke - having been sent Tristram and now Snell - a career politician (politics at uni to a safe seat Cllr knowing what about the world who knows) - I'd be voting UKIP with the hope that it results in Corbyn losing the leadership. In fact the best thing UKIP would do is to use the #stokebyelection twitter tags and encourage unsure Labour voters to go UKIP to get corbyn out.
Jess Phillips for Labour leader after Corbyn, the only person who could take on a very authentic and credible leader like
may is someone who is salt of the earth.
|
|
Jack
Reform Party
Posts: 8,679
|
Post by Jack on Feb 7, 2017 23:52:40 GMT
Jess Phillips for Labour leader after Corbyn, the only person who could take on a very authentic and credible leader like may is someone who is salt of the earth. Well, that's a new one. |
|
|
|
Post by Lord Twaddleford on Feb 7, 2017 23:58:11 GMT
Jess Phillips for Labour leader after Corbyn, the only person who could take on a very authentic and credible leader like   Thankfully such a thing is highly unlikely, but were it to happen, Labour can kiss my vote goodbye (in Westminster at least), and I'll be back to having a grey coloured display name. |
|
|
|
Post by schofield2016 on Feb 8, 2017 0:05:36 GMT
|
|
Richard Allen
Banned
Four time loser in VUKPOTY finals
Posts: 19,052
|
Post by Richard Allen on Feb 8, 2017 0:12:44 GMT
Thick as pig shit and out of her depth as a member of parliament, as I have pointed out to her in several letters, let alone as leader of an allegedly serious political party. |
|
