Indeed it was a very profitable election for common sense punters: all the polls were going in the same direction and Rutte's tough stand against Erdogan was a clear vote winner.
For Le Pen, current second round polls are way out of the margin of error either against Macron or against FIllon. However, before betting the farm on a Le Pen defeat, I would wait for the impact of next week's debate.
The TV debates had a massive impact both on the right-wing and left-wing primaries, so next Monday's debate sould be a turning point. (the debate will only feature the five "big" candidates: Le Pen, Macron, Fillon, Hamon and Mélenchon).
Not clear to me why lib Dems should be down at 1.12 to win without Labour. Last time they came 5th in a three horse race for second. Has their polling really improved all that much since 2015?
I've laid a little at 1.14 ish and also put two quid on greens coming second again at 54-1.
Good Morning Fellow PBers Worldwide And In Australia ....
You know who you are ....
.................................................
Meanwhile I note FPT that @TSE linked to a site that may not be named where yours truly had a historic honourable mention that indicated that @Plato and I should share a room, presumably to exchange notes on our respective pussy recollections.
I fear this feline soiree may never happen. A lost opportunity no doubt.
The narrative against the facts. The assumption that the narrative would win was driven by a media fascinated by Geert and his right wing ravings. There is also no doubt that his anti EU rants also made him so much more exciting for a certain part of the media and indeed for some punters.
Polling remains an inexact art rather than a science but results well outside the range of probability are undoubtedly an opportunity for the alert punter. I do believe we are seeing a repeat of this phenomenon in France.
These claims by Trump are increasingly bizarre and damaging. There will come points in his Presidency when he will ask the people to take him on trust, probably on very important matters such as war or peace. And no one will know whether to believe him or not.
(1) France has had a much less fun time of Euro membership than the Netherlands, and the EU is less popular there. With a majority of PVV voters thinking the Euro a good thing, the key plank of their platform was anti-Islam. While anti-Islam is a major part of the FN's appeal, anti-EU sentiment is also important.
(2) But don't over-estimate French Euroscepticism. While I have no data beyond the EU's own Eurobaromoter, the Euro is still supported 2:1 in France (as opposed to 4:1 in the Netherlands). This means Marine's Euroscepticism is not as much of a draw as British punters think.
(3) France has suffered two devastating terrorist attacks in the last three years. Being seen as good on security probably goes a lot further there than in other countries. (This could play badly for Macron.)
(4) France's problems with Muslim integration are not new.
(5) The FN still struggles with its historic issues of antisemitism. I don't think a Dutch Jew would have a problem voting for Geert Wilders. I think French Jews would struggle to vote for MLP.
(6) Remember that back in December 2015 when the FN topped the polls in the first round of the French Regional elections that Paris, Lyon and the French Overseas territories did not vote. Those three places are by far the weakest for the FN.
All together, I still struggle to see MLP getting more than 35% against Macron, or 40% against Fillon in the second round. Given the FN has - like the VVD - repeatedly underperformed its poll scores in actual elections, I think it is entirely possible they will end up on just 22-23% in the first round. I also wonder if Fillon's... errr... issues have led to shy Republicains. (And it's also possible the FN will have a late fade like the PVV.) For that reason, I continue to think the market is underestimating the chance of a Fillon vs Macron final two. Bet accordingly.
"I hope that quite a number of people who follow the site took the above tip and made some money."
Yes, congrats and thanks must go to Alastair for so succinctly pointing out what was in retrospect a near certain winner, yet prior to his advice half decent odds against prices had been widely available.
“It’s like we’ve forgotten we went through a scientific revolution,” says Robbert Dijkgraaf, director of the Institute for Advanced Study. “Facts can be shown with experiments. There’s a systematic way you can learn about the world.” Stating the obvious seems to be necessary where Trump is concerned even though he won't be listening.
Salmond in the FT - quick tour de policy - no currency union, “You can’t do something which the other side could have a veto over,” - No? Really?
Also repeats the much cited poll growth - which the FT obligingly corrects....
On the last independence campaign
“We started at 28 per cent and ended up at 45 per cent * . . . We just started from too low a base.” * These figures may require clarification: the 28 per cent support for independence — recorded in one poll in October 2012 — was artificially low because one in five respondents were undecided. When Don’t Knows were excluded, the Yes campaign’s support was 34 per cent. Other polls in 2012 put support for independence as high as 45 per cent, where it ultimately finished. It is true that support for Yes did increase during 2014 — from around 40 per cent to 44 per cent, according to poll averages. That came as many undecided voters made up their minds. It was an achievement, though not quite on the scale that Mr Salmond suggests.
And no one will know whether to believe him or not.
That seems improbable.
By that stage we'll all know not to believe him.
The snag will come if by some fluke in ten thousand he's correct.
it’s a sort of bizarre parody of the boy who cried wolf, isn’t it!
However, going by last night’s BBC TV he’s still believed in his ‘heartland’. There were chants, for example of ‘Lock her up” when Hilary Clinton’s name was mentioned.
I was in Aberdeen yesterday. Chatting to the taxi driver on the way in to town I was amazed that he didn't even mention IndyRef2. The only folk who mentioned it all day were English.
(1) France has had a much less fun time of Euro membership than the Netherlands, and the EU is less popular there. With a majority of PVV voters thinking the Euro a good thing, the key plank of their platform was anti-Islam. While anti-Islam is a major part of the FN's appeal, anti-EU sentiment is also important.
(2) But don't over-estimate French Euroscepticism. While I have no data beyond the EU's own Eurobaromoter, the Euro is still supported 2:1 in France (as opposed to 4:1 in the Netherlands). This means Marine's Euroscepticism is not as much of a draw as British punters think.
(3) France has suffered two devastating terrorist attacks in the last three years. Being seen as good on security probably goes a lot further there than in other countries. (This could play badly for Macron.)
(4) France's problems with Muslim integration are not new.
(5) The FN still struggles with its historic issues of antisemitism. I don't think a Dutch Jew would have a problem voting for Geert Wilders. I think French Jews would struggle to vote for MLP.
(6) Remember that back in December 2015 when the FN topped the polls in the first round of the French Regional elections that Paris, Lyon and the French Overseas territories did not vote. Those three places are by far the weakest for the FN.
All together, I still struggle to see MLP getting more than 35% against Macron, or 40% against Fillon in the second round. Given the FN has - like the VVD - repeatedly underperformed its poll scores in actual elections, I think it is entirely possible they will end up on just 22-23% in the first round. I also wonder if Fillon's... errr... issues have led to shy Republicains. (And it's also possible the FN will have a late fade like the PVV.) For that reason, I continue to think the market is underestimating the chance of a Fillon vs Macron final two. Bet accordingly.
"France has had a much less fun time of Euro membership than the Netherlands, and the EU is less popular there."
I'm surprised you say this since I always thought the CAP was introduced especially to maintain the French and in particular the French farmers in the manner to which they had grown accustomed. I suppose the bottom line is that the EU has been very good news for all the six founding members of the EEC (as was) by largely protecting their specific respective interests, whereas by the time we joined the club, we had to accept the rules as drawn for the benefit of others and were even forced to hand them some icing on the cake for good measure, like giving away our fisheries, etc. Finally, by 23 June last year, the British people woke up to this fact and voted accordingly.
One very smart poster also pointed out that the PVV had underperformed its poll scores at each of the last three elections.
Others pointed out that the Turkey/Nazi spat came at a very convenient time for Rutte as well!
But one poster assured me that was good for the PVV and bad for the VVD.
I think it will help Merkel as well though the effect may have worn off somewhat by October. Unless Erdogan pulls out of the refugee deal and Germany is flooded with another million refugees/migrants this summer.
@pulpstar and @rcs1000 put me onto this. The odds were completely out of whack with polling and remained so up to the last minute.
Political betting markets show where bettors want to put their money, no more no less. Sometimes bettors are insightful and sometimes they aren't. There is always the danger of fighting the last war.
These claims by Trump are increasingly bizarre and damaging. There will come points in his Presidency when he will ask the people to take him on trust, probably on very important matters such as war or peace. And no one will know whether to believe him or not.
The Dutch election results are being misinterpreted by many commentators. It was essentially a setback/defeat for the 2 governing parties, Mark Rutte's People's Party for Freedom and Democracy (VVD) and the Labour Party (PvdA), respectively. As commonly occurs with 2 coalition parties forming a government, the lesser party fared worse.
The PVV, CDA, D66 and GL all gained seats and vote share, so it was not a defeat for Wilders, who now leads the 2nd largest party and effectively becomes the LOTO, as the VVD will have to work with the CDA and D66 parties (& 1 other party) to form a multi-party coalition government.
It is true that the PVV didn't do as well as predicted a few weeks ago, but Rutte's neo-Nazi posturing vis-a-vis the Turks in the last few days probably helped the VVD to claw back some support from the PVV and not lose as may seats as their coalition partners.
Morning. Good call from @AlastairMeeks and others here on the Dutch election. Not the first time in recent memory that the betting and the polling have been out of line. Well done to those who made money!
@pulpstar and @rcs1000 put me onto this. The odds were completely out of whack with polling and remained so up to the last minute.
Political betting markets show where bettors want to put their money, no more no less. Sometimes bettors are insightful and sometimes they aren't. There is always the danger of fighting the last war.
Well done on your successful and well reasoned bet.
It must be remembered that MOST punters follow the money, they will back a horse because it's favourite. It would be easy to assume that political punters are shrewder than racing punters but there is no evidence to support that, very few will make long term profits. Most political punters are swayed by their own views in the same way that the hugely supported Man Utd and Liverpool are consistently overbet, they simply bet on what they want to happen, the odds are irrelevant.
These claims by Trump are increasingly bizarre and damaging. There will come points in his Presidency when he will ask the people to take him on trust, probably on very important matters such as war or peace. And no one will know whether to believe him or not.
The Dutch election results are being misinterpreted by many commentators. It was essentially a setback/defeat for the 2 governing parties, Mark Rutte's People's Party for Freedom and Democracy (VVD) and the Labour Party (PvdA), respectively. As commonly occurs with 2 coalition parties forming a government, the lesser party fared worse.
The PVV, CDA, D66 and GL all gained seats and vote share, so it was not a defeat for Wilders, who now leads the 2nd largest party and effectively becomes the LOTO, as the VVD will have to work with the CDA and D66 parties (& 1 other party) to form a multi-party coalition government.
It is true that the PVV didn't do as well as predicted a few weeks ago, but Rutte's neo-Nazi posturing vis-a-vis the Turks in the last few days probably helped the VVD to claw back some support from the PVV and not lose as may seats as their coalition partners.
Wilders party has 20 seats and is in second place, however CDA and D66 both have 19 seats and there are also two more parties with 14 each. So to call Wilders 'effectively the LOTO' is overstating things. He has 20 seats in a 150 seat parliament and is pretty much marginalised.
The hateful right have a meltdown because they're not allowed to spread untruths uncorrected. I wonder why.
It shows how intellectually bankrupt the left wing is in Britain at the moment when their main attack on O'Neil, former member of the Revolutionary Communist Party and journalist for Living Marxism, is to accuse them of being part of the 'hateful right'. I assume this qualifies Alastair as a fully fledged member of the 'Braindead Left'
It wasn't unreasonable for the PVV to be favouritess up until the last couple of weeks, as they were generally leading in the polls, but the refusal of the (mostly UK-driven) markets to change their minds until the last minute does reveal something interesting.
I could see that a lot of the exact same people who'd made money on Trump/Brexit were backing the PVV all the way through, presumably assuming that their "strategy" of backing the populists, irrespective of what the polls said, might pay off again. Some useless coverage in certain British newspapers probably helped as well.
At Ladbrokes, we were also taking a lot of money on multiples involving Wilders and Le Pen to be successful, which discouraged us from pushing the PVV out to a more realistic price.
There were a few people taking advantage of the consequently generous prices on the VVD (and on Wilders NOT to be PM), but not enough to "correct" the market. I'm pretty sure we'll see the same pattern in France and it'll be interesting to see what happens, particularly in the two weeks between R1 and R2, assuming Le Pen is one of the final two.
On topic - Wilders was hyped to a ridiculous extent by the UK media, which was looking for a story to continue the 2016 theme of it's all falling apart. Punters did not do their own research.
The hateful right have a meltdown because they're not allowed to spread untruths uncorrected. I wonder why.
It shows how intellectually bankrupt the left wing is in Britain at the moment when their main attack on O'Neil, former member of the Revolutionary Communist Party and journalist for Living Marxism, is to accuse them of being part of the 'hateful right'. I assume this qualifies Alastair as a fully fledged member of the 'Braindead Left'
People change. Oddly, those on the extremes are the ones that oscillate most wildly. Mr O'Neill seems to have mutated into a gun-for-hire willing to defend all the most unattractive arguments of the saloon bar right.
Indeed it was a very profitable election for common sense punters: all the polls were going in the same direction and Rutte's tough stand against Erdogan was a clear vote winner.
For Le Pen, current second round polls are way out of the margin of error either against Macron or against FIllon. However, before betting the farm on a Le Pen defeat, I would wait for the impact of next week's debate.
The TV debates had a massive impact both on the right-wing and left-wing primaries, so next Monday's debate sould be a turning point. (the debate will only feature the five "big" candidates: Le Pen, Macron, Fillon, Hamon and Mélenchon).
Good thread! I think I was actually the first to point out Wilders' overpricing here, though I tipped Green Left as good value at 50, which turned out wrong. Anyway, on the main issue we collectively got it right, and I agree with the other posters who say that the same pattern is repeating in France. People betting on Le Pen don't understand the two-round system or they don't understand French voters, or both. I don't usually bet more than small amounts for amusement, but if Le Pen wins I'll be £300 poorer: I'm not having any sleepless nights over it.
A warning, though, that Alastair has made before.Le :Pen will lose, but we can't yet be quite sure that Macron will win. The debate may well clarify things, as Chris says, but momentum is very important in these multi-candidate things (rather like US primaries) and the media like to play the "shock success at debate" card. If Fillon or conceivably Harmon do well, the odds could change.
The hateful right have a meltdown because they're not allowed to spread untruths uncorrected. I wonder why.
The point about Britain's libel laws is entirely valid - though given their existence, the stupidity of the protagonists in this spat is remarkable.
(edit) & yes, both credit & thanks for your Netherlands tip.
I don't see that there is much of a point here. If you read the case report rather than the Speccie's highly misleading synopsis, there is no doubt that the defamation was grave and the withdrawal inadequate. The relevant law isn't medieval, it is mainly Victorian or later and got a nice update in 2013; and the fact that the medium was twitter, rather than a newspaper or graffiti, makes little to no difference at all.
I echo thanks to Mr Meeks over the Netherlands. Sadly I made the numpty error of the year by assuming that Rutte next PM was a good proxy for VVD win, so am out of my money for months.
These claims by Trump are increasingly bizarre and damaging. There will come points in his Presidency when he will ask the people to take him on trust, probably on very important matters such as war or peace. And no one will know whether to believe him or not.
The Dutch election results are being misinterpreted by many commentators. It was essentially a setback/defeat for the 2 governing parties, Mark Rutte's People's Party for Freedom and Democracy (VVD) and the Labour Party (PvdA), respectively. As commonly occurs with 2 coalition parties forming a government, the lesser party fared worse.
The PVV, CDA, D66 and GL all gained seats and vote share, so it was not a defeat for Wilders, who now leads the 2nd largest party and effectively becomes the LOTO, as the VVD will have to work with the CDA and D66 parties (& 1 other party) to form a multi-party coalition government.
It is true that the PVV didn't do as well as predicted a few weeks ago, but Rutte's neo-Nazi posturing vis-a-vis the Turks in the last few days probably helped the VVD to claw back some support from the PVV and not lose as may seats as their coalition partners.
Wilders party has 20 seats and is in second place, however CDA and D66 both have 19 seats and there are also two more parties with 14 each. So to call Wilders 'effectively the LOTO' is overstating things. He has 20 seats in a 150 seat parliament and is pretty much marginalised.
The VVD will have to work with the CDA and D66 parties to form a coalition, so the 2 parties each with 19 seats won't form part of the opposition.
Indeed it was a very profitable election for common sense punters: all the polls were going in the same direction and Rutte's tough stand against Erdogan was a clear vote winner.
For Le Pen, current second round polls are way out of the margin of error either against Macron or against FIllon. However, before betting the farm on a Le Pen defeat, I would wait for the impact of next week's debate.
The TV debates had a massive impact both on the right-wing and left-wing primaries, so next Monday's debate sould be a turning point. (the debate will only feature the five "big" candidates: Le Pen, Macron, Fillon, Hamon and Mélenchon).
Good thread! I think I was actually the first to point out Wilders' overpricing here, though I tipped Green Left as good value at 50, which turned out wrong. Anyway, on the main issue we collectively got it right, and I agree with the other posters who say that the same pattern is repeating in France. People betting on Le Pen don't understand the two-round system or they don't understand French voters, or both. I don't usually bet more than small amounts for amusement, but if Le Pen wins I'll be £300 poorer: I'm not having any sleepless nights over it.
A warning, though, that Alastair has made before.Le :Pen will lose, but we can't yet be quite sure that Macron will win. The debate may well clarify things, as Chris says, but momentum is very important in these multi-candidate things (rather like US primaries) and the media like to play the "shock success at debate" card. If Fillon or conceivably Harmon do well, the odds could change.
If you think Hamon has a realistic chance of making the last two, then you should not be laying Le Pen.
I echo thanks to Mr Meeks over the Netherlands. Sadly I made the numpty error of the year by assuming that Rutte next PM was a good proxy for VVD win, so am out of my money for months.
You'll get it back eventually.
@rcs1000 Put me on to the dutch opportunity, Meeks' piece and foresight on the Erdogan reaction encouraged me to up my stake.
Note that the polls were around 6 seats wrong for the VVD. That certainly doesn't justify PVV favouritism as there was for ages, but it does imply the rags were too long. Particularly the CDA on election night - they are a party with a strong history who surely shouldn't have been 100-1 before the exits.
The hateful right have a meltdown because they're not allowed to spread untruths uncorrected. I wonder why.
It shows how intellectually bankrupt the left wing is in Britain at the moment when their main attack on O'Neil, former member of the Revolutionary Communist Party and journalist for Living Marxism, is to accuse them of being part of the 'hateful right'. I assume this qualifies Alastair as a fully fledged member of the 'Braindead Left'
People change. Oddly, those on the extremes are the ones that oscillate most wildly. Mr O'Neill seems to have mutated into a gun-for-hire willing to defend all the most unattractive arguments of the saloon bar right.
Actually if you go back and read what he was writing back at the time of LM he really hadn't changed at all. It was the Moonbat who was accusing him of being right wing back then just because he didn't conform to the nice safe soft left concensus.
Mr. Choose, it'd be interesting, if very laborious, to have someone do an analysis of what happens if you lay every big team in the Premier League for every match.
Mr. Choose, it'd be interesting, if very laborious, to have someone do an analysis of what happens if you lay every big team in the Premier League for every match.
god I'm drunk and tired after writing an entire chapter of a thriller, having TOO MUCH SEX last night, and now watching the enervating tedium of ARRIVAL. I had so much sex I have crocked my knee
Clearly it's too late to save my knee, or my liver, but can someone tell me whether it's worth pursuing ARRIVAL?
It just feels like some Portuguese speaking woman talking in the rain to allegorical migrants, right now. YAWNFEST
No. Tedium continues with boring, predictable 'surprise' ending.
Arrival is a great film. For the thinking viewer. Best watched sober, however.
It really didn't require that much thinking. I like a slower, contemplative movie, I love Amy Adams and Jeremy renner, but it feels like arrival, while of good quality, is a movie gettting elevated praise because it's supposed to be for the 'thinking viewer' more than how clever it truly is.
Mr. Choose, it'd be interesting, if very laborious, to have someone do an analysis of what happens if you lay every big team in the Premier League for every match.
You'd probably win by laying Arsenal.
There's no doubt now that Jezza and Arsene are twins separated at birth. Their characters are identical. Mild, numb to criticism, in charge of the reds, feted by some, derided by many more. Both going nowhere.
The hateful right have a meltdown because they're not allowed to spread untruths uncorrected. I wonder why.
It shows how intellectually bankrupt the left wing is in Britain at the moment when their main attack on O'Neil, former member of the Revolutionary Communist Party and journalist for Living Marxism, is to accuse them of being part of the 'hateful right'. I assume this qualifies Alastair as a fully fledged member of the 'Braindead Left
god I'm drunk and tired after writing an entire chapter of a thriller, having TOO MUCH SEX last night, and now watching the enervating tedium of ARRIVAL. I had so much sex I have crocked my knee
Clearly it's too late to save my knee, or my liver, but can someone tell me whether it's worth pursuing ARRIVAL?
It just feels like some Portuguese speaking woman talking in the rain to allegorical migrants, right now. YAWNFEST
No. Tedium continues with boring, predictable 'surprise' ending.
Arrival is a great film. For the thinking viewer. Best watched sober, however.
It really didn't require that much thinking. I like a slower, contemplative movie, I love Amy Adams and Jeremy renner, but it feels like arrival, while of good quality, is a movie gettting elevated praise because it's supposed to be for the 'thinking viewer' more than how clever it truly is.
If you really like slow, contemplative films - try and catch Homo Sapiens. There is no story, no acting, no music. Just wonderful, long, contemplative shots of broken, ruined and abandoned cityscapes, buildings and roads. It is strangely meditative and the lighting/photography is off the scale.
But as someone with a big red against Madame Le Pen I do wonder we might be reading too much into the result from The Netherlands.
Front National are more well established than Mr Wilders and we could also have a Spanish 2004 election precedent to worry about.
I'll be reduced to drinking lime & soda in the pub if MLP becomes Madame Le President. Or should that be Madame La President? My French doesn't extent much beyond arriere du peloton and the famous voulez-vous coucher avec moi ce soir.
I get instinctively turned off people running for office who feel the need to stress 'I'm not a politician'. I know the point they are making, that they are different and fresh, but they are now demonstrably politicians.
Amusingly candidates for the locals round my way alternate between 'I'm not a politician' and 'I'm a full time politician' as selling points.
Mr. Choose, it'd be interesting, if very laborious, to have someone do an analysis of what happens if you lay every big team in the Premier League for every match.
You'd probably win by laying Arsenal.
There's no doubt now that Jezza and Arsene are twins separated at birth. Their characters are identical. Mild, numb to criticism, in charge of the reds, feted by some, derided by many more. Both going nowhere.
Wenger has achieved extraordinary things in his life and played a pivotal role in reshaping British attitudes in a key area of our national life. Corbyn hasn't. At leadt, not on purpose.
Mr. Eagles, if you were designing a system to give mainstream candidates an advantage, it'd be the French system. Le Pen's best plausible hope is to have Fillon with her in the last two, and even then I think he'd win.
But as someone with a big red against Madame Le Pen I do wonder we might be reading too much into the result from The Netherlands.
Front National are more well established than Mr Wilders and we could also have a Spanish 2004 election precedent to worry about.
Certainly in the 2014 European elections the FN came first in France while the PVV came third in the Netherlands so there is no exact correlation and of course the PVV came second this time even though they did not win. At the moment Le Pen still leads in round 1 while Macron clearly leads the runoff polls but it would only take an angry Erdogan to open the gates and allow migrants to flow into southern Europe and a terrorist attack or two for things to become rather less clear
As the fashion now seems for everyone to come on here and boast about their great tips or how much money they've made on exchanges and the like (no one talks much about their losses), I'll join in:
I offered the stayers' hurdle winner yesterday morning:
3.30: NICHOLS CANYON (10/1)
My only winner of the week so far albeit with plenty of places and a good number of losses. Probably well down overall but one more day left to dig that hole a shade deeper.
The hateful right have a meltdown because they're not allowed to spread untruths uncorrected. I wonder why.
It shows how intellectually bankrupt the left wing is in Britain at the moment when their main attack on O'Neil, former member of the Revolutionary Communist Party and journalist for Living Marxism, is to accuse them of being part of the 'hateful right'. I assume this qualifies Alastair as a fully fledged member of the 'Braindead Left
"The left wing"!!!
A particular subset thereof. A rhetorical retort to the 'hateful right' label.
"As the fashion now seems for everyone to come on here and boast about their great tips or how much money they've made on exchanges and the like (no one talks much about their losses)"
You're right of course and that's why the likes of Shadsy, etc are still in a job!
But as someone with a big red against Madame Le Pen I do wonder we might be reading too much into the result from The Netherlands.
Front National are more well established than Mr Wilders and we could also have a Spanish 2004 election precedent to worry about.
I'll be reduced to drinking lime & soda in the pub if MLP becomes Madame Le President. Or should that be Madame La President? My French doesn't extent much beyond arriere du peloton and the famous voulez-vous coucher avec moi ce soir.
I'll be going to the poor house if it is Le Pen v Fillon in the final round.
Mr. Choose, it'd be interesting, if very laborious, to have someone do an analysis of what happens if you lay every big team in the Premier League for every match.
It would be laborious and pointless - what happens when "a big team" plays "a big team"?
My point is to make money punting you must detach yourself emotionally, in politics and football that is far from easy, some find it impossible.
As the fashion now seems for everyone to come on here and boast about their great tips or how much money they've made on exchanges and the like (no one talks much about their losses), I'll join in:
I offered the stayers' hurdle winner yesterday morning:
3.30: NICHOLS CANYON (10/1)
My only winner of the week so far albeit with plenty of places and a good number of losses. Probably well down overall but one more day left to dig that hole a shade deeper.
I've tipped some complete clunkers in the past. I remember those better than my wins.
It has long been a bugbear of mine the way people defer to "the betting markets" as somehow being more insightful than any other commentator or source.
I would argue that there is not a more populous group of political geeks than PB and we fight like cats in a sack over the outcome of any political event.
(1) France has had a much less fun time of Euro membership than the Netherlands, and the EU is less popular there. With a majority of PVV voters thinking the Euro a good thing, the key plank of their platform was anti-Islam. While anti-Islam is a major part of the FN's appeal, is ere than in other countries. (This could play badly for Macron.)
(4) France's problems with Muslim integration are not new.
(5) The FN still the French Overseas territories did not vote. Those three places are by far the weakest for the FN.
All together, I still struggle to see MLP getting more than 35% against Macron, or 40% against Fillon in the second round. Given the FN has - like the VVD - repeatedly underperformed its poll scores in actual elections, I think it is entirely possible they will end up on just 22-23% in the first round. I also wonder if Fillon's... errr... issues have led to shy Republicains. (And it's also possible the FN will have a late fade like the PVV.) For that reason, I continue to think the market is underestimating the chance of a Fillon vs Macron final two. Bet accordingly.
Marine Le Pen actually outperformed final polling in 2012 in the first round
As the fashion now seems for everyone to come on here and boast about their great tips or how much money they've made on exchanges and the like (no one talks much about their losses), I'll join in:
I offered the stayers' hurdle winner yesterday morning:
3.30: NICHOLS CANYON (10/1)
My only winner of the week so far albeit with plenty of places and a good number of losses. Probably well down overall but one more day left to dig that hole a shade deeper.
I've tipped some complete clunkers in the past. I remember those better than my wins.
Too true, my friend. It's just that everyone on here seems to win all the time and always gets the best prices, beats the spreads etc.
I don't but the occasional 10/1 winner makes it all worthwhile.
By the by, good call on matters Dutch and it was there in front of everyone. After 2016, however, polls and polling (except when they show big Conservative leads) are widely derided and the expectation becomes that the underdog populist will win out over the establishment favourite.
Mr. Choose, disagree. If weight of emotional sentiment leads to excessive backing for a big team that distorts their odds, consistently, then it opens up the idea of regularly laying big teams as a 'safer' sort of bet.
Mr. Meeks, it's some years ago now, but Kubica failed to get the Monaco pole by about 0.002s. I'd tipped it at 8 or so. That was bloody annoying.
The first and last are proper job horses, laid out for the race. Native River will run them ragged though I suspect he'd prefer it softer. Wonderful Charm at 6/1 is an e/w steal against the short fav. Try some small stakes e/w doubles and trebles as well as win singles.
(1) France has had a much less fun time of Euro membership than the Netherlands, and the EU is less popular there. With a majority of PVV voters thinking the Euro a good thing, the key plank of their platform was anti-Islam. While anti-Islam is a major part of the FN's appeal, is ere than in other countries. (This could play badly for Macron.)
(4) France's problems with Muslim integration are not new.
(5) The FN still the French Overseas territories did not vote. Those three places are by far the weakest for the FN.
All together, I still struggle to see MLP getting more than 35% against Macron, or 40% against Fillon in the second round. Given the FN has - like the VVD - repeatedly underperformed its poll scores in actual elections, I think it is entirely possible they will end up on just 22-23% in the first round. I also wonder if Fillon's... errr... issues have led to shy Republicains. (And it's also possible the FN will have a late fade like the PVV.) For that reason, I continue to think the market is underestimating the chance of a Fillon vs Macron final two. Bet accordingly.
Marine Le Pen actually outperformed final polling in 2012 in the first round
Sure also outperformed at the European elections in 2014. But, I would weight the more recent polling evidence more than the old.
I echo thanks to Mr Meeks over the Netherlands. Sadly I made the numpty error of the year by assuming that Rutte next PM was a good proxy for VVD win, so am out of my money for months.
You'll get it back eventually.
@rcs1000 Put me on to the dutch opportunity, Meeks' piece and foresight on the Erdogan reaction encouraged me to up my stake.
Note that the polls were around 6 seats wrong for the VVD. That certainly doesn't justify PVV favouritism as there was for ages, but it does imply the rags were too long. Particularly the CDA on election night - they are a party with a strong history who surely shouldn't have been 100-1 before the exits.
Pulps ...... I don't believe Ishmael_Z has yet conceded having lost his dough, merely that he is out of it "for months" whilst the Dutch power brokers get to work.
So to the final day of the Cotswolds Marathon and for those with functioning wallets and livers, it's Gold Cup day and St Patrick's Day so that should take care of any survivors in either category (wallet and liver).
Just a Patent today as frankly it's not quite as strong a card as previous days and after the Gold Cup it all gets a bit messy.
Prices currently with Hills:
1.30: SOLDIER IN ACTION (20/1) 2.50: AUGUSTA KATE (6/1) 3.30: DJAKADAM (10/3)
One very smart poster also pointed out that the PVV had underperformed its poll scores at each of the last three elections.
Others pointed out that the Turkey/Nazi spat came at a very convenient time for Rutte as well!
But one poster assured me that was good for the PVV and bad for the VVD.
If you are referring to me I actually said on the evening it first broke out 'probably benefits the PVV but who knows' and while I did admittedly initially call that wrong as the next polls came out and until the exit polls I consistently said the VVD would likely come first. Earlier in the campaign I also posted Rutte's statement 'migrants be normal or be gone' as evidence he was toughening his stance in response to Wilders
Mr. Choose, disagree. If weight of emotional sentiment leads to excessive backing for a big team that distorts their odds, consistently, then it opens up the idea of regularly laying big teams as a 'safer' sort of bet.
Mr. Meeks, it's some years ago now, but Kubica failed to get the Monaco pole by about 0.002s. I'd tipped it at 8 or so. That was bloody annoying.
I rarely bet on football, as a Spurs I find it hard to be objective about most teams. I'd suggest laying odds on away from home in the Prem as a potential example of what we're discussing.
Andy is a great chap. I've met him a couple of times and always went away feeling energised in myself and entirely confident in his capabilities.
I remember a mate of mine saying the much the same about Grant Shapps to me about 10 years ago.
Many 'business leaders' proved indifferent MPs. This job seems to be for a puffed-up 'leader of the council'. The main problem as I see it with UK local govt. isn't lack of elected mayors, it's the legacy of 40-50 years of having powers taken away, e.g. Thatcher largely removed the ability to borrow. No wonder many local govts. aren't that inspiring and fill regularly Private Eye's Rotten Boroughs pages, if Whitehall just issues orders from on high to obey its orders and not try anything enterprising.
In Sweden and Finland, county councils run most of the NHS. In Canada, provinces run most of the NHS. They typically have a population of a few million, not 64 million. That's devolution.
Yes, thanks for the sound tips on the Netherlands and before that Stoke.
(1) France has had a much less fun time of Euro membership than the Netherlands, and the EU is less popular there. With a majority of PVV voters thinking the Euro a good thing, the key plank of their platform was anti-Islam. While anti-Islam is a major part of the FN's appeal, is ere than in other countries. (This could play badly for Macron.)
(4) France's problems with Muslim integration are not new.
(5) The FN still the French Overseas territories did not vote. Those three places are by far the weakest for the FN.
All together, I still struggle to see MLP getting more than 35% against Macron, or 40% against Fillon in the second round. Given the FN has - like the VVD - repeatedly underperformed its poll scores in actual elections, I think it is entirely possible they will end up on just 22-23% in the first round. I also wonder if Fillon's... errr... issues have led to shy Republicains. (And it's also possible the FN will have a late fade like the PVV.) For that reason, I continue to think the market is underestimating the chance of a Fillon vs Macron final two. Bet accordingly.
Marine Le Pen actually outperformed final polling in 2012 in the first round
Sure also outperformed at the European elections in 2014. But, I would weight the more recent polling evidence more than the old.
She polls better than the FN, she outperforms the brand if you like which also has to be factored in
god I'm drunk and tired after writing an entire chapter of a thriller, having TOO MUCH SEX last night, and now watching the enervating tedium of ARRIVAL. I had so much sex I have crocked my knee
Clearly it's too late to save my knee, or my liver, but can someone tell me whether it's worth pursuing ARRIVAL?
It just feels like some Portuguese speaking woman talking in the rain to allegorical migrants, right now. YAWNFEST
No. Tedium continues with boring, predictable 'surprise' ending.
Arrival is a great film. For the thinking viewer. Best watched sober, however.
It really didn't require that much thinking. I like a slower, contemplative movie, I love Amy Adams and Jeremy renner, but it feels like arrival, while of good quality, is a movie gettting elevated praise because it's supposed to be for the 'thinking viewer' more than how clever it truly is.
The classic film for that is Inception: we went to see it and wondered why people were saying they were getting confused by the layers. Drastically over-rated.
If you want a film that is genuinely confusing, then Shane Carrith's Primer is for you. I've seen it many times and still don't clearly know who is when. A brilliant film.
(1) France has had a much less fun time of Euro membership than the Netherlands, and the EU is less popular there. With a majority of PVV voters thinking the Euro a good thing, the key plank of their platform was anti-Islam. While anti-Islam is a major part of the FN's appeal, is ere than in other countries. (This could play badly for Macron.)
(4) France's problems with Muslim integration are not new.
(5) The FN still the French Overseas territories did not vote. Those three places are by far the weakest for the FN.
All together, I still struggle to see MLP getting more than 35% against Macron, or 40% against Fillon in the second round. Given the FN has - like the VVD - repeatedly underperformed its poll scores in actual elections, I think it is entirely possible they will end up on just 22-23% in the first round. I also wonder if Fillon's... errr... issues have led to shy Republicains. (And it's also possible the FN will have a late fade like the PVV.) For that reason, I continue to think the market is underestimating the chance of a Fillon vs Macron final two. Bet accordingly.
Marine Le Pen actually outperformed final polling in 2012 in the first round
Sure also outperformed at the European elections in 2014. But, I would weight the more recent polling evidence more than the old.
She polls better than the FN, she outperforms the brand if you like which also has to be factored in
Worth remembering though that in 2015, in the Regionals, when she was up for the Premiership of Nord-Pas de Calais, she did slightly worse in terms of round two pickups than her party as a whole.
Comments
For Le Pen, current second round polls are way out of the margin of error either against Macron or against FIllon. However, before betting the farm on a Le Pen defeat, I would wait for the impact of next week's debate.
The TV debates had a massive impact both on the right-wing and left-wing primaries, so next Monday's debate sould be a turning point.
(the debate will only feature the five "big" candidates: Le Pen, Macron, Fillon, Hamon and Mélenchon).
Not clear to me why lib Dems should be down at 1.12 to win without Labour.
Last time they came 5th in a three horse race for second.
Has their polling really improved all that much since 2015?
I've laid a little at 1.14 ish and also put two quid on greens coming second again at 54-1.
The moral of this tale is don't fall for media driven hype. Serious punters should know this.
You know who you are ....
.................................................
Meanwhile I note FPT that @TSE linked to a site that may not be named where yours truly had a historic honourable mention that indicated that @Plato and I should share a room, presumably to exchange notes on our respective pussy recollections.
I fear this feline soiree may never happen. A lost opportunity no doubt.
Meowww ....
:-)
Good to see that the British state might have stopped,pandering to Trump...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/03/16/gchq-issues-unprecedented-public-statement-dismiss-trump-tower/
... though does that mean we're at the back of the queue again ?
Polling remains an inexact art rather than a science but results well outside the range of probability are undoubtedly an opportunity for the alert punter. I do believe we are seeing a repeat of this phenomenon in France.
https://www.wired.com/2017/03/trumps-budget-break-american-science-today-tomorrow/
By that stage we'll all know not to believe him.
The snag will come if by some fluke in ten thousand he's correct.
(1) France has had a much less fun time of Euro membership than the Netherlands, and the EU is less popular there. With a majority of PVV voters thinking the Euro a good thing, the key plank of their platform was anti-Islam. While anti-Islam is a major part of the FN's appeal, anti-EU sentiment is also important.
(2) But don't over-estimate French Euroscepticism. While I have no data beyond the EU's own Eurobaromoter, the Euro is still supported 2:1 in France (as opposed to 4:1 in the Netherlands). This means Marine's Euroscepticism is not as much of a draw as British punters think.
(3) France has suffered two devastating terrorist attacks in the last three years. Being seen as good on security probably goes a lot further there than in other countries. (This could play badly for Macron.)
(4) France's problems with Muslim integration are not new.
(5) The FN still struggles with its historic issues of antisemitism. I don't think a Dutch Jew would have a problem voting for Geert Wilders. I think French Jews would struggle to vote for MLP.
(6) Remember that back in December 2015 when the FN topped the polls in the first round of the French Regional elections that Paris, Lyon and the French Overseas territories did not vote. Those three places are by far the weakest for the FN.
All together, I still struggle to see MLP getting more than 35% against Macron, or 40% against Fillon in the second round. Given the FN has - like the VVD - repeatedly underperformed its poll scores in actual elections, I think it is entirely possible they will end up on just 22-23% in the first round. I also wonder if Fillon's... errr... issues have led to shy Republicains. (And it's also possible the FN will have a late fade like the PVV.) For that reason, I continue to think the market is underestimating the chance of a Fillon vs Macron final two. Bet accordingly.
Yes, congrats and thanks must go to Alastair for so succinctly pointing out what was in retrospect a near certain winner, yet prior to his advice half decent odds against prices had been widely available.
http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user3303/imageroot/2017/03/15/20170316_EUPOP.jpg
Stating the obvious seems to be necessary where Trump is concerned even though he won't be listening.
Also repeats the much cited poll growth - which the FT obligingly corrects....
On the last independence campaign
“We started at 28 per cent and ended up at 45 per cent * . . . We just started from too low a base.”
* These figures may require clarification: the 28 per cent support for independence — recorded in one poll in October 2012 — was artificially low because one in five respondents were undecided. When Don’t Knows were excluded, the Yes campaign’s support was 34 per cent. Other polls in 2012 put support for independence as high as 45 per cent, where it ultimately finished. It is true that support for Yes did increase during 2014 — from around 40 per cent to 44 per cent, according to poll averages. That came as many undecided voters made up their minds. It was an achievement, though not quite on the scale that Mr Salmond suggests.
https://www.ft.com/content/e248b414-0a37-11e7-ac5a-903b21361b43
However, going by last night’s BBC TV he’s still believed in his ‘heartland’. There were chants, for example of ‘Lock her up” when Hilary Clinton’s name was mentioned.
I was in Aberdeen yesterday. Chatting to the taxi driver on the way in to town I was amazed that he didn't even mention IndyRef2. The only folk who mentioned it all day were English.
Make of that what you will.
I'm surprised you say this since I always thought the CAP was introduced especially to maintain the French and in particular the French farmers in the manner to which they had grown accustomed.
I suppose the bottom line is that the EU has been very good news for all the six founding members of the EEC (as was) by largely protecting their specific respective interests, whereas by the time we joined the club, we had to accept the rules as drawn for the benefit of others and were even forced to hand them some icing on the cake for good measure, like giving away our fisheries, etc.
Finally, by 23 June last year, the British people woke up to this fact and voted accordingly.
Yesterday's was entertaining and pretty informative re the budget top lines.
FFW to 11 mins in for Mulvaney.
https://youtu.be/b1fi7mo4s5s
Political betting markets show where bettors want to put their money, no more no less. Sometimes bettors are insightful and sometimes they aren't. There is always the danger of fighting the last war.
Mr. Meeks, indeed. Making the best money betting is essentially a game of disagreeing with as many people as possible whilst still being right.
https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2017/03/britains-medieval-libel-laws-kept-away-twitter/
The PVV, CDA, D66 and GL all gained seats and vote share, so it was not a defeat for Wilders, who now leads the 2nd largest party and effectively becomes the LOTO, as the VVD will have to work with the CDA and D66 parties (& 1 other party) to form a multi-party coalition government.
It is true that the PVV didn't do as well as predicted a few weeks ago, but Rutte's neo-Nazi posturing vis-a-vis the Turks in the last few days probably helped the VVD to claw back some support from the PVV and not lose as may seats as their coalition partners.
It must be remembered that MOST punters follow the money, they will back a horse because it's favourite. It would be easy to assume that political punters are shrewder than racing punters but there is no evidence to support that, very few will make long term profits. Most political punters are swayed by their own views in the same way that the hugely supported Man Utd and Liverpool are consistently overbet, they simply bet on what they want to happen, the odds are irrelevant.
"The art of taxation is plucking the goose to extract the most feathers with the least hissing"
* Colbert is a sadly forgotten man who also coined the term "laissez-faire" to describe the best economic policy
(edit) & yes, both credit & thanks for your Netherlands tip.
I could see that a lot of the exact same people who'd made money on Trump/Brexit were backing the PVV all the way through, presumably assuming that their "strategy" of backing the populists, irrespective of what the polls said, might pay off again. Some useless coverage in certain British newspapers probably helped as well.
At Ladbrokes, we were also taking a lot of money on multiples involving Wilders and Le Pen to be successful, which discouraged us from pushing the PVV out to a more realistic price.
There were a few people taking advantage of the consequently generous prices on the VVD (and on Wilders NOT to be PM), but not enough to "correct" the market. I'm pretty sure we'll see the same pattern in France and it'll be interesting to see what happens, particularly in the two weeks between R1 and R2, assuming Le Pen is one of the final two.
A warning, though, that Alastair has made before.Le :Pen will lose, but we can't yet be quite sure that Macron will win. The debate may well clarify things, as Chris says, but momentum is very important in these multi-candidate things (rather like US primaries) and the media like to play the "shock success at debate" card. If Fillon or conceivably Harmon do well, the odds could change.
I echo thanks to Mr Meeks over the Netherlands. Sadly I made the numpty error of the year by assuming that Rutte next PM was a good proxy for VVD win, so am out of my money for months.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/03/17/want-lead-tories-back-urban-britain-john-lewis-conservatism/
@rcs1000 Put me on to the dutch opportunity, Meeks' piece and foresight on the Erdogan reaction encouraged me to up my stake.
Note that the polls were around 6 seats wrong for the VVD. That certainly doesn't justify PVV favouritism as there was for ages, but it does imply the rags were too long. Particularly the CDA on election night - they are a party with a strong history who surely shouldn't have been 100-1 before the exits.
Also for the 14:30 tip yesterday from one of our newer posters.
But as someone with a big red against Madame Le Pen I do wonder we might be reading too much into the result from The Netherlands.
Front National are more well established than Mr Wilders and we could also have a Spanish 2004 election precedent to worry about.
Or should that be Madame La President?
My French doesn't extent much beyond arriere du peloton and the famous voulez-vous coucher avec moi ce soir.
Amusingly candidates for the locals round my way alternate between 'I'm not a politician' and 'I'm a full time politician' as selling points.
As the fashion now seems for everyone to come on here and boast about their great tips or how much money they've made on exchanges and the like (no one talks much about their losses), I'll join in:
I offered the stayers' hurdle winner yesterday morning:
3.30: NICHOLS CANYON (10/1)
My only winner of the week so far albeit with plenty of places and a good number of losses. Probably well down overall but one more day left to dig that hole a shade deeper.
You're right of course and that's why the likes of Shadsy, etc are still in a job!
BTW What's your tip for today stodge?
https://twitter.com/andrewbeatty/status/842492580038430720
As for Madame Le President
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2785156/War-le-words-French-MP-fined-using-sexist-GRAMMAR-calling-female-colleague-Madame-Le-President.html
My point is to make money punting you must detach yourself emotionally, in politics and football that is far from easy, some find it impossible.
He really knew his stuff when I met him.
I would argue that there is not a more populous group of political geeks than PB and we fight like cats in a sack over the outcome of any political event.
I don't but the occasional 10/1 winner makes it all worthwhile.
By the by, good call on matters Dutch and it was there in front of everyone. After 2016, however, polls and polling (except when they show big Conservative leads) are widely derided and the expectation becomes that the underdog populist will win out over the establishment favourite.
Mr. Meeks, it's some years ago now, but Kubica failed to get the Monaco pole by about 0.002s. I'd tipped it at 8 or so. That was bloody annoying.
Today we go
2.10 Vosne Romanee
3.30 Native River
4.10 Wonderful Charm
5.30 Dandridge
The first and last are proper job horses, laid out for the race. Native River will run them ragged though I suspect he'd prefer it softer. Wonderful Charm at 6/1 is an e/w steal against the short fav. Try some small stakes e/w doubles and trebles as well as win singles.
Be lucky.
Just a Patent today as frankly it's not quite as strong a card as previous days and after the Gold Cup it all gets a bit messy.
Prices currently with Hills:
1.30: SOLDIER IN ACTION (20/1)
2.50: AUGUSTA KATE (6/1)
3.30: DJAKADAM (10/3)
Good Luck to All.
In Sweden and Finland, county councils run most of the NHS. In Canada, provinces run most of the NHS. They typically have a population of a few million, not 64 million. That's devolution.
Yes, thanks for the sound tips on the Netherlands and before that Stoke.
If you want a film that is genuinely confusing, then Shane Carrith's Primer is for you. I've seen it many times and still don't clearly know who is when. A brilliant film.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tUzy-xPf0MI
It's also odd to have a film that is so confusing that essentially has only two characters.