Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » A 20/1 tip to start off 2017
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » A 20/1 tip to start off 2017
Betway have some specials up on what will happen to UKIP in 2017, the one that caught my attention was Nigel Farage to end 2017 as UKIP leader at 20/1, much like a persistent rash, Nigel Farage regularly returns as the next UKIP leader. Ladbrokes make it 3/1 that Nigel Farage will be the next UKIP leader, so by my reckoning the 20/1 on Farage to end 2017 as UKIP leader is value and here’s why.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
The first first of the new year, too
My non-political fun bet at this very early stage of 2017 is based on the highly charismatic Rory McIlroy returning to the scene big time as the world's top golfer by winning at least one of the four major tournaments and accordingly going on to win SPOTY 2017, where Ladbrokes have him on offer at stand-out odds of 33/1. After the Olympics last year, 2017 is likely to produce fewer individual star performers and Andy Murray notwithstanding, will therefore provides a better opportunity for someone of Rory's ilk to collect this award. As ever, DYOR.
Reading the name Nigel Farage next to 'leader' before my new years eve is over promises a good year
Firstly it would soften the image of a bar room bully boy. Secondly, it would blunt the attacks from the 'progressives' whose ad-hominem attacks will become more difficult. Can't be seen to be misogynist. Suzanne Evans would have fitted the bill. A male Scouser is just too easy a target.
But I still think Mrs May's "Brexit means Brexit" makes a Ukip revival in the short tem unlikely.
Edit: Mr Eagles, I have to agree that 20/1 is a long price.
Personally, I think if we win the America's Cup, Ben Ainslie will be in with a very good chance of winning SPOTY. He's in to 12-1, which I think is long if you think we'll win the America's Cup. But I don't know how good a chance we have of winning.
And on Prince Harry getting married, his brother's marriage was announced less than a year before it happened, though it did cross the new year. However, you'd think they'd need to be doing the planning now for an August wedding and I think there is the thorny issue of Ms Markle's faith to deal with too. So I think it's unlikely to be this year.
https://twitter.com/benjilanyado/status/815197186346647552/photo/1?ref_src=twsrc^tfw
Also he is strong where the Ducati package has traditionally been weak (corner speed) so even if he marginally improves that area and they retain their power advantage it could all come together.
This time next year I doubt Farage will be UKIP leader, he’s achieved his political aim and out grown the dwindling purple party, nothing less than supreme leader of Luxembourg will do.
Mr. Ace, not up on two-wheeled motorsport, but sounds interesting. Are those Betfair odds?
On-topic: bet sounds good, excepting I don't have a Betway account.
I largely agree with the reasoning. I do think it's odds against, but not 20/1.
And logical song's charts are good too. Globally, we've never had it so good and it's only our focus on every bit of bad news anywhere on the planet that prevents us from recognising it.
Very interesting graphs. Excluding monarchy (which isn't to do with being liberal) all the pointers to a much more liberal society end around 20%. I suspect these are now UKIPers. The interesting question is whether this 20% will continue its progress or whether it's now reached a reactionary hard core
"Monarchy still going strong! And nothing wrong with being an Anglican."
Is that what you got from the charts?
I think Farage is very happy doing what he is doing, which is sounding off in the right wing press, annoying Theresa May, hanging out with white supremacists in the US and being fawned on by extremely rich reactionaries. He is done with the political process for a while. He'll only return when he starts getting less coverage. I doubt that will be in 2017.
Happy New Year, looking forward to your Oscar tips!
Prof Frank McDonough
1 January 1909. The first payments of old-age pensions were made. People over 70, who qualified, received 5 shillings (25p) a week. https://t.co/bFq6L0LjnC
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-38481521
Have to wait a few weeks to find out if anything happened in Germany.
MotoGP betting is interesting as the market is always massively distorted by the presence of Rossi who will attract bets to such a degree that his odds never have to offer value. That sometimes makes other riders under-valued to some degree.
2016 was a weird year with an anomalously high number of wet races so the form book isn't a great guide to 2017.
Interesting note on Rossi.
O/T: Was that a Kremlinbot on the last thread?
"Easy to see why the reactionaries of the alt. right are angry. Despite 2016 they are losing the culture war.
Happy New Year, looking forward to your Oscar tips!"
That's an interesting and comforting thought and the first green shoot of optimism for the New Year.....
...and a Happy New Year to you
I have to say, however, I don't see there being value in Lorenzo at 5-1. If you think that bike can compete for the title I'd suggest backing Lorenzo's teammate and old foe Andrea Dovizioso at 22-1 with Coral.
Personally I find it hard to see past Marquez winning again. His teammate isn't a threat and I'd expect Honda to have improved the bike on last season. Vinales did very well last season, but he needs to get used to the Yamaha. Could Rossi do it? It would be nice, but I think his time is up.
As a complete outside shot, I wonder if Cal Crutchlow at 80-1 with Sky Bet is worth a punt? He was going toe to toe with the factory bikes last season and did get a win in the dry (albeit at the tricky Philip Island).
On a liberal forum I read there are a few Turks who are beginning to realise the problem is Islam and just how warped their secular nation has become. In a nod to SeanT, one hopes our liberal fools realise the same over here before we too suffer attacks of this kind on our way of life.
As an aside, though, I don't see what fewer Anglicans has to do with liberalism. Anglicanism is very liberal.
https://twitter.com/regsprecher/status/815262900608765952
(calling Moses)
Anglicanism is mostly liberal, I agree, though the growing congregations tend to be on the evangelical wing.
"Though some in the Lords still opposed pensions as ‘thinly disguised outdoor relief’ and others still favoured a contributory pension as ideologically more respectable, the 1908 Old Age Pensions Bill found widespread support..."
http://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/SN04817
It would probably take at the least a fairly clean Brexit, Banks and his money moving on, and a big enough scandal within the party. None of those seems unlikely, but there's the possibility they'll just keep going anyway, even if it is a sort of tiny continuity Ukip. On the whole there probably isn't value there. Agree the 20/1 on Farage looks good though.
PA
#Breaking The Queen will not attend a New Year's Day church service at Sandringham because of a lingering heavy cold
For Lorenzo to win he needs Marquez to have 3 (or ideally 4 DNFs) and for the Ducati to be competitive at corner speed tracks. We know it can win at tracks which are basically 2 or 3 drag strips connected by hairpins (Sepang and whatever that piece of shit in Austria is called). The chances of all that happening are less than 50% but more than 20% which is why I think 5/1 is value.
#OnThisDay 1942: 26 Allied nations sign declaration to create international peacekeeping organisation, the @UN. https://t.co/R1QOqLEhpR
If you read what I wrote, I acknowledge the right of the individual to make poor lifestyle choices - there is however the notion that as a society we all pay for those poor choices through the lack of healthcare provision to those in genuine need.
The sovereignty of the individual is fine but it could only be unlimited in a society with unlimited resources. In a finite world, resources have to be prioritised - it's not unreasonable (I would argue) for the state to seek to inform and educate people on health and for society as a whole to consider whether those who, in the face of that information, choose to make lifestyle choices which negatively impact on their health (and the health of those around them) shouldn't have to take some measure of responsibility for their actions.
Infinity plus one is almost the first way I was introduced to multiple infinities and transfinites.
It went something like this: when you have an uncountably large number, you can prove it's the same as another uncountably large number if you can map one to the other on an exactly one-to-one correspondence (the same you you can prove the equality of two numbers: the number of people in the theatre and the number of tickets sold by being able to map one to the other on a one-to-one basis).
You can prove the infinite set N of natural numbers (1,2,3,4,...) has the same (infinite) number of members as the set W of whole numbers (0,1,2,3,4...), even though there is exactly one more member of the latter (ie "0"), because you can map one to another by the process n=n+1
(ie map each member of the set of whole numbers to the n+1th member of the set of natural numbers; as they go on for ever, there is a one-to-one correspondence).
That is: infinity = infinity+1
You can carry out the same process for any number greater than 1 in the n=n+1 mapping (ie n=n=377727) and, indeed, for any number x where x is finite.
You can even do it where x is infinite, because the set Z of integers (..., -3, -2, -1, 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, ...) can be mapped one to one to the preceding one by mapping all negative numbers of Z to odd positive numbers of W and all positive members of Z to even members of W. Or, to put it another way, infinity plus (the same) infinity = infinity; or infinity x 2 = infinity.
By expansion, you can substitute any finite number in for that "2".
You can keep playing around like this until you get to the set of all Real numbers (ie including irrational numbers) which cannot, under any mapping, be mapped one-to-one. There are therefore more members of the set R than the set Z and you have a different and greater infinity. Arithmetically, 2 to the power of infinity (where "infinity" substitutes for the transfinite number equating to the smallest infinity and the infinity we've been discussing) equals this greater infinity.
As bracing as the chilly weather outside but far more enjoyable.
Happy New Year you lot.
Ive just done some detective work and 'Flag' and 'Off topic' can only be seen by clicking your own symbol. So even if you're in the habit of doing that you are the only one likely to see it. it's like a private rebuke. So I'm thinking 'what kind of a nutter does that' and the answer is there are loads of them!
I'm starting to wonder whether this is the sort of place you make your excuses and back out of quietly!!
Also: it can be fairly easy to press the 'flag' and 'Off topic' links easily, especially when 'Quote' was in a similar position. I've definitely clicked on them accidentally many more times than I meant to.
Or perhaps that's just my lack of dexterity.
And now they're being named and their confidential witness statements handed over to those they blew the whistle on. Who'd come forward now?
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/trojan-horse-school-witnesses-fear-for-safety-as-names-released-p5dmm3hwn
It should be seen through the prism of internal Labour Party politics, not Brexit. It's a fairly easy area where Lab MPs can disagree with the leadership. With luck, it will escalate and spread to other areas.
An interesting point is why there isn't more of a backlash against Merkel in Germany - the Berlin attack seems to have had virtually no impact in the German polls, and the general 2016 trend has been for a modest CDU recovery. I think it's to some extent because the terror attacks are horrible but actually rare, and none of them related to Syrians, so the obvious speculation that ISIS would use the situation to bring in bombers seems to have been wrong. In terms of personal safety, the risk of being blown up by a terrorist remains close to zero, appalling though it is when it happens, so it's still a nasty news item rather than something experienced as personal menace. Germany's become a very stable country for obvious historical reasons, and populist parties struggle to get past the 15-20% available to the extremes in any country.
BBC Archive
It's #popularvideosbbcarchivepostedin2016 (sure to trend) time! First up: clackers from 05/10/1971 https://t.co/X1eDIKnR18
Just re-watching The Crown - some cracking political stuff over the manoeuvres to get Churchill to stand down. The second episode, where he more than rises to the occasion of delivering the king's eulogy to Eden's evident disappointment, while Queen Mary offers her grand daughter the deepest of curtseys then looks Elizabeth straight in the eye as she rises, is great TV.
Are you a Starmerite or a Jezzer over Lab and immigration?
Also the first of the lanyado charts ends in 2014 and while it shows a liberal consensus on three hand picked issues has developed, not that it holds on all issues. A question about attitudes to freedom of movement or Islam might not show a similar trend.
Roger said:
Logial Song
Very interesting graphs. Excluding monarchy (which isn't to do with being liberal) all the pointers to a much more liberal society end around 20%. I suspect these are now UKIPers. The interesting question is whether this 20% will continue its progress or whether it's now reached a reactionary hard core
"I think it's cyclical more than progression and regression."
There's no evidence in the graph of any significant cycles over the 30+ years.
In my opinion, it is a big cycle.
When society is faced with hardship and privation, strong organisation and 'rules', typified by those found in world religions, are to be commonly found. This is imo because they are rules of survival. If you take the Israelites in the OT, a nomadic people struggling to find the promised land, they had very strong rules. No men sleeping with men, but also no eating shellfish or cloven-hooved animals, strict marital fidelity, and all the others. You can argue these rules were sent by God to help maintain the race, or argue the other way, they were arrived at by trial and error, and were then given 'God's' seal of approval, depending on your spiritual beliefs.
Then society gets rich, and fat, with no immediate hardships, and the rules of society become less important, especially the old morality. People forget even the folk memory of hardship and privation - take the baby boomer generation as an example. The importance of 'the tribe' is totally forgotten. As a consequence, what happens is decline, those old Victorian fears of 'degeneration' - and what they would have recognised as such is all around us. Then in many instances you get collapse, and so the cycle continues.
Therefore I don't really look upon most attitudes to minorities as representing progress - unless I feel they represent a genuine increase in the universal human virtues of kindness and tolerance. Which stuff like people being taken to court for not baking a cake obviously isn't. That stuff is just fashion - another turn of the circle.
It's unlikely that attitudes towards immigration or crime and punishment or human rights laws have shown the same progression. And, of course, public opinion became more eurosceptic over the same period (not that that can easily be fitted into a left/right, liberal/conservative axis).
Let's hope click-bait threads died with the first bong of the New Year.
It interesting that the Liberals appear to be supporting the various government prudery changes on what people can watch on TV and online.
May the new year bring health, wealth and prosperity to all, especially if 2017's winnings are anything like 2016's.
+1 for the comments about @AndyJS and his magic spreadsheet on the last thread, the man who will never have to buy himself a drink at PB gatherings ever again!
Less of an issue now that the quote button has gone.. grumble grumble.
Mr. Pubgoer, I remember others saying likewise.
2,900 would be more accurate