politicalbetting
Home› General

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Sign In Register

Categories

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » How much should those with 33/1 Sadiq Khan vouchers cover t

SystemSystem Posts: 12,293
edited 2015 30 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » How much should those with 33/1 Sadiq Khan vouchers cover themselves on a Zac victory?

Back in March 2013 Henry G Manson gave what might prove to be one of the best ever political betting tips here when he said get on Sadiq Khan, then at 33/1, for next London Mayor.

Read the full story here


«13

Comments

  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 120,744
    edited 2015 30
    Some of us are also on Zac at 22/1 thanks to Tissue_Price, is a good place to be thanks to Henry and Tissue_Price
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 53,362
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Some of us are also on Zac at 22/1 thanks to Tissue_Price, is a good place to be thanks to Henry and Tissue_Price

    You'll be well in the money.

    Unless Donald Trump decides to stand....
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 120,744
    I said yesterday I expect Khan to win, which isn't the worst result for the Tories as

    1) It spares a tricky by election in Richmond Park, which despite its mahoosive majority, I still place faith in the Lib Dem by election ops

    2) Keeps Jez in place

    3) Gives us a fascinating by election in Tooting, especially if Ken Livingstone is the Labour candidate.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 120,744
    MarqueeMark said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Some of us are also on Zac at 22/1 thanks to Tissue_Price, is a good place to be thanks to Henry and Tissue_Price

    You'll be well in the money.

    Unless Donald Trump decides to stand....
    Or Winston McKenzie becomes London Mayor
  • SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976
    What puts Sadiq Khan in such a great place for this contest is that Ed Miliband also made him Shadow Minister for London two months ago.'

    Pedant alert - Ed appointed him Shadow Minister for London in January 2013.
  • ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 5,331
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    I said yesterday I expect Khan to win, which isn't the worst result for the Tories as

    1) It spares a tricky by election in Richmond Park, which despite its mahoosive majority, I still place faith in the Lib Dem by election ops

    2) Keeps Jez in place

    3) Gives us a fascinating by election in Tooting, especially if Ken Livingstone is the Labour candidate.

    Tooting is quite simple, I think. Reasonable Lab candidate and it's a Lab hold. Livingstone for Lab and it's a sure-fire Tory gain.
  • WandererWanderer Posts: 3,838
    SimonStClare said:

    What puts Sadiq Khan in such a great place for this contest is that Ed Miliband also made him Shadow Minister for London two months ago.'

    Pedant alert - Ed appointed him Shadow Minister for London in January 2013.

    Well, to be pedantic, the words were written in March 2013.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    I'm on this bet (at these odds and at shorter odds). I don't feel the need to buy an insurance policy. In a city that's trending to Labour, Zac Goldsmith faces an uphill struggle, even with the troubles that Labour are going through at present at a national level.
  • JBriskinJBriskin Posts: 2,380
    edited 2015 30
    "I know quite a few PBers took Henry’s advice in 2003 – what are they doing?"

    Throw away the calculaters and spreadsheets and cross your fingers would be my advice. Hedging hurts head.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 120,744
    ThomasNashe said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    I said yesterday I expect Khan to win, which isn't the worst result for the Tories as

    1) It spares a tricky by election in Richmond Park, which despite its mahoosive majority, I still place faith in the Lib Dem by election ops

    2) Keeps Jez in place

    3) Gives us a fascinating by election in Tooting, especially if Ken Livingstone is the Labour candidate.

    Tooting is quite simple, I think. Reasonable Lab candidate and it's a Lab hold. Livingstone for Lab and it's a sure-fire Tory gain.
    Indeed, Governments seldom win seats from the Opposition, so it should be a Labour hold but Ken adds a new dynamic, plus the Tories seem quite confident that if not next year, they might take it in 2020.
  • JBriskinJBriskin Posts: 2,380
    Or hedge the stake so it looks pretty on the spreadsheets - everyone likes pretty spreadsheets
  • WandererWanderer Posts: 3,838
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    I said yesterday I expect Khan to win, which isn't the worst result for the Tories as

    1) It spares a tricky by election in Richmond Park, which despite its mahoosive majority, I still place faith in the Lib Dem by election ops

    2) Keeps Jez in place

    3) Gives us a fascinating by election in Tooting, especially if Ken Livingstone is the Labour candidate.

    I agree about 1 and 3. For the Tories a Tooting by-election is way more appetising than a Richmond one. As in a fresh quivering slice of jelly versus a rotten herring.

    I don't think 2 is in doubt either way.
  • SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976
    edited 2015 30
    Wanderer said:

    SimonStClare said:

    What puts Sadiq Khan in such a great place for this contest is that Ed Miliband also made him Shadow Minister for London two months ago.'

    Pedant alert - Ed appointed him Shadow Minister for London in January 2013.

    Well, to be pedantic, the words were written in March 2013.
    Indeed – but my point was that Khan has now resigned from the Cabinet and no longer enjoys that platform advantage.
  • WandererWanderer Posts: 3,838
    AlastairMeeks said:

    I'm on this bet (at these odds and at shorter odds). I don't feel the need to buy an insurance policy. In a city that's trending to Labour, Zac Goldsmith faces an uphill struggle, even with the troubles that Labour are going through at present at a national level.

    Entirely agree. We also know that a disproportionate number of new Labour members are in London.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 32,739
    I am not convinced that the Heathrow issue has been neutralised for Khan. Whilst Goldsmith has been consistently opposed, Khan changed his mind in the last two years - some might say when he realised he might have a shot at London Mayor. That could play very bad for him as being two faced.
  • MTimTMTimT Posts: 7,034
    FPT

    RodCrosby said:
    » show previous quotes
    I ruled out a Labour majority in 2011, stated in 2012 the Tories would win most votes, and held out the serious possibility of a majority during 2014 and early 2015, although I never believed it was odds-on. And in truth it never was odds-on.
    Wanderer said:
    I think that's right. It's an example of a somewhat (not extremely) unlikely thing that happened.

    This exchange sums up my problem with applying odds to an individual event. Today, it with either rain, or it won't. There is not a 30% chance of rain today. In one hundred days like today, it will probably rain on 30 of them. But today it will either rain or it won't.

    Odds only work when there are multiple events, they do not work for single events.

    Betting odds on single events works, not because a single event has an x% probability of happening, but because there are multiple bets made.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,598
    I think it's still something of a tossup, as we don't know how voters will behave in the new political environment. Khan's edge depends on younger voters turning out - will Corbyn+Khan make that happen? Khan is the more traditional candidate - is that good or bad in a London Mayor election? The internal rows in Labour aren't over yet - will they spoil Khan's chances? Or will centrist Labour voters feel that they may be dubious about Corbyn but Khan's a reasonable option? So I'd be inclined to bet on whoever has worse than even odds at the moment.
  • WandererWanderer Posts: 3,838
    MTimT said:

    FPT

    RodCrosby said:
    » show previous quotes
    I ruled out a Labour majority in 2011, stated in 2012 the Tories would win most votes, and held out the serious possibility of a majority during 2014 and early 2015, although I never believed it was odds-on. And in truth it never was odds-on.
    Wanderer said:
    I think that's right. It's an example of a somewhat (not extremely) unlikely thing that happened.

    This exchange sums up my problem with applying odds to an individual event. Today, it with either rain, or it won't. There is not a 30% chance of rain today. In one hundred days like today, it will probably rain on 30 of them. But today it will either rain or it won't.

    Odds only work when there are multiple events, they do not work for single events.

    Betting odds on single events works, not because a single event has an x% probability of happening, but because there are multiple bets made.

    That did occur to me as I wrote that post, but I thought, meh, just post already.
  • JBriskinJBriskin Posts: 2,380
    "So I'd be inclined to bet on whoever has worse than even odds at the moment."

    You mean better than - otherwise you'd made a bit of textbook betting error.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    @adebradley · 1m1 minute ago
    AP: Bill Cosby charged with sexual assaulting a women 12 years ago.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 55,925
    Afternoon all. A very lucky position to be in indeed, unfortunately not mine!

    Just returned to see that England easily did was was required against SA. Well done also to @AlastairMeeks for his public revisiting of his predictions on the previous thread.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,753
    edited 2015 30
    On topic:

    https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1eyYNABS7Y6x0ceO75qI9dUKNui1rIKFSnwF5Nf6rDJY/edit?usp=sharing

    This is what I've done.
  • WandererWanderer Posts: 3,838
    SimonStClare said:

    Wanderer said:

    SimonStClare said:

    What puts Sadiq Khan in such a great place for this contest is that Ed Miliband also made him Shadow Minister for London two months ago.'

    Pedant alert - Ed appointed him Shadow Minister for London in January 2013.

    Well, to be pedantic, the words were written in March 2013.
    Indeed – but my point was that Khan has now resigned from the Cabinet and no longer enjoys that platform advantage.
    Yes, but he's already reaped the benefit by becoming the candidate.

    Sorry, I'm just being argumentative, probably because I'm not on either candidate at these fantastic odds.

    How was Zac ever 22/1? He was the only Tory candidate anyone had heard of.
  • JBriskinJBriskin Posts: 2,380
    Hmmmm - not such pretty spreadsheet - does that mean you're only 40 quid up at the moment???
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,753
    Wanderer said:

    SimonStClare said:

    Wanderer said:

    SimonStClare said:

    What puts Sadiq Khan in such a great place for this contest is that Ed Miliband also made him Shadow Minister for London two months ago.'

    Pedant alert - Ed appointed him Shadow Minister for London in January 2013.

    Well, to be pedantic, the words were written in March 2013.
    Indeed – but my point was that Khan has now resigned from the Cabinet and no longer enjoys that platform advantage.
    Yes, but he's already reaped the benefit by becoming the candidate.

    Sorry, I'm just being argumentative, probably because I'm not on either candidate at these fantastic odds.

    How was Zac ever 22/1? He was the only Tory candidate anyone had heard of.
    He was 33-1 at one point.
  • DixieDixie Posts: 1,221
    On the doorstep re: Mayoral characters, there is apathy in general. Boris and Ken were massive figures; Zac and Khan are not currently. It's too early to tell.

    In 2012 Labour beat Tories 42 to 33% in Assembly Member vote. Yet, Boris beat Ken 51.5 to 48.5%. 2012 was the omnishambles budget. My canvass returns say to date that Tories will get a swing at Assembly Member level and that is backed up by lots of Labour canvassers I know who corroborate. How much is hard to say, but it could be up to 3.5%. At Mayoral level, it is all about GOTV. with just 38.1% turnout last time, many supporters may not be voters. That will mean either Khan or Zac may be ahead in opinion polls but lose.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,138
    Good afternoon, everyone.
  • JBriskinJBriskin Posts: 2,380
    edited 2015 30
    I think that means he's >600 quid up - i.e Gloating Klaxon

    EDIT - don't think it means that - still profits secured - always nice to see on a spreadsheet
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,753
    JBriskin said:

    I think that means he's >600 quid up - i.e Gloating Klaxon

    So long as it is Khan or Goldsmith.
  • MTimTMTimT Posts: 7,034
    Wanderer said:

    MTimT said:

    FPT

    RodCrosby said:
    » show previous quotes
    I ruled out a Labour majority in 2011, stated in 2012 the Tories would win most votes, and held out the serious possibility of a majority during 2014 and early 2015, although I never believed it was odds-on. And in truth it never was odds-on.
    Wanderer said:
    I think that's right. It's an example of a somewhat (not extremely) unlikely thing that happened.

    This exchange sums up my problem with applying odds to an individual event. Today, it with either rain, or it won't. There is not a 30% chance of rain today. In one hundred days like today, it will probably rain on 30 of them. But today it will either rain or it won't.

    Odds only work when there are multiple events, they do not work for single events.

    Betting odds on single events works, not because a single event has an x% probability of happening, but because there are multiple bets made.

    That did occur to me as I wrote that post, but I thought, meh, just post already.
    :)
  • JBriskinJBriskin Posts: 2,380
    edited 2015 30
    GLOATING KLAXON GLOATING KLAXON CONFIRMED
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 120,744
    Pulpstar said:

    Wanderer said:

    SimonStClare said:

    Wanderer said:

    SimonStClare said:

    What puts Sadiq Khan in such a great place for this contest is that Ed Miliband also made him Shadow Minister for London two months ago.'

    Pedant alert - Ed appointed him Shadow Minister for London in January 2013.

    Well, to be pedantic, the words were written in March 2013.
    Indeed – but my point was that Khan has now resigned from the Cabinet and no longer enjoys that platform advantage.
    Yes, but he's already reaped the benefit by becoming the candidate.

    Sorry, I'm just being argumentative, probably because I'm not on either candidate at these fantastic odds.

    How was Zac ever 22/1? He was the only Tory candidate anyone had heard of.
    He was 33-1 at one point.
    50/1 in May 2014.
  • JBriskinJBriskin Posts: 2,380
    And on a spreadsheet as well, oh my....
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,753
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Wanderer said:

    SimonStClare said:

    Wanderer said:

    SimonStClare said:

    What puts Sadiq Khan in such a great place for this contest is that Ed Miliband also made him Shadow Minister for London two months ago.'

    Pedant alert - Ed appointed him Shadow Minister for London in January 2013.

    Well, to be pedantic, the words were written in March 2013.
    Indeed – but my point was that Khan has now resigned from the Cabinet and no longer enjoys that platform advantage.
    Yes, but he's already reaped the benefit by becoming the candidate.

    Sorry, I'm just being argumentative, probably because I'm not on either candidate at these fantastic odds.

    How was Zac ever 22/1? He was the only Tory candidate anyone had heard of.
    He was 33-1 at one point.
    50/1 in May 2014.
    Do you have the betslip in your top drawer :D ?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,753
    Better than being stiffed by William Hill on their next Chelsea manager market !
  • JBriskinJBriskin Posts: 2,380
    I bet on Jowell as Lab candidate so my tiny bankroll ain't going on any spreadsheet.
  • ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 5,331
    Dixie said:

    On the doorstep re: Mayoral characters, there is apathy in general. Boris and Ken were massive figures; Zac and Khan are not currently. It's too early to tell.

    In 2012 Labour beat Tories 42 to 33% in Assembly Member vote. Yet, Boris beat Ken 51.5 to 48.5%. 2012 was the omnishambles budget. My canvass returns say to date that Tories will get a swing at Assembly Member level and that is backed up by lots of Labour canvassers I know who corroborate. How much is hard to say, but it could be up to 3.5%. At Mayoral level, it is all about GOTV. with just 38.1% turnout last time, many supporters may not be voters. That will mean either Khan or Zac may be ahead in opinion polls but lose.

    I think for such a high profile post, there's a really pitiful choice of candidates all the way down the list:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_mayoral_election,_2016

    I didn't vote in 2012 (a contest that I regarded as being between a creep and a clown), and I'm very unlikely to vote this time either.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 120,744
    Pulpstar said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Wanderer said:

    SimonStClare said:

    Wanderer said:

    SimonStClare said:

    What puts Sadiq Khan in such a great place for this contest is that Ed Miliband also made him Shadow Minister for London two months ago.'

    Pedant alert - Ed appointed him Shadow Minister for London in January 2013.

    Well, to be pedantic, the words were written in March 2013.
    Indeed – but my point was that Khan has now resigned from the Cabinet and no longer enjoys that platform advantage.
    Yes, but he's already reaped the benefit by becoming the candidate.

    Sorry, I'm just being argumentative, probably because I'm not on either candidate at these fantastic odds.

    How was Zac ever 22/1? He was the only Tory candidate anyone had heard of.
    He was 33-1 at one point.
    50/1 in May 2014.
    Do you have the betslip in your top drawer :D ?
    No, I only got onto the Zac bandwagon at 22/1
  • JBriskinJBriskin Posts: 2,380
    Pulpstar said:

    Better than being stiffed by William Hill on their next Chelsea manager market !

    yeah yeah yeah - lay the favourite
  • DixieDixie Posts: 1,221
    ThomasNashe said:

    Dixie said:

    On the doorstep re: Mayoral characters, there is apathy in general. Boris and Ken were massive figures; Zac and Khan are not currently. It's too early to tell.

    In 2012 Labour beat Tories 42 to 33% in Assembly Member vote. Yet, Boris beat Ken 51.5 to 48.5%. 2012 was the omnishambles budget. My canvass returns say to date that Tories will get a swing at Assembly Member level and that is backed up by lots of Labour canvassers I know who corroborate. How much is hard to say, but it could be up to 3.5%. At Mayoral level, it is all about GOTV. with just 38.1% turnout last time, many supporters may not be voters. That will mean either Khan or Zac may be ahead in opinion polls but lose.

    I think for such a high profile post, there's a really pitiful choice of candidates all the way down the list:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_mayoral_election,_2016

    I didn't vote in 2012 (a contest that I regarded as being between a creep and a clown), and I'm very unlikely to vote this time either.
    You're right, a pitiful bunch. Zac is hugly clever adn earnest. he will be a great Mayor.

    Galloway might be a surprise but he won't win. Most of his 2nd preferences will go to Khan. But Khan might lose some 2nd preferences because fo Galloway. Gorgeous George claims Jezza is backing him!
  • JBriskinJBriskin Posts: 2,380
    I've probably responded to the wrong thing - but I implore PBers to watch this film - it's great, you'll love it-

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lay_the_Favorite
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 23,107
    FPT
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    viewcode said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    When the exit poll came out Tory maj was 10/1, and even after Nuneaton Tory Majority was around 2/1.

    If you have a link to an extant source for either of those two odds, I will think kindly of you.

    10/1 Here - Though it is poorly worded

    http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/bookies-odds-general-election-results-9208205
    Um, I've read that link and it says "Following the release of the exit poll, which was based on asking around 20,000 people across the country who they had voted for, William Hill made Cameron 10/1 likely to return to Downing Street and the odds of Ed Miliband resigning before midnight tomorrow were slashed to 6/4.". Given the following line ("The odds on a Conservative/Lib Dem coalition were also dramatically cut to 5/2, with a Conservative minority government odds at 1/1."), and the fact that this was after the exit poll, I infer that these are odds of 1/10, not 10/1.
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    viewcode said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    When the exit poll came out Tory maj was 10/1, and even after Nuneaton Tory Majority was around 2/1.

    If you have a link to an extant source for either of those two odds, I will think kindly of you.

    The 2/1 was mentioned on the Nuneaton result thread by the wonderful Tissue_Price

    http://politicalbetting.vanillaforums.com/discussion/comment/664674/#Comment_664674
    He did indeed ("Con Maj is, astonishingly, value @ 2.94"), thank you.
  • JBriskinJBriskin Posts: 2,380
    NPXMP has got this very wrong though -

    I make most of my (non) profits on 2/1s that I see as 50/50 (toss-ups)

    That's Brisky's theory of break-even betting for you
  • ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 5,331
    Dixie said:

    ThomasNashe said:

    Dixie said:

    On the doorstep re: Mayoral characters, there is apathy in general. Boris and Ken were massive figures; Zac and Khan are not currently. It's too early to tell.

    In 2012 Labour beat Tories 42 to 33% in Assembly Member vote. Yet, Boris beat Ken 51.5 to 48.5%. 2012 was the omnishambles budget. My canvass returns say to date that Tories will get a swing at Assembly Member level and that is backed up by lots of Labour canvassers I know who corroborate. How much is hard to say, but it could be up to 3.5%. At Mayoral level, it is all about GOTV. with just 38.1% turnout last time, many supporters may not be voters. That will mean either Khan or Zac may be ahead in opinion polls but lose.

    I think for such a high profile post, there's a really pitiful choice of candidates all the way down the list:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_mayoral_election,_2016

    I didn't vote in 2012 (a contest that I regarded as being between a creep and a clown), and I'm very unlikely to vote this time either.
    You're right, a pitiful bunch. Zac is hugly clever adn earnest. he will be a great Mayor.

    Galloway might be a surprise but he won't win. Most of his 2nd preferences will go to Khan. But Khan might lose some 2nd preferences because fo Galloway. Gorgeous George claims Jezza is backing him!
    Zac speaks to the prosperous suburbs of south-west London, but I don't see much evidence of him engaging other parts of the capital. It's very close, but I'd still expect Khan to edge it by default.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,138
    Mr. Briskin, I take a similar approach with F1 stuff. Of course, I'm not averse to longer odds, but they're, naturally, harder to get right.
  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    edited 2015 30
    If Labour get within 10% of the Tories in the National Vote Share in the local elections on that day, then IMO they should win London. Boris only defied the national trend in 2012 because (for whatever reason) he has such more appeal to young people than any other Tory does.

    Currently, I'd predict a Tory lead of about 3-4% in the locals, which should see Sadiq in, and will then give PBTories the vapours because he dares to suggest more non-white people should be policemen.
  • JBriskinJBriskin Posts: 2,380
    Morris_Dancer said:

    Mr. Briskin, I take a similar approach with F1 stuff. Of course, I'm not averse to longer odds, but they're, naturally, harder to get right.

    Yeah, apart from 60/1s that are forgotten to put on of course ;)
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 120,744
    viewcode said:

    FPT

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    viewcode said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    When the exit poll came out Tory maj was 10/1, and even after Nuneaton Tory Majority was around 2/1.

    If you have a link to an extant source for either of those two odds, I will think kindly of you.

    10/1 Here - Though it is poorly worded

    http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/bookies-odds-general-election-results-9208205
    Um, I've read that link and it says "Following the release of the exit poll, which was based on asking around 20,000 people across the country who they had voted for, William Hill made Cameron 10/1 likely to return to Downing Street and the odds of Ed Miliband resigning before midnight tomorrow were slashed to 6/4.". Given the following line ("The odds on a Conservative/Lib Dem coalition were also dramatically cut to 5/2, with a Conservative minority government odds at 1/1."), and the fact that this was after the exit poll, I infer that these are odds of 1/10, not 10/1.
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    viewcode said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    When the exit poll came out Tory maj was 10/1, and even after Nuneaton Tory Majority was around 2/1.

    If you have a link to an extant source for either of those two odds, I will think kindly of you.

    The 2/1 was mentioned on the Nuneaton result thread by the wonderful Tissue_Price

    http://politicalbetting.vanillaforums.com/discussion/comment/664674/#Comment_664674
    He did indeed ("Con Maj is, astonishingly, value @ 2.94"), thank you.
    This link is better

    William Hill was offering odds of 10/1 on Thursday night on the Conservatives having a majority even after exit polls indicated a surprise surge by the party.

    http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/markets/article-3075515/Bookies-Ladbrokes-William-Hill-hammering-shock-General-Election-majority-win-Tories.html
  • DixieDixie Posts: 1,221
    ThomasNashe said:

    Dixie said:

    ThomasNashe said:

    Dixie said:

    On the doorstep re: Mayoral characters, there is apathy in general. Boris and Ken were massive figures; Zac and Khan are not currently. It's too early to tell.

    In 2012 Labour beat Tories 42 to 33% in Assembly Member vote. Yet, Boris beat Ken 51.5 to 48.5%. 2012 was the omnishambles budget. My canvass returns say to date that Tories will get a swing at Assembly Member level and that is backed up by lots of Labour canvassers I know who corroborate. How much is hard to say, but it could be up to 3.5%. At Mayoral level, it is all about GOTV. with just 38.1% turnout last time, many supporters may not be voters. That will mean either Khan or Zac may be ahead in opinion polls but lose.

    I think for such a high profile post, there's a really pitiful choice of candidates all the way down the list:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_mayoral_election,_2016

    I didn't vote in 2012 (a contest that I regarded as being between a creep and a clown), and I'm very unlikely to vote this time either.
    You're right, a pitiful bunch. Zac is hugly clever adn earnest. he will be a great Mayor.

    Galloway might be a surprise but he won't win. Most of his 2nd preferences will go to Khan. But Khan might lose some 2nd preferences because fo Galloway. Gorgeous George claims Jezza is backing him!
    Zac speaks to the prosperous suburbs of south-west London, but I don't see much evidence of him engaging other parts of the capital. It's very close, but I'd still expect Khan to edge it by default.
    Very early to say though as voters haven't made up their mind. Also, rumours Labour are struggling to raise funds and Tories are doing well in that area. Some reds have told me that they may be a bitch fest between Labour politicians, which will unsetlle Khan. Time will tell.
  • JBriskinJBriskin Posts: 2,380
    Morris_Dancer said:

    Mr. Briskin, I take a similar approach with F1 stuff. Of course, I'm not averse to longer odds, but they're, naturally, harder to get right.

    Betting on Vettel on pole on form on evens has made money for me as well.

    Anyway - let's all bow to Glorious Pulpstar right now. On A Spreadsheet!!!
  • ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 5,331
    Just to add, there is one significant factor that might allow Zac to shift the momentum, and that would be if there are further tube strikes in the run-up to the election. Sadiq is too close to the unions for most Londoners' tastes.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,138
    Mr. Briskin, we'll see how he does next year.

    Also, Button was 70/1.
  • DixieDixie Posts: 1,221
    Danny565 said:

    If Labour get within 10% of the Tories in the National Vote Share in the local elections on that day, then IMO they should win London. Boris only defied the national trend in 2012 because (for whatever reason) he has such more appeal to young people than any other Tory does.

    Currently, I'd predict a Tory lead of about 3-4% in the locals, which should see Sadiq in, and will then give PBTories the vapours because he dares to suggest more non-white people should be policemen.

    Although 2012 was a disaster for Tories, things will be better. Canvassing is showing a swing to blues in London. I think Tory lead will be more than 4 points. Also, don't forget Khan's background does not endear him to many Ethnics, in particular Indians. And Ken rully f*cked off the Jewish fraternity in 2012 as Jezza is doing so too.
  • HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098
    O/T Prices are insane!

    Herself declared a wish to go to a particular concert at the Royal Albert Hall in March. I have just booked the tickets in accordance with her standard wish for "nice" seats, not the best but "nice". One hundred and seventeen pounds those two tickets have cost me! Add on the rail fares plus taxis, a bite to eat and a few little drinkies here and there and I am not going to see much change, if any, out of £300. Three hundred fecking quid to take my wife out for the evening! Utter madness.
  • JBriskinJBriskin Posts: 2,380
    Morris_Dancer said:

    Mr. Briskin, we'll see how he does next year.

    Also, Button was 70/1.

    You're taking the Piss!!!!!!!!!!! Obama was 50/1 - Button 60/1 - every long term F1 fan lurker here knows that!!!!!!!!!!!!!1 you're suffering from that effect thing
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 58,161
    HurstLlama said:

    O/T Prices are insane!

    Herself declared a wish to go to a particular concert at the Royal Albert Hall in March. I have just booked the tickets in accordance with her standard wish for "nice" seats, not the best but "nice". One hundred and seventeen pounds those two tickets have cost me! Add on the rail fares plus taxis, a bite to eat and a few little drinkies here and there and I am not going to see much change, if any, out of £300. Three hundred fecking quid to take my wife out for the evening! Utter madness.

    You'll find that a small price to pay relative to divorce.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,138
    Mr. Briskin, question ye not the Word of Morris.

    Mr. Llama, that is mad.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,882
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    ThomasNashe said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    I said yesterday I expect Khan to win, which isn't the worst result for the Tories as

    1) It spares a tricky by election in Richmond Park, which despite its mahoosive majority, I still place faith in the Lib Dem by election ops

    2) Keeps Jez in place

    3) Gives us a fascinating by election in Tooting, especially if Ken Livingstone is the Labour candidate.

    Tooting is quite simple, I think. Reasonable Lab candidate and it's a Lab hold. Livingstone for Lab and it's a sure-fire Tory gain.
    Indeed, Governments seldom win seats from the Opposition, so it should be a Labour hold but Ken adds a new dynamic, plus the Tories seem quite confident that if not next year, they might take it in 2020.
    Sooner or later, the Conservatives will make it a hat-trick in Wandsworth.

    I think I'd give Khan a slight edge, although I think Labour will do worse in the Assembly than in 2012.
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    Momentum Hampshire
    @angelaeagle You are a Tory. Hoping for a peerage when you get deselected are you?
  • ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 5,331
    HurstLlama said:

    O/T Prices are insane!

    Herself declared a wish to go to a particular concert at the Royal Albert Hall in March. I have just booked the tickets in accordance with her standard wish for "nice" seats, not the best but "nice". One hundred and seventeen pounds those two tickets have cost me! Add on the rail fares plus taxis, a bite to eat and a few little drinkies here and there and I am not going to see much change, if any, out of £300. Three hundred fecking quid to take my wife out for the evening! Utter madness.

    I go the proms once or twice a season, and I regard the upper gallery as offering quite good value. You're along way from the arena, but the view is still unrestricted (and there's nothing to stop you taking binoculars). The tickets are roughly one third of the cost of the ones in the stalls.
  • DixieDixie Posts: 1,221
    Sean_F said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    ThomasNashe said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    I said yesterday I expect Khan to win, which isn't the worst result for the Tories as

    1) It spares a tricky by election in Richmond Park, which despite its mahoosive majority, I still place faith in the Lib Dem by election ops

    2) Keeps Jez in place

    3) Gives us a fascinating by election in Tooting, especially if Ken Livingstone is the Labour candidate.

    Tooting is quite simple, I think. Reasonable Lab candidate and it's a Lab hold. Livingstone for Lab and it's a sure-fire Tory gain.
    Indeed, Governments seldom win seats from the Opposition, so it should be a Labour hold but Ken adds a new dynamic, plus the Tories seem quite confident that if not next year, they might take it in 2020.
    Sooner or later, the Conservatives will make it a hat-trick in Wandsworth.

    I think I'd give Khan a slight edge, although I think Labour will do worse in the Assembly than in 2012.
    Tory Ealing & HIllingdon Candidate is particularly good. And of course Conservatives won't have that arse Brian Coleman in Barnet and Camden.
  • DixieDixie Posts: 1,221
    ThomasNashe said:

    HurstLlama said:

    O/T Prices are insane!

    Herself declared a wish to go to a particular concert at the Royal Albert Hall in March. I have just booked the tickets in accordance with her standard wish for "nice" seats, not the best but "nice". One hundred and seventeen pounds those two tickets have cost me! Add on the rail fares plus taxis, a bite to eat and a few little drinkies here and there and I am not going to see much change, if any, out of £300. Three hundred fecking quid to take my wife out for the evening! Utter madness.

    I go the proms once or twice a season, and I regard the upper gallery as offering quite good value. You're along way from the arena, but the view is still unrestricted (and there's nothing to stop you taking binoculars). The tickets are roughly one third of the cost of the ones in the stalls.
    HurstLlama said:

    O/T Prices are insane!

    Herself declared a wish to go to a particular concert at the Royal Albert Hall in March. I have just booked the tickets in accordance with her standard wish for "nice" seats, not the best but "nice". One hundred and seventeen pounds those two tickets have cost me! Add on the rail fares plus taxis, a bite to eat and a few little drinkies here and there and I am not going to see much change, if any, out of £300. Three hundred fecking quid to take my wife out for the evening! Utter madness.

    Agreed. Can't take a date there, if it turns sour, you're 300 smackers down!
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 23,107
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    viewcode said:

    FPT

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    viewcode said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    When the exit poll came out Tory maj was 10/1, and even after Nuneaton Tory Majority was around 2/1.

    If you have a link to an extant source for either of those two odds, I will think kindly of you.

    10/1 Here - Though it is poorly worded

    http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/bookies-odds-general-election-results-9208205
    Um, I've read that link and it says "Following the release of the exit poll, which was based on asking around 20,000 people across the country who they had voted for, William Hill made Cameron 10/1 likely to return to Downing Street and the odds of Ed Miliband resigning before midnight tomorrow were slashed to 6/4.". Given the following line ("The odds on a Conservative/Lib Dem coalition were also dramatically cut to 5/2, with a Conservative minority government odds at 1/1."), and the fact that this was after the exit poll, I infer that these are odds of 1/10, not 10/1.
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    viewcode said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    When the exit poll came out Tory maj was 10/1, and even after Nuneaton Tory Majority was around 2/1.

    If you have a link to an extant source for either of those two odds, I will think kindly of you.

    The 2/1 was mentioned on the Nuneaton result thread by the wonderful Tissue_Price

    http://politicalbetting.vanillaforums.com/discussion/comment/664674/#Comment_664674
    He did indeed ("Con Maj is, astonishingly, value @ 2.94"), thank you.
    This link is better

    William Hill was offering odds of 10/1 on Thursday night on the Conservatives having a majority even after exit polls indicated a surprise surge by the party.

    http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/markets/article-3075515/Bookies-Ladbrokes-William-Hill-hammering-shock-General-Election-majority-win-Tories.html
    Thank you. I know William Hill had odds of 10/1 Con OM on the day before, so the fact that they left it in place even after the exit poll is notable. SPIN went suspended at approx 9:40pm and came back at 10:15pm, slashing their odds after the 10pm exit poll. I think from this William Hill are slower to adjust their odds than they should be: a good betting tip, methinks...:-)
  • JBriskinJBriskin Posts: 2,380
    The rail fare alone unless we booked a year in advance would cost me and Ms Briskin over 300 quid so take solace in that Hurst.
  • HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098
    ThomasNashe said:

    HurstLlama said:

    O/T Prices are insane!

    Herself declared a wish to go to a particular concert at the Royal Albert Hall in March. I have just booked the tickets in accordance with her standard wish for "nice" seats, not the best but "nice". One hundred and seventeen pounds those two tickets have cost me! Add on the rail fares plus taxis, a bite to eat and a few little drinkies here and there and I am not going to see much change, if any, out of £300. Three hundred fecking quid to take my wife out for the evening! Utter madness.

    I go the proms once or twice a season, and I regard the upper gallery as offering quite good value. You're along way from the arena, but the view is still unrestricted (and there's nothing to stop you taking binoculars). The tickets are roughly one third of the cost of the ones in the stalls.
    Quite right, Mr. Nashe, and given the choice that would be my preference too, one is there to listen not watch after all. However, if I booked seats in the "Gods" as she would see it then I would never hear the end of the matter.
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    Ollie's greatest hits

    http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/the-staggers/2011/10/letwin-cut-ideas-exist-20bn
  • flightpath01flightpath01 Posts: 4,903
    Plato_Says said:

    Momentum Hampshire
    @angelaeagle You are a Tory. Hoping for a peerage when you get deselected are you?

    Isn't it great to be a real Tory. ha ha ha. Poor old Labour. (This is definitely not hubris btw. Thats very bad and lots of water to go under the bridge etc. But you have to laugh at the state of mind of the thicko left.)
  • DixieDixie Posts: 1,221
    viewcode said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    viewcode said:

    FPT

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    viewcode said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    When the exit poll came out Tory maj was 10/1, and even after Nuneaton Tory Majority was around 2/1.

    If you have a link to an extant source for either of those two odds, I will think kindly of you.

    10/1 Here - Though it is poorly worded

    http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/bookies-odds-general-election-results-9208205
    Um, I've read that link and it says "Following the release of the exit poll, which was based on asking around 20,000 people across the country who they had voted for, William Hill made Cameron 10/1 likely to return to Downing Street and the odds of Ed Miliband resigning before midnight tomorrow were slashed to 6/4.". Given the following line ("The odds on a Conservative/Lib Dem coalition were also dramatically cut to 5/2, with a Conservative minority government odds at 1/1."), and the fact that this was after the exit poll, I infer that these are odds of 1/10, not 10/1.
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    viewcode said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    When the exit poll came out Tory maj was 10/1, and even after Nuneaton Tory Majority was around 2/1.

    If you have a link to an extant source for either of those two odds, I will think kindly of you.

    The 2/1 was mentioned on the Nuneaton result thread by the wonderful Tissue_Price

    http://politicalbetting.vanillaforums.com/discussion/comment/664674/#Comment_664674
    He did indeed ("Con Maj is, astonishingly, value @ 2.94"), thank you.
    This link is better

    William Hill was offering odds of 10/1 on Thursday night on the Conservatives having a majority even after exit polls indicated a surprise surge by the party.

    http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/markets/article-3075515/Bookies-Ladbrokes-William-Hill-hammering-shock-General-Election-majority-win-Tories.html
    Thank you. I know William Hill had odds of 10/1 Con OM on the day before, so the fact that they left it in place even after the exit poll is notable. SPIN went suspended at approx 9:40pm and came back at 10:15pm, slashing their odds after the 10pm exit poll. I think from this William Hill are slower to adjust their odds than they should be: a good betting tip, methinks...:-)
    I know someone who managed to put on 30 grand post exit polls at 9/1. Quite frankly, his return was superb but even at 10 pm on election night, I would have said that was too risky. Hats off to him.
  • DixieDixie Posts: 1,221
    Dixie said:

    viewcode said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    viewcode said:

    FPT

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    viewcode said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    When the exit poll came out Tory maj was 10/1, and even after Nuneaton Tory Majority was around 2/1.

    If you have a link to an extant source for either of those two odds, I will think kindly of you.

    10/1 Here - Though it is poorly worded

    http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/bookies-odds-general-election-results-9208205
    Um, I've read that link and it says "Following the release of the exit poll, which was based on asking around 20,000 people across the country who they had voted for, William Hill made Cameron 10/1 likely to return to Downing Street and the odds of Ed Miliband resigning before midnight tomorrow were slashed to 6/4.". Given the following line ("The odds on a Conservative/Lib Dem coalition were also dramatically cut to 5/2, with a Conservative minority government odds at 1/1."), and the fact that this was after the exit poll, I infer that these are odds of 1/10, not 10/1.
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    viewcode said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    When the exit poll came out Tory maj was 10/1, and even after Nuneaton Tory Majority was around 2/1.

    If you have a link to an extant source for either of those two odds, I will think kindly of you.

    The 2/1 was mentioned on the Nuneaton result thread by the wonderful Tissue_Price

    http://politicalbetting.vanillaforums.com/discussion/comment/664674/#Comment_664674
    He did indeed ("Con Maj is, astonishingly, value @ 2.94"), thank you.


    I know someone who managed to put on 30 grand post exit polls at 9/1. Quite frankly, his return was superb but even at 10 pm on election night, I would have said that was too risky. Hats off to him.
    And it does amaze how slow/stupid some of the betting organisations were to not slash their odds wihtin seconds of getting the exit poll. Still, that's betting. Good luck to those that piled on the bets and well done to my old mucker who made a killing.

  • JBriskinJBriskin Posts: 2,380
    "30 grand"
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 23,107
    Dixie said:

    viewcode said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    viewcode said:

    FPT

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    viewcode said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    When the exit poll came out Tory maj was 10/1, and even after Nuneaton Tory Majority was around 2/1.

    If you have a link to an extant source for either of those two odds, I will think kindly of you.

    10/1 Here - Though it is poorly worded

    http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/bookies-odds-general-election-results-9208205
    Um, I've read that link and it says "Following the release of the exit poll, which was based on asking around 20,000 people across the country who they had voted for, William Hill made Cameron 10/1 likely to return to Downing Street and the odds of Ed Miliband resigning before midnight tomorrow were slashed to 6/4.". Given the following line ("The odds on a Conservative/Lib Dem coalition were also dramatically cut to 5/2, with a Conservative minority government odds at 1/1."), and the fact that this was after the exit poll, I infer that these are odds of 1/10, not 10/1.
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    viewcode said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    When the exit poll came out Tory maj was 10/1, and even after Nuneaton Tory Majority was around 2/1.

    If you have a link to an extant source for either of those two odds, I will think kindly of you.

    The 2/1 was mentioned on the Nuneaton result thread by the wonderful Tissue_Price

    http://politicalbetting.vanillaforums.com/discussion/comment/664674/#Comment_664674
    He did indeed ("Con Maj is, astonishingly, value @ 2.94"), thank you.
    This link is better

    William Hill was offering odds of 10/1 on Thursday night on the Conservatives having a majority even after exit polls indicated a surprise surge by the party.

    http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/markets/article-3075515/Bookies-Ladbrokes-William-Hill-hammering-shock-General-Election-majority-win-Tories.html
    Thank you. I know William Hill had odds of 10/1 Con OM on the day before, so the fact that they left it in place even after the exit poll is notable. SPIN went suspended at approx 9:40pm and came back at 10:15pm, slashing their odds after the 10pm exit poll. I think from this William Hill are slower to adjust their odds than they should be: a good betting tip, methinks...:-)
    I know someone who managed to put on 30 grand post exit polls at 9/1. Quite frankly, his return was superb but even at 10 pm on election night, I would have said that was too risky. Hats off to him.
    Indeed
  • JBriskinJBriskin Posts: 2,380
    Step aside Pulpstar - our new overlord is out there somewhere
  • ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 5,331
    HurstLlama said:

    ThomasNashe said:

    HurstLlama said:

    O/T Prices are insane!

    Herself declared a wish to go to a particular concert at the Royal Albert Hall in March. I have just booked the tickets in accordance with her standard wish for "nice" seats, not the best but "nice". One hundred and seventeen pounds those two tickets have cost me! Add on the rail fares plus taxis, a bite to eat and a few little drinkies here and there and I am not going to see much change, if any, out of £300. Three hundred fecking quid to take my wife out for the evening! Utter madness.

    I go the proms once or twice a season, and I regard the upper gallery as offering quite good value. You're along way from the arena, but the view is still unrestricted (and there's nothing to stop you taking binoculars). The tickets are roughly one third of the cost of the ones in the stalls.
    Quite right, Mr. Nashe, and given the choice that would be my preference too, one is there to listen not watch after all. However, if I booked seats in the "Gods" as she would see it then I would never hear the end of the matter.
    Thankfully, my other half is a little more tolerant ... and has a head for heights.

    I recall a few years ago ordering two large glasses of white plonk during the interval, and being a little surprised by the negligible amount of change I got from a £20 note. So my advice would be to ensure that she's either fully satiated beforehand, or prepared to wait for refreshment until after the show!
  • DixieDixie Posts: 1,221
    JBriskin said:

    "30 grand"

    Indeed. I was amazed that anyone took such a huge bet. Clearly they took him for a mug. I actually took him for a mug too. But he received the biggest payout I have ever known in political betting.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 120,744
    Sorry to lower the tone, but this is the story in Manchester

    'Is it a crime to have an erection in public?' Police defend hunt for excited man in Lyrca

    http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/cyclist-erection-lycra-manchester-police-10666441

    Follows on from this

    Man in Lycra 'with an erection' hunted by Manchester city centre police

    Police received the call reporting a man in 'a state of arousal' on Tuesday afternoon – and officers immediately launched a search

    http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/man-lycra-with-erection-hunted-10664094
  • JBriskinJBriskin Posts: 2,380
    Dixie said:

    JBriskin said:

    "30 grand"

    Indeed. I was amazed that anyone took such a huge bet. Clearly they took him for a mug. I actually took him for a mug too. But he received the biggest payout I have ever known in political betting.
    Aye - just hope it was all within his bankroll eh.
  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,382
    Dixie said:

    viewcode said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    viewcode said:

    FPT

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    viewcode said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    When the exit poll came out Tory maj was 10/1, and even after Nuneaton Tory Majority was around 2/1.

    If you have a link to an extant source for either of those two odds, I will think kindly of you.

    10/1 Here - Though it is poorly worded

    http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/bookies-odds-general-election-results-9208205
    Um, I've read that link and it says "Following the release of the exit poll, which was based on asking around 20,000 people across the country who they had voted for, William Hill made Cameron 10/1 likely to return to Downing Street and the odds of Ed Miliband resigning before midnight tomorrow were slashed to 6/4.". Given the following line ("The odds on a Conservative/Lib Dem coalition were also dramatically cut to 5/2, with a Conservative minority government odds at 1/1."), and the fact that this was after the exit poll, I infer that these are odds of 1/10, not 10/1.
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    viewcode said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    When the exit poll came out Tory maj was 10/1, and even after Nuneaton Tory Majority was around 2/1.

    If you have a link to an extant source for either of those two odds, I will think kindly of you.

    The 2/1 was mentioned on the Nuneaton result thread by the wonderful Tissue_Price

    http://politicalbetting.vanillaforums.com/discussion/comment/664674/#Comment_664674
    He did indeed ("Con Maj is, astonishingly, value @ 2.94"), thank you.
    This link is better

    William Hill was offering odds of 10/1 on Thursday night on the Conservatives having a majority even after exit polls indicated a surprise surge by the party.

    http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/markets/article-3075515/Bookies-Ladbrokes-William-Hill-hammering-shock-General-Election-majority-win-Tories.html
    Thank you. I know William Hill had odds of 10/1 Con OM on the day before, so the fact that they left it in place even after the exit poll is notable. SPIN went suspended at approx 9:40pm and came back at 10:15pm, slashing their odds after the 10pm exit poll. I think from this William Hill are slower to adjust their odds than they should be: a good betting tip, methinks...:-)
    I know someone who managed to put on 30 grand post exit polls at 9/1. Quite frankly, his return was superb but even at 10 pm on election night, I would have said that was too risky. Hats off to him.
    Unless I see documentary evidence I don't believe you.
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    John Rentoul
    Top Tweet Aug 2015 He's usually right, and this time he is again: @JananGanesh FT https://t.co/OYOD6iqh8W https://t.co/xVYxtuOqy0
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 55,925
    Dixie said:

    viewcode said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    viewcode said:

    FPT

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    viewcode said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    When the exit poll came out Tory maj was 10/1, and even after Nuneaton Tory Majority was around 2/1.

    If you have a link to an extant source for either of those two odds, I will think kindly of you.

    10/1 Here - Though it is poorly worded

    http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/bookies-odds-general-election-results-9208205
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    viewcode said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    When the exit poll came out Tory maj was 10/1, and even after Nuneaton Tory Majority was around 2/1.

    If you have a link to an extant source for either of those two odds, I will think kindly of you.

    The 2/1 was mentioned on the Nuneaton result thread by the wonderful Tissue_Price

    http://politicalbetting.vanillaforums.com/discussion/comment/664674/#Comment_664674
    He did indeed ("Con Maj is, astonishingly, value @ 2.94"), thank you.
    This link is better

    William Hill was offering odds of 10/1 on Thursday night on the Conservatives having a majority even after exit polls indicated a surprise surge by the party.

    http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/markets/article-3075515/Bookies-Ladbrokes-William-Hill-hammering-shock-General-Election-majority-win-Tories.html
    Thank you. I know William Hill had odds of 10/1 Con OM on the day before, so the fact that they left it in place even after the exit poll is notable. SPIN went suspended at approx 9:40pm and came back at 10:15pm, slashing their odds after the 10pm exit poll. I think from this William Hill are slower to adjust their odds than they should be: a good betting tip, methinks...:-)
    I know someone who managed to put on 30 grand post exit polls at 9/1. Quite frankly, his return was superb but even at 10 pm on election night, I would have said that was too risky. Hats off to him.
    Fair play to them for that bet. Did we ever find out the identity of the Glaswegian punter that took Shadsy's for a mortgage-sized chunk on the Con majority?

    Better than Obama and Button was 100/1 on Corbyn that was still there for an hour or two after he had been nominated!
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    Seems like overkill

    Kay Burley
    Royal Navy on way to scene of bus trapped in #flood water in Ayrshire
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,138
    Mr. Sandpit, aye, wish I'd backed Corbyn.

    Labour MPs are such bloody fools. What were they thinking?
  • JBriskinJBriskin Posts: 2,380
    Morris_Dancer said:

    Mr. Sandpit, aye, wish I'd backed Corbyn.

    Labour MPs are such bloody fools. What were they thinking?

    Abbot mark 2 presumably...
  • flightpath01flightpath01 Posts: 4,903
    Dixie said:

    ThomasNashe said:

    Dixie said:

    ThomasNashe said:

    Dixie said:

    On the doorstep re: Mayoral characters, there is apathy in general. Boris and Ken were massive figures; Zac and Khan are not currently. It's too early to tell.

    In 2012 Labour beat Tories 42 to 33% in Assembly Member vote. Yet, Boris beat Ken 51.5 to 48.5%. 2012 was the omnishambles budget. My canvass returns say to date that Tories will get a swing at Assembly Member level and that is backed up by lots of Labour canvassers I know who corroborate. How much is hard to say, but it could be up to 3.5%. At Mayoral level, it is all about GOTV. with just 38.1% turnout last time, many supporters may not be voters. That will mean either Khan or Zac may be ahead in opinion polls but lose.

    I think for such a high profile post, there's a really pitiful choice of candidates all the way down the list:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_mayoral_election,_2016

    I didn't vote in 2012 (a contest that I regarded as being between a creep and a clown), and I'm very unlikely to vote this time either.
    You're right, a pitiful bunch. Zac is hugly clever adn earnest. he will be a great Mayor.

    Galloway might be a surprise but he won't win. Most of his 2nd preferences will go to Khan. But Khan might lose some 2nd preferences because fo Galloway. Gorgeous George claims Jezza is backing him!
    Zac speaks to the prosperous suburbs of south-west London, but I don't see much evidence of him engaging other parts of the capital. It's very close, but I'd still expect Khan to edge it by default.
    Very early to say though as voters haven't made up their mind. Also, rumours Labour are struggling to raise funds and Tories are doing well in that area. Some reds have told me that they may be a bitch fest between Labour politicians, which will unsetlle Khan. Time will tell.
    I do not see the Mayor of London as being a big deal one way or the other. The London demographic generally seems a Labour one and the job is a mickey mouse one anyway. Good luck to either candidate, they will both upset their opponents in fairly equal measure. The one which cannot avoid upsetting his opponents voters the most will probably lose.
  • DixieDixie Posts: 1,221
    MikeSmithson said:

    Dixie said:

    viewcode said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    viewcode said:

    FPT

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    viewcode said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    When the exit poll came out Tory maj was 10/1, and even after Nuneaton Tory Majority was around 2/1.

    If you have a link to an extant source for either of those two odds, I will think kindly of you.

    10/1 Here - Though it is poorly worded

    http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/bookies-odds-general-election-results-9208205
    Um, I've read that link and it says "Following the release of the exit poll, which was based on asking around 20,000 people across the country who they had voted for, William Hill made Cameron 10/1 likely to return to Downing Street and the odds of Ed Miliband resigning before midnight tomorrow were slashed to 6/4.". Given the following line ("The odds on a Conservative/Lib Dem coalition were also dramatically cut to 5/2, with a Conservative minority government odds at 1/1."), and the fact that this was after the exit poll, I infer that these are odds of 1/10, not 10/1.
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    viewcode said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    When the exit poll came out Tory maj was 10/1, and even after Nuneaton Tory Majority was around 2/1.

    >

    Thank you. I know William Hill had odds of 10/1 Con OM on the day before, so the fact that they left it in place even after the exit poll is notable. SPIN went suspended at approx 9:40pm and came back at 10:15pm, slashing their odds after the 10pm exit poll. I think from this William Hill are slower to adjust their odds than they should be: a good betting tip, methinks...:-)
    I know someone who managed to put on 30 grand post exit polls at 9/1. Quite frankly, his return was superb but even at 10 pm on election night, I would have said that was too risky. Hats off to him.
    Unless I see documentary evidence I don't believe you.
    I can't prove it as I only have his word although the fella is a humble type, not prone to hyperbole and straight as a dye. But he laid out his case, explained what he did that evening, explained the options he had, made his bets and claims to have won. He follows your bets very closely, Mike, and that is why until 10 pm he didn't bet on Tory majority. Post exit poll, he decided to make his own decisions.
  • DixieDixie Posts: 1,221
    MikeSmithson said:

    Dixie said:

    viewcode said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    viewcode said:

    FPT


    I know someone who managed to put on 30 grand post exit polls at 9/1. Quite frankly, his return was superb but even at 10 pm on election night, I would have said that was too risky. Hats off to him.

    Unless I see documentary evidence I don't believe you.
    I can't prove it as I only have his word although the fella is a humble type, not prone to hyperbole and straight as a dye. But he laid out his case, explained what he did that evening, explained the options he had, made his bets and claims to have won. He follows your bets very closely, Mike, and that is why until 10 pm he didn't bet on Tory majority. Post exit poll, he decided to make his own decisions.
  • ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 5,331
    edited 2015 30
    flightpath01 said:

    Dixie said:

    ThomasNashe said:

    Dixie said:

    ThomasNashe said:

    Dixie said:

    On the doorstep re: Mayoral characters, there is apathy in general. Boris and Ken were massive figures; Zac and Khan are not currently. It's too early to tell.

    In 2012 Labour beat Tories 42 to 33% in Assembly Member vote. Yet, Boris beat Ken 51.5 to 48.5%. 2012 was the omnishambles budget. My canvass returns say to date that Tories will get a swing at Assembly Member level and that is backed up by lots of Labour canvassers I know who corroborate. How much is hard to say, but it could be up to 3.5%. At Mayoral level, it is all about GOTV. with just 38.1% turnout last time, many supporters may not be voters. That will mean either Khan or Zac may be ahead in opinion polls but lose.

    I think for such a high profile post, there's a really pitiful choice of candidates all the way down the list:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_mayoral_election,_2016

    I didn't vote in 2012 (a contest that I regarded as being between a creep and a clown), and I'm very unlikely to vote this time either.
    You're right, a pitiful bunch. Zac is hugly clever adn earnest. he will be a great Mayor.

    Galloway might be a surprise but he won't win. Most of his 2nd preferences will go to Khan. But Khan might lose some 2nd preferences because fo Galloway. Gorgeous George claims Jezza is backing him!
    Zac speaks to the prosperous suburbs of south-west London, but I don't see much evidence of him engaging other parts of the capital. It's very close, but I'd still expect Khan to edge it by default.
    Very early to say though as voters haven't made up their mind. Also, rumours Labour are struggling to raise funds and Tories are doing well in that area. Some reds have told me that they may be a bitch fest between Labour politicians, which will unsetlle Khan. Time will tell.
    I do not see the Mayor of London as being a big deal one way or the other. The London demographic generally seems a Labour one and the job is a mickey mouse one anyway. Good luck to either candidate, they will both upset their opponents in fairly equal measure. The one which cannot avoid upsetting his opponents voters the most will probably lose.
    It's true to say that it doesn't come with much in the way of real power. However, it's a fantastic opportunity to raise political profile, not just nationally, but internationally too.
  • JBriskinJBriskin Posts: 2,380
    #30grandgate
  • DixieDixie Posts: 1,221
    flightpath01 said:

    Dixie said:

    ThomasNashe said:

    Dixie said:

    ThomasNashe said:

    Dixie said:

    On the doorstep re: Mayoral characters, there is apathy in general. Boris and Ken were massive figures; Zac and Khan are not currently. It's too early to tell.

    In 2012 Labour beat Tories 42 to 33% in Assembly Member vote. Yet, Boris beat Ken 51.5 to 48.5%. 2012 was the omnishambles budget. My canvass returns say to date that Tories will get a swing at Assembly Member level and that is backed up by lots of Labour canvassers I know who corroborate. How much is hard to say, but it could be up to 3.5%. At Mayoral level, it is all about GOTV. with just 38.1% turnout last time, many supporters may not be voters. That will mean either Khan or Zac may be ahead in opinion polls but lose.

    I think for such a high profile post, there's a really pitiful choice of candidates all the way down the list:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_mayoral_election,_2016

    I didn't vote in 2012 (a contest that I regarded as being between a creep and a clown), and I'm very unlikely to vote this time either.
    You're right, a pitiful bunch. Zac is hugly clever adn earnest. he will be a great Mayor.

    Galloway might be a surprise but he won't win. Most of his 2nd preferences will go to Khan. But Khan might lose some 2nd preferences because fo Galloway. Gorgeous George claims Jezza is backing him!
    Zac speaks to the prosperous suburbs of south-west London, but I don't see much evidence of him engaging other parts of the capital. It's very close, but I'd still expect Khan to edge it by default.
    Very early to say though as voters haven't made up their mind. Also, rumours Labour are struggling to raise funds and Tories are doing well in that area. Some reds have told me that they may be a bitch fest between Labour politicians, which will unsetlle Khan. Time will tell.
    I do not see the Mayor of London as being a big deal one way or the other. The London demographic generally seems a Labour one and the job is a mickey mouse one anyway. Good luck to either candidate, they will both upset their opponents in fairly equal measure. The one which cannot avoid upsetting his opponents voters the most will probably lose.
    Although Mayor is about to get more powers with devolution and a £17 Billion budget. I assume bigger than Scotland's under Nicola but I could be wrong.
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    edited 2015 30
    For trivia lovers. 100 things we didn't know this year... Most kangaroos are left handed and only 4% of babies are born on the due date http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-35132976
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 55,925
    Morris_Dancer said:

    Mr. Sandpit, aye, wish I'd backed Corbyn.

    Labour MPs are such bloody fools. What were they thinking?

    Quite literally the best tenner I ever spent! Obviously didn't predict the result that far out, but was on the other three nominees already at good odds from the days after the election and thought it was a good covering bet.

    Finished about £900 up on the contest, huge for me if small by PB standards. Happy to have won the bet, if not so happy at how it turned out for the poor Labour Party.
  • JBriskinJBriskin Posts: 2,380
    Sandpit said:



    huge for me if small by PB standards.

    Most here don't bet
  • JBriskinJBriskin Posts: 2,380
    Hense when you getting betting threads you get #30grandgate stories
  • Hertsmere_PubgoerHertsmere_Pubgoer Posts: 3,476
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Sorry to lower the tone, but this is the story in Manchester

    'Is it a crime to have an erection in public?' Police defend hunt for excited man in Lyrca

    http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/cyclist-erection-lycra-manchester-police-10666441

    Follows on from this

    Man in Lycra 'with an erection' hunted by Manchester city centre police

    Police received the call reporting a man in 'a state of arousal' on Tuesday afternoon – and officers immediately launched a search

    http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/man-lycra-with-erection-hunted-10664094

    You lower the tone TSE? Never!
    As long as he isn't waving it around in public, how can it be a crime?
  • JBriskinJBriskin Posts: 2,380
    Thanks to Mike for pointing out the unlikeness of that scenario
  • SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976
    Hertsmere_Pubgoer said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Sorry to lower the tone, but this is the story in Manchester

    'Is it a crime to have an erection in public?' Police defend hunt for excited man in Lyrca

    http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/cyclist-erection-lycra-manchester-police-10666441

    Follows on from this

    Man in Lycra 'with an erection' hunted by Manchester city centre police

    Police received the call reporting a man in 'a state of arousal' on Tuesday afternoon – and officers immediately launched a search

    http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/man-lycra-with-erection-hunted-10664094

    You lower the tone TSE? Never!

    As long as he isn't waving it around in public, how can it be a crime?
    If the wearing of Lycra out in public is not a crime, then it bloody well should be…
  • TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,362
    Diane Abbott on sky news just now about the racist comments of letwin 30 years ago and how the Tories are still racist and the nasty party.

    Abbott attacking other people on racism is just laughable,what a country we live in,it's a joke.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    FPT:

    I'd like to ask Alastair Meeks whether he expected UKIP to finish around 5 percentage points ahead of the LDs in the popular vote at the general election. Not trying to make a point, just genuinely interested.
  • notmenotme Posts: 3,293
    Danny565 said:

    If Labour get within 10% of the Tories in the National Vote Share in the local elections on that day, then IMO they should win London. Boris only defied the national trend in 2012 because (for whatever reason) he has such more appeal to young people than any other Tory does.

    Currently, I'd predict a Tory lead of about 3-4% in the locals, which should see Sadiq in, and will then give PBTories the vapours because he dares to suggest more non-white people should be policemen.

    I would expect the national share to be very similar, certainly not the scale of the GE, I agree on the 3-4% ahead, but I think if they are that far ahead on the vote they'll keep London mayoralty.

  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 58,161
    AndyJS said:

    FPT:

    I'd like to ask Alastair Meeks whether he expected UKIP to finish around 5 percentage points ahead of the LDs in the popular vote at the general election. Not trying to make a point, just genuinely interested.

    I don't think anyone did. My forecast - a month before - was for UKIP to get 13% and 2 seats, and the LibDems to get 10% and 14 seats. Early in the campaign, in fact, there were a number of polls that suggested it could be LDs 12%, UKIP 11% or something like that. But the LDs underperformed throughout the campaign, while UKIP improved its standing.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 58,161
    notme said:

    Danny565 said:

    If Labour get within 10% of the Tories in the National Vote Share in the local elections on that day, then IMO they should win London. Boris only defied the national trend in 2012 because (for whatever reason) he has such more appeal to young people than any other Tory does.

    Currently, I'd predict a Tory lead of about 3-4% in the locals, which should see Sadiq in, and will then give PBTories the vapours because he dares to suggest more non-white people should be policemen.

    I would expect the national share to be very similar, certainly not the scale of the GE, I agree on the 3-4% ahead, but I think if they are that far ahead on the vote they'll keep London mayoralty.

    I wonder how the second preferences will go in the mayoral vote...
This discussion has been closed.