Posted on 11/03/2016 9:01:45 AM PDT by mandaladon
There’s an old saying about election predictions which instructs people making claims against popularly held beliefs to put their money where their mouth is. That actually happens in the real world because betting markets exist where people can wager on the outcome of the presidential race (or pretty much any other endeavor). One such enterprise is the Irish website Paddy Power and they’ve been taking bets on the Clinton vs Trump rumble since before the conventions were finished. For some time now the “smart money” had been on Clinton, but they now report there’s been a shift in the trends and nearly all the wagers coming in are on The Donald to win by a nose. (The Hill)
A major gambling website says nearly all wagers on the presidential election in the last 48 hours have been on Donald Trump to win.
Irish bookmaker Paddy Power on Tuesday said 91 percent of bets on the election in the last two days have been backing Trump, the Republican nominee.
In the past 48 hours, 91% of bets on the US Election have been on Trump. He’s into 9/4. And we’ve already paid out on Hillary. Uh-oh.
(Excerpt) Read more at hotair.com ...
Those places have the ability to claw back winnings made in advance. If I remember correctly they are usually “payouts” to fund new bets, so the “house” still controls the money.
the early, poll driven “stupid” money has all been lost.
the late “smart” money is coming in now.
About two weeks too early.
I’m pretty sure Hillary is going to win Hawaii.
I’m not sure I’d be willing to bet on more than that.
5 days out to election day isn’t too soon to start peaking. The election cycle for President is now almost 2 years in terms of getting ready to run. That said there is a strong strain of thought here on FR that Trump was ahead all along and this so called surge is simply the polls realigning with reality.
It sounds like Paddy flunked Bookmaking 101. Who pays out before an event is over and the results officially verified?
This!
I think there’s a clip of comedian Gilbert Gottfried at an appearance in Sept 2001. It was about a week after 9-11 and he told a joke about the Two Towers falling.
Dead silence in the room.
He said, “Oh. Too soon?”
(There were layers of comedic timing in that entire interchange. He did it well.)
Pretty telling when an NBC poll shows 69 - 31 for Trump.....
Since betting is always on an event yet to occur I hardly believe placing a bet 5 to 6 days before the event is too soon.
Besides, a bet doesn’t ensure victory, it is nothing more than the manifestation of a hunch. You will recall that the betting was against brexit before the vote came out and was in favor of brexit.
Weeks ago they showed more people betting on Trump and more money wagered on Hillary (they had to tell us that to show she had the big money folks on her side and the People on his side.....- the trend keeps moving in his favor.
Great place to bet. Of course, when they’re bankrupt, how will they pay???
Why would they do that? I don't know anything about betting/gambling. Is there a reason for this?
Publicity.
That story gets carried on the evening news, advertising costs money.
If paying off a few bets early is less expensive than buying advertising time, it is worth doing.
Do not feel bad for Paddy Power. The only sure bet in gambling is that the house always wins.
The betting odds in England during the Brexit vote was solidly on the “Stay in the EU” side. Yep, “smart” money was on UK to “Stay”. Lot of people lost big bucks (Pounds?)on that one...including the betting shops. It was a bloodbath for Ireland’s largest bookmaker “Paddy Power”. Go ahead, look it up.
“The betting odds in England during the Brexit vote was solidly on the “Stay in the EU” side. Yep, “smart” money was on UK to “Stay”. Lot of people lost big bucks (Pounds?)on that one...including the betting shops. It was a bloodbath for Ireland’s largest bookmaker “Paddy Power”. Go ahead, look it up.”
On the Monday before the Brexit vote, the odds were 7 to 4 for “leave,” meaning that a 4 pound wager on Brexit would pay out 7 pounds, implying a probability of Brexit of about 36%.
I don’t know Paddy Power’s business model, but if it is a conventional bookmaking operation, how could it lose money on a particular outcome? Betting shops typically adjust the odds dynamically so as to roughly equalize the flow of bets on the two outcomes. This is called “keeping a Dutch book.” In other words, the odds are a “price” which (approximately) equates the supply of and demand for bets on a particular outcome, exclusive of any commissions and “overrounds” (take by the house).
“That said there is a strong strain of thought here on FR that Trump was ahead all along and this so called surge is simply the polls realigning with reality.”
How could it be otherwise? How could a woman who can hardly draw flies be far ahead in the polls against a man who can fill huge stadiums? It never made sense. Hillary is as exciting as stale bread and as charming as Ebenezer Scrooge before he had his dream.
She can draw flies. We have seen that.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.