Comprehensive Schools were the Brexit of their day. Although officially the Tory Party had some pro-grammar school policies, there was a consensus against them, led by an alliance of socialist experts and conservative parents.
Speaking of Mrs T quotes, here's a nice one from 1966: "Europe has become a cornerstone of our campaign. You will be aware of Mr. Heath's efforts to get us into the common market. Many of the difficulties facing us then no longer exist. Many of the Commonwealth problems have been solved. I believe together we could form a block with as much power as the USA or Russia."
Excuse a dim question but as a v infrequent gambler but political obsessive I am looking at Betfair but I don't quite get how it works - can someone explain briefly ?
Ask any question you want.
The blue "back" boxes are like a simple bet you'd place at a bookmaker.
The pink "lay" boxes are the *opposite* - when you lay, you are taking on the role of the bookie.
Thank you. So if I say lay Donald Trump at 3.65 I am inviting other users to accept those odds and potentially have to pay them if he did win?
Yep, exactly.
By laying, you're betting that Donald Trump *won't* become president.
If anyone other than Trump becomes POTUS you win your bet.
Thanks again. Am I right - It seems like one could both bet on him and lay him in such a way as to at worst get your money back whatever the outcome?
Sure - One of the main reasons betfair is so popular is that it allows punters to trade in and out of bets.
If you lay Donald trump now and his odds drift out (become longer) then you'll be able to back him again at the longer odds, getting your money back and guaranteeing a small profit when the market settles in November.
If you've laid him and his odds shorten, then you can back him again at the new odds to get back some of your money.
There's no way to guarantee that you won't lose money, unfortunately!
I read something the other day that said there are more Britons in Australia than in the 27 EU countries combined. No idea of it's truth.
So, there are more Poles in Germany than in the UK. I thought they were all here.
No that's not what it says. It says there are more Poles in Germany than any other nation of birth in Germany.
Nothing about more or less than the UK.
Amazing there are more than Turks
Well they do share a border.
There are many people who have immigrated to Germany from Poland who consider themselves to be of German heritage, mainly from those parts of Poland that used to be parts of Germany. Because of the dependence of German nationality on bloodline, many of them may actually be considered by the German authorities to be German, despite having been born in Poland.
Nevertheless, I doubt that the Poles outnumber the Turks in Germany. Large numbers of Turks immigrated to Germany during the 60s and 70s and mostly stayed there.
Turks would be more noticeable in Germany whilst Poles wouldn't, maybe it *feels* like Turks are more, polls often show people in Britain think Muslims make up 20% of the population when its much less.
Many Turkish Germans are second or third generation so wouldn't show up on "country of birth" statistics.
Excuse a dim question but as a v infrequent gambler but political obsessive I am looking at Betfair but I don't quite get how it works - can someone explain briefly ?
Ask any question you want.
The blue "back" boxes are like a simple bet you'd place at a bookmaker.
The pink "lay" boxes are the *opposite* - when you lay, you are taking on the role of the bookie.
Thank you. So if I say lay Donald Trump at 3.65 I am inviting other users to accept those odds and potentially have to pay them if he did win?
Yep, exactly.
By laying, you're betting that Donald Trump *won't* become president.
If anyone other than Trump becomes POTUS you win your bet.
Thanks again. Am I right - It seems like one could both bet on him and lay him in such a way as to at worst get your money back whatever the outcome?
Sure - One of the main reasons betfair is so popular is that it allows punters to trade in and out of bets.
If you lay Donald trump now and his odds drift out (become longer) then you'll be able to back him again at the longer odds, getting your money back and guaranteeing a small profit when the market settles in November.
If you've laid him and his odds shorten, then you can back him again at the new odds to get back some of your money.
There's no way to guarantee that you won't lose money, unfortunately!
I read something the other day that said there are more Britons in Australia than in the 27 EU countries combined. No idea of it's truth.
So, there are more Poles in Germany than in the UK. I thought they were all here.
No that's not what it says. It says there are more Poles in Germany than any other nation of birth in Germany.
Nothing about more or less than the UK.
Amazing there are more than Turks
Well they do share a border.
There are many people who have immigrated to Germany from Poland who consider themselves to be of German heritage, mainly from those parts of Poland that used to be parts of Germany. Because of the dependence of German nationality on bloodline, many of them may actually be considered by the German authorities to be German, despite having been born in Poland.
Nevertheless, I doubt that the Poles outnumber the Turks in Germany. Large numbers of Turks immigrated to Germany during the 60s and 70s and mostly stayed there.
Turks would be more noticeable in Germany whilst Poles wouldn't, maybe it *feels* like Turks are more, polls often show people in Britain think Muslims make up 20% of the population when its much less.
Many Turkish Germans are second or third generation so wouldn't show up on "country of birth" statistics.
There are no stupid questions. OK, let's take a specific example. I'll assume you mean "Betfair Exchange", which is a subdivision of Betfair.
At 00:44 the Betfair Exchange market for "Article 50 triggered date" gave these numbers for "During 2016"
Back
6.4: £20 6.6: £39 6.8: £23
Lay 9.4: £19 10.5: £28 11: £19
The "Back 6.8:£23" means that somebody is willing to cover a bet on Article 50 being triggered in 2016@6.8. So if you bet £23 and it is triggered in 2016, that person will give you £156.40 and he gets nothing. Why that number? Because 23 times 6.8 is £156.40. Conversely if it ISN'T triggered in 2016, that person keeps your £23 and you get nothing.
The "Lay 9.4: £19" means that somebody is willing to bet on Article 50 being triggered in 2016@9.4. So if you cover that £19 and it ISN'T triggered in 2016, you get to keep that £19 and the other person gets nothing. Conversely if it IS triggered in 2016, you have to give that person £178.60 and you get nothing. Why that number? Because 19 times 9.4 is £178.60.
Is that understandable?
[Everybody else: have I made a mistake here? I think I have it right]
Stephen Bush @stephenkb 24m24 minutes ago Jeremy Corbyn and Katy Clark both nominated Hillary Benn for the deputy leadership. It's been a long nine years.
There are no stupid questions. OK, let's take a specific example. I'll assume you mean "Betfair Exchange", which is a subdivision of Betfair.
At 00:44 the Betfair Exchange market for "Article 50 triggered date" gave these numbers for "During 2016"
Back
6.4: £20 6.6: £39 6.8: £23
Lay 9.4: £19 10.5: £28 11: £19
The "Back 6.8:£23" means that somebody is willing to cover a bet on Article 50 being triggered in 2016@6.8. So if you bet £23 and it is triggered in 2016, that person will give you £156.40 and he gets nothing. Why that number? Because 23 times 6.8 is £156.40. Conversely if it ISN'T triggered in 2016, that person keeps your £23 and you get nothing.
The "Lay 9.4: £19" means that somebody is willing to bet on Article 50 being triggered in 2016@9.4. So if you cover that £19 and it ISN'T triggered in 2016, you get to keep that £19 and the other person gets nothing. Conversely if it IS triggered in 2016, you have to give that person £178.60 and you get nothing. Why that number? Because 19 times 9.4 is £178.60.
Is that understandable?
[Everybody else: have I made a mistake here? I think I have it right]
Pretty good explanation - although I think you've made the same error that anybody who has ever calculated odds/winnings has made at some point - you've included the stake in with the winnings.
If you lay a bet at 9.4 for £19 and you win, you win £19. If you lay the same bet and it loses, you lose 8.4 x £19. Why 8.4? because it's 9.4-1.
"The "Lay 9.4: £19" means that somebody is willing to bet on Article 50 being triggered in 2016@9.4. So if you cover that £19 and it ISN'T triggered in 2016, you get to keep that £19 and the other person gets nothing. Conversely if it IS triggered in 2016, you have to give that person £178.60 and you get nothing. Why that number? Because 19 times 9.4 is £178.60."
In this example, if it is triggered, you have to give that person 19 times 8.4 = £159.60
The person on the other side of the bet gets their stake of £19 back AND you also give them £159.60.
Pretty good explanation - although I think you've made the same error that anybody who has ever calculated odds/winnings has made at some point - you've included the stake in with the winnings.
If you lay a bet at 9.4 for £19 and you win, you win £19. If you lay the same bet and it loses, you lose 8.4 x £19. Why 8.4? because it's 9.4-1.
The -1 is the stake.
Fair enough. I should have used the word "returns" (which includes the stake) instead.
"The "Lay 9.4: £19" means that somebody is willing to bet on Article 50 being triggered in 2016@9.4. So if you cover that £19 and it ISN'T triggered in 2016, you get to keep that £19 and the other person gets nothing. Conversely if it IS triggered in 2016, you have to give that person £178.60 and you get nothing. Why that number? Because 19 times 9.4 is £178.60."
In this example, if it is triggered, you have to give that person 19 times 8.4 = £159.60
The person on the other side of the bet gets their stake of £19 back AND you also give them £159.60.
So to phrase it slightly differently. thus "If it is triggered, that person has to get £178.60. That £178.60 is made up of £159.60 (which you provide), and £19 (which was their original stake, which you don't have to provide because they already have)"
"The "Lay 9.4: £19" means that somebody is willing to bet on Article 50 being triggered in 2016@9.4. So if you cover that £19 and it ISN'T triggered in 2016, you get to keep that £19 and the other person gets nothing. Conversely if it IS triggered in 2016, you have to give that person £178.60 and you get nothing. Why that number? Because 19 times 9.4 is £178.60."
In this example, if it is triggered, you have to give that person 19 times 8.4 = £159.60
The person on the other side of the bet gets their stake of £19 back AND you also give them £159.60.
So to phrase it slightly differently. thus "If it is triggered, that person has to get £178.60. That £178.60 is made up of £159.60 (which you provide), and £19 (which was their original stake, which you don't have to provide because they already have)"
[Modified as per Pong's point below]. Let's take a specific example. I'll assume you mean "Betfair Exchange", which is a subdivision of Betfair.
At 00:44 the Betfair Exchange market for "Article 50 triggered date" gave these numbers for "During 2016"
Back
6.4: £20 6.6: £39 6.8: £23
Lay 9.4: £19 10.5: £28 11: £19
The "Back 6.8:£23" means that somebody is willing to cover a bet on Article 50 being triggered in 2016@6.8. So if you bet £23 and it is triggered in 2016, you will get £156.40 (because £23 times 6.8 is £156.40). That £156.40 is made up of £23 (which you provided when you made the bet) and £133.40 (which is provided by that person). Conversely if it ISN'T triggered in 2016, that person keeps your £23 and you get nothing.
The "Lay 9.4: £19" means that somebody is willing to bet on Article 50 being triggered in 2016@9.4. So if you cover that £19 and it ISN'T triggered in 2016, you get to keep that £19 and the other person gets nothing. Conversely if it IS triggered in 2016, that person will get £178.60 (because £19 times 9.4 is £178.60). That £178.60 is made up of £19 (which he provided when he made the bet) and £159.60 (which is provided by you).
Comments
Speaking of Mrs T quotes, here's a nice one from 1966: "Europe has become a cornerstone of our campaign. You will be aware of Mr. Heath's efforts to get us into the common market. Many of the difficulties facing us then no longer exist. Many of the Commonwealth problems have been solved. I believe together we could form a block with as much power as the USA or Russia."
If you lay Donald trump now and his odds drift out (become longer) then you'll be able to back him again at the longer odds, getting your money back and guaranteeing a small profit when the market settles in November.
If you've laid him and his odds shorten, then you can back him again at the new odds to get back some of your money.
There's no way to guarantee that you won't lose money, unfortunately!
Clinton 76%
Trump 24%
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/upshot/presidential-polls-forecast.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=b-lede-package-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0
https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/737662384421101569/photo/1
There are no stupid questions. OK, let's take a specific example. I'll assume you mean "Betfair Exchange", which is a subdivision of Betfair.
At 00:44 the Betfair Exchange market for "Article 50 triggered date" gave these numbers for "During 2016"
Back
6.4: £20
6.6: £39
6.8: £23
Lay
9.4: £19
10.5: £28
11: £19
The "Back 6.8:£23" means that somebody is willing to cover a bet on Article 50 being triggered in 2016@6.8. So if you bet £23 and it is triggered in 2016, that person will give you £156.40 and he gets nothing. Why that number? Because 23 times 6.8 is £156.40. Conversely if it ISN'T triggered in 2016, that person keeps your £23 and you get nothing.
The "Lay 9.4: £19" means that somebody is willing to bet on Article 50 being triggered in 2016@9.4. So if you cover that £19 and it ISN'T triggered in 2016, you get to keep that £19 and the other person gets nothing. Conversely if it IS triggered in 2016, you have to give that person £178.60 and you get nothing. Why that number? Because 19 times 9.4 is £178.60.
Is that understandable?
[Everybody else: have I made a mistake here? I think I have it right]
Jeremy Corbyn and Katy Clark both nominated Hillary Benn for the deputy leadership. It's been a long nine years.
If you lay a bet at 9.4 for £19 and you win, you win £19.
If you lay the same bet and it loses, you lose 8.4 x £19. Why 8.4? because it's 9.4-1.
The -1 is the stake. In this example, if it is triggered, you have to give that person 19 times 8.4 = £159.60
The person on the other side of the bet gets their stake of £19 back AND you also give them £159.60.
[Modified as per Pong's point below]. Let's take a specific example. I'll assume you mean "Betfair Exchange", which is a subdivision of Betfair.
At 00:44 the Betfair Exchange market for "Article 50 triggered date" gave these numbers for "During 2016"
Back
6.4: £20
6.6: £39
6.8: £23
Lay
9.4: £19
10.5: £28
11: £19
The "Back 6.8:£23" means that somebody is willing to cover a bet on Article 50 being triggered in 2016@6.8. So if you bet £23 and it is triggered in 2016, you will get £156.40 (because £23 times 6.8 is £156.40). That £156.40 is made up of £23 (which you provided when you made the bet) and £133.40 (which is provided by that person). Conversely if it ISN'T triggered in 2016, that person keeps your £23 and you get nothing.
The "Lay 9.4: £19" means that somebody is willing to bet on Article 50 being triggered in 2016@9.4. So if you cover that £19 and it ISN'T triggered in 2016, you get to keep that £19 and the other person gets nothing. Conversely if it IS triggered in 2016, that person will get £178.60 (because £19 times 9.4 is £178.60). That £178.60 is made up of £19 (which he provided when he made the bet) and £159.60 (which is provided by you).