To be honest. other than the thread header referred to, I have not heard of him or seen him perform. Chief Secretary to the Treasury used to be a Cabinet post, didn't it? It's a low profile post but of considerable importance, especially when you have something of a lightweight Chancellor.
To be honest. other than the thread header referred to, I have not heard of him or seen him perform. Chief Secretary to the Treasury used to be a Cabinet post, didn't it? It's a low profile post but of considerable importance, especially when you have something of a lightweight Chancellor.
I saw him on the 7-way debate. No disasters but didnt shine either imo.
Whenever I’ve heard him he has not particularly impressed me. A bit of an automaton in the way he speaks. And, groan, another ex-GS alumni. Bad enough having an ex-DB banker as Chancellor. The amount of damage those two firms have caused ........
Whenever I’ve heard him he has not particularly impressed me. A bit of an automaton in the way he speaks. And, groan, another ex-GS alumni. Bad enough having an ex-DB banker as Chancellor. The amount of damage those two firms have caused ........
I don't see it paying out. With 364 MPs to choose from - possibly more when Boris destroys the rest of the Red Wall in 2024 - there's likely to be more impressive candidates to choose from by then.
I don't see it paying out. With 364 MPs to choose from - possibly more when Boris destroys the rest of the Red Wall in 2024 - there's likely to be more impressive candidates to choose from by then.
Whenever I’ve heard him he has not particularly impressed me. A bit of an automaton in the way he speaks. And, groan, another ex-GS alumni. Bad enough having an ex-DB banker as Chancellor. The amount of damage those two firms have caused ........
Whenever I’ve heard him he has not particularly impressed me. A bit of an automaton in the way he speaks. And, groan, another ex-GS alumni. Bad enough having an ex-DB banker as Chancellor. The amount of damage those two firms have caused ........
What we need is more lawyers in government.
There is no space-time continuum that would be improved by having Richard Burgon in government.
Whenever I’ve heard him he has not particularly impressed me. A bit of an automaton in the way he speaks. And, groan, another ex-GS alumni. Bad enough having an ex-DB banker as Chancellor. The amount of damage those two firms have caused ........
I don't see it paying out. With 364 MPs to choose from - possibly more when Boris destroys the rest of the Red Wall in 2024 - there's likely to be more impressive candidates to choose from by then.
It is a fantastic trading bet.
What is the difference between a trading bet and any other kind of bet?
I don't see it paying out. With 364 MPs to choose from - possibly more when Boris destroys the rest of the Red Wall in 2024 - there's likely to be more impressive candidates to choose from by then.
I don't see it paying out. With 364 MPs to choose from - possibly more when Boris destroys the rest of the Red Wall in 2024 - there's likely to be more impressive candidates to choose from by then.
It is a fantastic trading bet.
What is the difference between a trading bet and any other kind of bet?
You take you profit long before the event you’ve bet on plays out.
I don't see it paying out. With 364 MPs to choose from - possibly more when Boris destroys the rest of the Red Wall in 2024 - there's likely to be more impressive candidates to choose from by then.
It is a fantastic trading bet.
What is the difference between a trading bet and any other kind of bet?
You take you profit long before the event you’ve bet on plays out.
Dont see how that differs from any other long term bet
Whenever I’ve heard him he has not particularly impressed me. A bit of an automaton in the way he speaks. And, groan, another ex-GS alumni. Bad enough having an ex-DB banker as Chancellor. The amount of damage those two firms have caused ........
What we need is more lawyers in government.
There is no space-time continuum that would be improved by having Richard Burgon in government.
I’ve actually got an explanation for how Richard Burgon was accepted into St John’s.
My friend’s brother was also at St John’s at the same time as Burgon and that Burgon was very good at English literature but he was a proper lefty (his uncle was a Labour MP) and that Burgon engaged in some shocking logic defying positions to support a left wing agenda, which has become worse with age.
He may have done it to impress a lady as well but he ended up as Chairman of CULC.
So the issue isn’t Cambridge letting in a duffer but the law firms that hired Burgon.
I don't see it paying out. With 364 MPs to choose from - possibly more when Boris destroys the rest of the Red Wall in 2024 - there's likely to be more impressive candidates to choose from by then.
It is a fantastic trading bet.
What is the difference between a trading bet and any other kind of bet?
A regular bet is one where you think the market price is wrong - i.e., you believe that the probability of the actual event is meaningfully different to the priced probability.
A trading bet is one where you believe the market price will change for some reason. So, for example, you might believe that Tottenham's implied probability for the winning the PL is absolutely right, but you notice they have three away games in six days ahead of them. You think that they're likely to drop points, and therefore the market price is likely to move against them in the next week. So you sell them for the PL expecting to buy them back in a week's time at better price.
Whenever I’ve heard him he has not particularly impressed me. A bit of an automaton in the way he speaks. And, groan, another ex-GS alumni. Bad enough having an ex-DB banker as Chancellor. The amount of damage those two firms have caused ........
What we need is more lawyers in government.
There is no space-time continuum that would be improved by having Richard Burgon in government.
I’ve actually got an explanation for how Richard Burgon was accepted into St John’s.
My friend’s brother was also at St John’s at the same time as Burgon and that Burgon was very good at English literature but he was a proper lefty (his uncle was a Labour MP) and that Burgon engaged in some shocking logic defying positions to support a left wing agenda, which has become worse with age.
He may have done it to impress a lady as well but he ended up as Chairman of CULC.
So the issue isn’t Cambridge letting in a duffer but the law firms that hired Burgon.
Burgon is a duffer, but I quite like him. I also quite like Barry Gardiner and Diane Abbot. A trio of terrible, all Cambridge, but I can see why the admissions tutor went for it.
Whenever I’ve heard him he has not particularly impressed me. A bit of an automaton in the way he speaks. And, groan, another ex-GS alumni. Bad enough having an ex-DB banker as Chancellor. The amount of damage those two firms have caused ........
What we need is more lawyers in government.
There is no space-time continuum that would be improved by having Richard Burgon in government.
I’ve actually got an explanation for how Richard Burgon was accepted into St John’s.
My friend’s brother was also at St John’s at the same time as Burgon and that Burgon was very good at English literature but he was a proper lefty (his uncle was a Labour MP) and that Burgon engaged in some shocking logic defying positions to support a left wing agenda, which has become worse with age.
He may have done it to impress a lady as well but he ended up as Chairman of CULC.
So the issue isn’t Cambridge letting in a duffer but the law firms that hired Burgon.
Once Boris gracefully retires after a decade in power having been the most brilliant and successful Tory PM since Thatcher and Churchill and with 2 general election wins under his belt and having delivered Brexit with trade deals around the world, Rishi Sunak might have a chance to succeed him.
However he would have to see off the likes of Javid, Raab and Patel if they are still around and also face the problem he would be seeking an unprecedented third decade of the Tories in power, something they have not achieved since Lord Liverpool.
Despite the current uselessness of the opposition by then even Labour and the LDs might have got their act together
Whenever I’ve heard him he has not particularly impressed me. A bit of an automaton in the way he speaks. And, groan, another ex-GS alumni. Bad enough having an ex-DB banker as Chancellor. The amount of damage those two firms have caused ........
What we need is more lawyers in government.
There is no space-time continuum that would be improved by having Richard Burgon in government.
I’ve actually got an explanation for how Richard Burgon was accepted into St John’s.
My friend’s brother was also at St John’s at the same time as Burgon and that Burgon was very good at English literature but he was a proper lefty (his uncle was a Labour MP) and that Burgon engaged in some shocking logic defying positions to support a left wing agenda, which has become worse with age.
He may have done it to impress a lady as well but he ended up as Chairman of CULC.
So the issue isn’t Cambridge letting in a duffer but the law firms that hired Burgon.
Didn't Nick Griffin go to Cambridge?
I believe he did.
A lot of idiots go to Cambridge (or Oxford or Harvard), and a lot of very smart people either didn't go to University at all, or went somewhere without the history or the reputation.
It turns out that people develop at different rates. Top of the primary school class at six years old does not mean likely CEO.
Whenever I’ve heard him he has not particularly impressed me. A bit of an automaton in the way he speaks. And, groan, another ex-GS alumni. Bad enough having an ex-DB banker as Chancellor. The amount of damage those two firms have caused ........
What we need is more lawyers in government.
There is no space-time continuum that would be improved by having Richard Burgon in government.
I’ve actually got an explanation for how Richard Burgon was accepted into St John’s.
My friend’s brother was also at St John’s at the same time as Burgon and that Burgon was very good at English literature but he was a proper lefty (his uncle was a Labour MP) and that Burgon engaged in some shocking logic defying positions to support a left wing agenda, which has become worse with age.
He may have done it to impress a lady as well but he ended up as Chairman of CULC.
So the issue isn’t Cambridge letting in a duffer but the law firms that hired Burgon.
Didn't Nick Griffin go to Cambridge?
He did, which is a shame as Cambridge is well known and well honoured for producing alumni who fight against fascism.
Whenever I’ve heard him he has not particularly impressed me. A bit of an automaton in the way he speaks. And, groan, another ex-GS alumni. Bad enough having an ex-DB banker as Chancellor. The amount of damage those two firms have caused ........
What we need is more lawyers in government.
There is no space-time continuum that would be improved by having Richard Burgon in government.
I’ve actually got an explanation for how Richard Burgon was accepted into St John’s.
My friend’s brother was also at St John’s at the same time as Burgon and (said ?) that Burgon was very good at English literature...
I deduce the Cambridge syllabus doesn’t include rhetoric, then ?
Once Boris gracefully retires after a decade in power having been the most brilliant and successful Tory PM since Thatcher and Churchill and with 2 general election wins under his belt and having delivered Brexit with trade deals around the world, Rishi Sunak might have a chance to succeed him.
However he would have to see off the likes of Javid, Raab and Patel if they are still around and also face the problem he would be seeking an unprecedented third decade of the Tories in power, something they have not achieved since Lord Liverpool.
Despite the current uselessness of the opposition by then even Labour and the LDs might have got their act together
To be pedantic - it was under Canning as acting Prime Minister following Liverpool’s stroke in February 1827 that the Tories entered their third decade in power (26th March 1827 being the 20th anniversary of the fall of Grenville).
Moreover, it didn’t exactly last for the full decade.
Once Boris gracefully retires after a decade in power having been the most brilliant and successful Tory PM since Thatcher and Churchill and with 2 general election wins under his belt and having delivered Brexit with trade deals around the world, Rishi Sunak might have a chance to succeed him...
Who dares constrain China? They get huffy if sport stars tweet something disapproving, let alone anything real.
The problem the US has is that it's pushing away it's natural allies at the time it needs them most.
Look at South America. Those countries that buckled to Trump's pressure in 2017/18 and introduced voluntary export controls (Brazil and Argentina) have been royally shat upon by Trump when he chucked tariffs on them both.
They won't make that mistake again: China keeps its promises and Trump will have just moved two likely Western/US allies into the China camp.
Who dares constrain China? They get huffy if sport stars tweet something disapproving, let alone anything real.
The problem the US has is that it's pushing away it's natural allies at the time it needs them most.
Look at South America. Those countries that buckled to Trump's pressure in 2017/18 and introduced voluntary export controls (Brazil and Argentina) have been royally shat upon by Trump when he chucked tariffs on them both.
They won't make that mistake again: China keeps its promises and Trump will have just moved two likely Western/US allies into the China camp.
I don't see it paying out. With 364 MPs to choose from - possibly more when Boris destroys the rest of the Red Wall in 2024 - there's likely to be more impressive candidates to choose from by then.
It is a fantastic trading bet.
What is the difference between a trading bet and any other kind of bet?
A regular bet is one where you think the market price is wrong - i.e., you believe that the probability of the actual event is meaningfully different to the priced probability.
A trading bet is one where you believe the market price will change for some reason. So, for example, you might believe that Tottenham's implied probability for the winning the PL is absolutely right, but you notice they have three away games in six days ahead of them. You think that they're likely to drop points, and therefore the market price is likely to move against them in the next week. So you sell them for the PL expecting to buy them back in a week's time at better price.
They dont seem that different to me. I would have thought the Tottenham scenario is in the price, and it wouldn't move that much if they lost all three games, because they are likely to drop points
Surely every bet you have you believe the market price would change in the direction you are betting, else you'd wait for the bigger price?
Offtopic, but in case anyone missed it, the rather funny Private Eye Review of the Year 2019. Equal opportunities satire and impressions - pretty much everyone is a target. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=MhX3ez_Onvo
I don't see it paying out. With 364 MPs to choose from - possibly more when Boris destroys the rest of the Red Wall in 2024 - there's likely to be more impressive candidates to choose from by then.
It is a fantastic trading bet.
What is the difference between a trading bet and any other kind of bet?
A regular bet is one where you think the market price is wrong - i.e., you believe that the probability of the actual event is meaningfully different to the priced probability.
A trading bet is one where you believe the market price will change for some reason. So, for example, you might believe that Tottenham's implied probability for the winning the PL is absolutely right, but you notice they have three away games in six days ahead of them. You think that they're likely to drop points, and therefore the market price is likely to move against them in the next week. So you sell them for the PL expecting to buy them back in a week's time at better price.
They dont seem that different to me. I would have thought the Tottenham scenario is in the price, and it wouldn't move that much if they lost all three games, because they are likely to drop points
Surely every bet you have you believe the market price would change in the direction you are betting, else you'd wait for the bigger price?
Yes, football is a pretty efficient market. Politics is less efficient.
Ultimately, you can make money by either correctly forecasting probabilities, or by correctly forecasting how the market will move.
If you think that Buttigieg will win Iowa, you should buy him for the nomination because the market will likely over-react to the news of his victory, irrespective of whether he has any realistic shot at the nomination.
Personally, I think there is a role for both kids of betting.
I don't see it paying out. With 364 MPs to choose from - possibly more when Boris destroys the rest of the Red Wall in 2024 - there's likely to be more impressive candidates to choose from by then.
It is a fantastic trading bet.
What is the difference between a trading bet and any other kind of bet?
A regular bet is one where you think the market price is wrong - i.e., you believe that the probability of the actual event is meaningfully different to the priced probability.
A trading bet is one where you believe the market price will change for some reason. So, for example, you might believe that Tottenham's implied probability for the winning the PL is absolutely right, but you notice they have three away games in six days ahead of them. You think that they're likely to drop points, and therefore the market price is likely to move against them in the next week. So you sell them for the PL expecting to buy them back in a week's time at better price.
They dont seem that different to me. I would have thought the Tottenham scenario is in the price, and it wouldn't move that much if they lost all three games, because they are likely to drop points
Surely every bet you have you believe the market price would change in the direction you are betting, else you'd wait for the bigger price?
Yes, football is a pretty efficient market. Politics is less efficient.
Ultimately, you can make money by either correctly forecasting probabilities, or by correctly forecasting how the market will move.
If you think that Buttigieg will win Iowa, you should buy him for the nomination because the market will likely over-react to the news of his victory, irrespective of whether he has any realistic shot at the nomination.
Personally, I think there is a role for both kids of betting.
Offtopic, but in case anyone missed it, the rather funny Private Eye Review of the Year 2019. Equal opportunities satire and impressions - pretty much everyone is a target. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=MhX3ez_Onvo
It's amazing to think that HIGNFY has been running for THIRTY years.
I don't see it paying out. With 364 MPs to choose from - possibly more when Boris destroys the rest of the Red Wall in 2024 - there's likely to be more impressive candidates to choose from by then.
It is a fantastic trading bet.
What is the difference between a trading bet and any other kind of bet?
A regular bet is one where you think the market price is wrong - i.e., you believe that the probability of the actual event is meaningfully different to the priced probability.
A trading bet is one where you believe the market price will change for some reason. So, for example, you might believe that Tottenham's implied probability for the winning the PL is absolutely right, but you notice they have three away games in six days ahead of them. You think that they're likely to drop points, and therefore the market price is likely to move against them in the next week. So you sell them for the PL expecting to buy them back in a week's time at better price.
They dont seem that different to me. I would have thought the Tottenham scenario is in the price, and it wouldn't move that much if they lost all three games, because they are likely to drop points
Surely every bet you have you believe the market price would change in the direction you are betting, else you'd wait for the bigger price?
Yes, football is a pretty efficient market. Politics is less efficient.
Ultimately, you can make money by either correctly forecasting probabilities, or by correctly forecasting how the market will move.
If you think that Buttigieg will win Iowa, you should buy him for the nomination because the market will likely over-react to the news of his victory, irrespective of whether he has any realistic shot at the nomination.
Personally, I think there is a role for both kids of betting.
If Boris is a success he has 5-10 years as PM, by which time Rishi will be a senior Cabinet minister while the Javids and Patels of the world will be long in the tooth
If Boris is a failure then you are likely not getting a Tory next PM anyway
Whenever I’ve heard him he has not particularly impressed me. A bit of an automaton in the way he speaks. And, groan, another ex-GS alumni. Bad enough having an ex-DB banker as Chancellor. The amount of damage those two firms have caused ........
Doesn’t harm that he’s filthy rich, though.
A filthy rich ex-GS banker will have such an understanding of the issues for people living in towns like Millom and Workington and Barrow, won’t he?
You can’t make sensible public policy just by looking at a spreadsheet.
Whenever I’ve heard him he has not particularly impressed me. A bit of an automaton in the way he speaks. And, groan, another ex-GS alumni. Bad enough having an ex-DB banker as Chancellor. The amount of damage those two firms have caused ........
What we need is more lawyers in government.
There is no space-time continuum that would be improved by having Richard Burgon in government.
I’ve actually got an explanation for how Richard Burgon was accepted into St John’s.
My friend’s brother was also at St John’s at the same time as Burgon and that Burgon was very good at English literature but he was a proper lefty (his uncle was a Labour MP) and that Burgon engaged in some shocking logic defying positions to support a left wing agenda, which has become worse with age.
He may have done it to impress a lady as well but he ended up as Chairman of CULC.
So the issue isn’t Cambridge letting in a duffer but the law firms that hired Burgon.
Didn't Nick Griffin go to Cambridge?
He did, which is a shame as Cambridge is well known and well honoured for producing alumni who fight against fascism.
I don't see it paying out. With 364 MPs to choose from - possibly more when Boris destroys the rest of the Red Wall in 2024 - there's likely to be more impressive candidates to choose from by then.
It is a fantastic trading bet.
What is the difference between a trading bet and any other kind of bet?
A regular bet is one where you think the market price is wrong - i.e., you believe that the probability of the actual event is meaningfully different to the priced probability.
A trading bet is one where you believe the market price will change for some reason. So, for example, you might believe that Tottenham's implied probability for the winning the PL is absolutely right, but you notice they have three away games in six days ahead of them. You think that they're likely to drop points, and therefore the market price is likely to move against them in the next week. So you sell them for the PL expecting to buy them back in a week's time at better price.
They dont seem that different to me. I would have thought the Tottenham scenario is in the price, and it wouldn't move that much if they lost all three games, because they are likely to drop points
Surely every bet you have you believe the market price would change in the direction you are betting, else you'd wait for the bigger price?
Yes, football is a pretty efficient market. Politics is less efficient.
Ultimately, you can make money by either correctly forecasting probabilities, or by correctly forecasting how the market will move.
If you think that Buttigieg will win Iowa, you should buy him for the nomination because the market will likely over-react to the news of his victory, irrespective of whether he has any realistic shot at the nomination.
Personally, I think there is a role for both kids of betting.
Whenever I’ve heard him he has not particularly impressed me. A bit of an automaton in the way he speaks. And, groan, another ex-GS alumni. Bad enough having an ex-DB banker as Chancellor. The amount of damage those two firms have caused ........
What we need is more lawyers in government.
There is no space-time continuum that would be improved by having Richard Burgon in government.
I think @TheScreamingEagles meant to say that we need more good lawyers in government.
Whenever I’ve heard him he has not particularly impressed me. A bit of an automaton in the way he speaks. And, groan, another ex-GS alumni. Bad enough having an ex-DB banker as Chancellor. The amount of damage those two firms have caused ........
What we need is more lawyers in government.
There is no space-time continuum that would be improved by having Richard Burgon in government.
I think @TheScreamingEagles meant to say that we need more good lawyers in government.
Yes but in my defence there are so few bad lawyers in the world. Ahem.
Whenever I’ve heard him he has not particularly impressed me. A bit of an automaton in the way he speaks. And, groan, another ex-GS alumni. Bad enough having an ex-DB banker as Chancellor. The amount of damage those two firms have caused ........
What we need is more lawyers in government.
There is no space-time continuum that would be improved by having Richard Burgon in government.
I’ve actually got an explanation for how Richard Burgon was accepted into St John’s.
My friend’s brother was also at St John’s at the same time as Burgon and that Burgon was very good at English literature but he was a proper lefty (his uncle was a Labour MP) and that Burgon engaged in some shocking logic defying positions to support a left wing agenda, which has become worse with age.
He may have done it to impress a lady as well but he ended up as Chairman of CULC.
So the issue isn’t Cambridge letting in a duffer but the law firms that hired Burgon.
Didn't Nick Griffin go to Cambridge?
He did, which is a shame as Cambridge is well known and well honoured for producing alumni who fight against fascism.
Whenever I’ve heard him he has not particularly impressed me. A bit of an automaton in the way he speaks. And, groan, another ex-GS alumni. Bad enough having an ex-DB banker as Chancellor. The amount of damage those two firms have caused ........
What we need is more lawyers in government.
There is no space-time continuum that would be improved by having Richard Burgon in government.
I think @TheScreamingEagles meant to say that we need more good lawyers in government.
Yes but in my defence there are so few bad lawyers in the world. Ahem.
What about Unite’s lawyer? I read the judgement in Turley v Unite and Walker this afternoon and I really enjoyed the moment where the judge mocked the counsel for the defence for suggesting no damage had been done because everyone knows Skwawkbox only publishes a pack of lies anyway.
Whenever I’ve heard him he has not particularly impressed me. A bit of an automaton in the way he speaks. And, groan, another ex-GS alumni. Bad enough having an ex-DB banker as Chancellor. The amount of damage those two firms have caused ........
What we need is more lawyers in government.
There is no space-time continuum that would be improved by having Richard Burgon in government.
I think @TheScreamingEagles meant to say that we need more good lawyers in government.
Yes but in my defence there are so few bad lawyers in the world. Ahem.
What about Unite’s lawyer? I read the judgement in Turley v Unite and Walker this afternoon and I really enjoyed the moment where the judge mocked the counsel for the defence for suggesting no damage had been done because everyone knows Skwawkbox only publishes a pack of lies anyway.
Whenever I’ve heard him he has not particularly impressed me. A bit of an automaton in the way he speaks. And, groan, another ex-GS alumni. Bad enough having an ex-DB banker as Chancellor. The amount of damage those two firms have caused ........
What we need is more lawyers in government.
There is no space-time continuum that would be improved by having Richard Burgon in government.
I think @TheScreamingEagles meant to say that we need more good lawyers in government.
Whenever I’ve heard him he has not particularly impressed me. A bit of an automaton in the way he speaks. And, groan, another ex-GS alumni. Bad enough having an ex-DB banker as Chancellor. The amount of damage those two firms have caused ........
What we need is more lawyers in government.
There is no space-time continuum that would be improved by having Richard Burgon in government.
I’ve actually got an explanation for how Richard Burgon was accepted into St John’s.
My friend’s brother was also at St John’s at the same time as Burgon and that Burgon was very good at English literature but he was a proper lefty (his uncle was a Labour MP) and that Burgon engaged in some shocking logic defying positions to support a left wing agenda, which has become worse with age.
He may have done it to impress a lady as well but he ended up as Chairman of CULC.
So the issue isn’t Cambridge letting in a duffer but the law firms that hired Burgon.
Didn't Nick Griffin go to Cambridge?
He did, which is a shame as Cambridge is well known and well honoured for producing alumni who fight against fascism.
I don't see it paying out. With 364 MPs to choose from - possibly more when Boris destroys the rest of the Red Wall in 2024 - there's likely to be more impressive candidates to choose from by then.
It is a fantastic trading bet.
What is the difference between a trading bet and any other kind of bet?
A regular bet is one where you think the market price is wrong - i.e., you believe that the probability of the actual event is meaningfully different to the priced probability.
A trading bet is one where you believe the market price will change for some reason. So, for example, you might believe that Tottenham's implied probability for the winning the PL is absolutely right, but you notice they have three away games in six days ahead of them. You think that they're likely to drop points, and therefore the market price is likely to move against them in the next week. So you sell them for the PL expecting to buy them back in a week's time at better price.
They dont seem that different to me. I would have thought the Tottenham scenario is in the price, and it wouldn't move that much if they lost all three games, because they are likely to drop points
Surely every bet you have you believe the market price would change in the direction you are betting, else you'd wait for the bigger price?
Essentially it comes down to whether you intend to hold to maturity or whether you expect - at the time of making the bet - to liquidate prior to maturity
Whenever I’ve heard him he has not particularly impressed me. A bit of an automaton in the way he speaks. And, groan, another ex-GS alumni. Bad enough having an ex-DB banker as Chancellor. The amount of damage those two firms have caused ........
What we need is more lawyers in government.
There is no space-time continuum that would be improved by having Richard Burgon in government.
I’ve actually got an explanation for how Richard Burgon was accepted into St John’s.
My friend’s brother was also at St John’s at the same time as Burgon and that Burgon was very good at English literature but he was a proper lefty (his uncle was a Labour MP) and that Burgon engaged in some shocking logic defying positions to support a left wing agenda, which has become worse with age.
He may have done it to impress a lady as well but he ended up as Chairman of CULC.
So the issue isn’t Cambridge letting in a duffer but the law firms that hired Burgon.
Didn't Nick Griffin go to Cambridge?
He did, which is a shame as Cambridge is well known and well honoured for producing alumni who fight against fascism.
Once Boris gracefully retires after a decade in power having been the most brilliant and successful Tory PM since Thatcher and Churchill and with 2 general election wins under his belt and having delivered Brexit with trade deals around the world, Rishi Sunak might have a chance to succeed him.
However he would have to see off the likes of Javid, Raab and Patel if they are still around and also face the problem he would be seeking an unprecedented third decade of the Tories in power, something they have not achieved since Lord Liverpool.
Despite the current uselessness of the opposition by then even Labour and the LDs might have got their act together
To be pedantic - it was under Canning as acting Prime Minister following Liverpool’s stroke in February 1827 that the Tories entered their third decade in power (26th March 1827 being the 20th anniversary of the fall of Grenville).
Moreover, it didn’t exactly last for the full decade.
Liverpool took over in 1812 with the Tories already having been in power for 5 years and stayed PM for 15 years until 1827, a period in office that even outlasted Thatcher. The Tories remained in power for a further 3 years until 1830 when Grey replaced the Duke of Wellington to lead the Whigs back to power
Ironically I was discussing something similar with a colleague last week.
He worked on a project in a prison in the U.K. a decade or so ago. As expected, all copies of the plans were numbered and watermarked, had to be signed in an out, had to be kept in a certain safe and viewed in certain rooms, computers containing digital copies couldn’t access a network etc etc.
How the hell do you lose copies of plans to such a secure building, and how the hell were the plans even allowed off the site in the first place?
Whenever I’ve heard him he has not particularly impressed me. A bit of an automaton in the way he speaks. And, groan, another ex-GS alumni. Bad enough having an ex-DB banker as Chancellor. The amount of damage those two firms have caused ........
What we need is more lawyers in government.
There is no space-time continuum that would be improved by having Richard Burgon in government.
I think @TheScreamingEagles meant to say that we need more good lawyers in government.
The moron who stuffed up procurement of ammunition for the British army was a lawyer.
He actually told me that he had done the right thing - the fact that it was a disaster was outside his remit.
He replaced a group of... basically gun nuts in the MoD who had done ammo procurement up to that point.
I don't see it paying out. With 364 MPs to choose from - possibly more when Boris destroys the rest of the Red Wall in 2024 - there's likely to be more impressive candidates to choose from by then.
It is a fantastic trading bet.
What is the difference between a trading bet and any other kind of bet?
A regular bet is one where you think the market price is wrong - i.e., you believe that the probability of the actual event is meaningfully different to the priced probability.
A trading bet is one where you believe the market price will change for some reason. So, for example, you might believe that Tottenham's implied probability for the winning the PL is absolutely right, but you notice they have three away games in six days ahead of them. You think that they're likely to drop points, and therefore the market price is likely to move against them in the next week. So you sell them for the PL expecting to buy them back in a week's time at better price.
They dont seem that different to me. I would have thought the Tottenham scenario is in the price, and it wouldn't move that much if they lost all three games, because they are likely to drop points
Surely every bet you have you believe the market price would change in the direction you are betting, else you'd wait for the bigger price?
Essentially it comes down to whether you intend to hold to maturity or whether you expect - at the time of making the bet - to liquidate prior to maturity
That is a much more concise and pithy summary than my turgid efforts.
Whenever I’ve heard him he has not particularly impressed me. A bit of an automaton in the way he speaks. And, groan, another ex-GS alumni. Bad enough having an ex-DB banker as Chancellor. The amount of damage those two firms have caused ........
What we need is more lawyers in government.
There is no space-time continuum that would be improved by having Richard Burgon in government.
I think @TheScreamingEagles meant to say that we need more good lawyers in government.
Yes but in my defence there are so few bad lawyers in the world. Ahem.
What about Unite’s lawyer? I read the judgement in Turley v Unite and Walker this afternoon and I really enjoyed the moment where the judge mocked the counsel for the defence for suggesting no damage had been done because everyone knows Skwawkbox only publishes a pack of lies anyway.
The whole thing is worth reading, but the contortions revealed on pages 42-44 are something else.
Incredibly, Walker is now claiming that the judgement went against Turley because the judge told her off for not sharing a series of WhatsApp messages in a timely manner (P. 72) - and is editing Wikipedia to that effect, without mentioning that the judge considered the fact she was mistaken did not mean she had lied to the court as Walker and Unite repeatedly and publicly claimed.
Whenever I’ve heard him he has not particularly impressed me. A bit of an automaton in the way he speaks. And, groan, another ex-GS alumni. Bad enough having an ex-DB banker as Chancellor. The amount of damage those two firms have caused ........
What we need is more lawyers in government.
There is no space-time continuum that would be improved by having Richard Burgon in government.
I’ve actually got an explanation for how Richard Burgon was accepted into St John’s.
My friend’s brother was also at St John’s at the same time as Burgon and that Burgon was very good at English literature but he was a proper lefty (his uncle was a Labour MP) and that Burgon engaged in some shocking logic defying positions to support a left wing agenda, which has become worse with age.
He may have done it to impress a lady as well but he ended up as Chairman of CULC.
So the issue isn’t Cambridge letting in a duffer but the law firms that hired Burgon.
Didn't Nick Griffin go to Cambridge?
He did, which is a shame as Cambridge is well known and well honoured for producing alumni who fight against fascism.
Whenever I’ve heard him he has not particularly impressed me. A bit of an automaton in the way he speaks. And, groan, another ex-GS alumni. Bad enough having an ex-DB banker as Chancellor. The amount of damage those two firms have caused ........
What we need is more lawyers in government.
There is no space-time continuum that would be improved by having Richard Burgon in government.
I’ve actually got an explanation for how Richard Burgon was accepted into St John’s.
My friend’s brother was also at St John’s at the same time as Burgon and that Burgon was very good at English literature but he was a proper lefty (his uncle was a Labour MP) and that Burgon engaged in some shocking logic defying positions to support a left wing agenda, which has become worse with age.
He may have done it to impress a lady as well but he ended up as Chairman of CULC.
So the issue isn’t Cambridge letting in a duffer but the law firms that hired Burgon.
Didn't Nick Griffin go to Cambridge?
He did, which is a shame as Cambridge is well known and well honoured for producing alumni who fight against fascism.
Whenever I’ve heard him he has not particularly impressed me. A bit of an automaton in the way he speaks. And, groan, another ex-GS alumni. Bad enough having an ex-DB banker as Chancellor. The amount of damage those two firms have caused ........
Doesn’t harm that he’s filthy rich, though.
A filthy rich ex-GS banker will have such an understanding of the issues for people living in towns like Millom and Workington and Barrow, won’t he?
You can’t make sensible public policy just by looking at a spreadsheet.
All of which more or less you could have said, and many did, about Boris. We've moved on from there I think.
Whenever I’ve heard him he has not particularly impressed me. A bit of an automaton in the way he speaks. And, groan, another ex-GS alumni. Bad enough having an ex-DB banker as Chancellor. The amount of damage those two firms have caused ........
What we need is more lawyers in government.
There is no space-time continuum that would be improved by having Richard Burgon in government.
I’ve actually got an explanation for how Richard Burgon was accepted into St John’s.
My friend’s brother was also at St John’s at the same time as Burgon and that Burgon was very good at English literature but he was a proper lefty (his uncle was a Labour MP) and that Burgon engaged in some shocking logic defying positions to support a left wing agenda, which has become worse with age.
He may have done it to impress a lady as well but he ended up as Chairman of CULC.
So the issue isn’t Cambridge letting in a duffer but the law firms that hired Burgon.
Didn't Nick Griffin go to Cambridge?
He did, which is a shame as Cambridge is well known and well honoured for producing alumni who fight against fascism.
If Boris is a success he has 5-10 years as PM, by which time Rishi will be a senior Cabinet minister while the Javids and Patels of the world will be long in the tooth
If Boris is a failure then you are likely not getting a Tory next PM anyway
(a) Boris is rapid failure, and is ejected by his party in the next five years. Chance: very small. Result: a current senior Cabinet Minister is next PM.
(b) Boris is a slightly less rapid failure and is dumped by the electorate in 2024. Chance: a bit higher. Result: a non-Conservative is next PM.
(c) Boris is a relative success and hands over in the next Parliament. Chance: reasonable. Result: someone who is not currently a senior Cabinet Minister becomes PM.
Personally, I'd simply sell the favourites right now.
I don't see it paying out. With 364 MPs to choose from - possibly more when Boris destroys the rest of the Red Wall in 2024 - there's likely to be more impressive candidates to choose from by then.
It is a fantastic trading bet.
What is the difference between a trading bet and any other kind of bet?
A regular bet is one where you think the market price is wrong - i.e., you believe that the probability of the actual event is meaningfully different to the priced probability.
A trading bet is one where you believe the market price will change for some reason. So, for example, you might believe that Tottenham's implied probability for the winning the PL is absolutely right, but you notice they have three away games in six days ahead of them. You think that they're likely to drop points, and therefore the market price is likely to move against them in the next week. So you sell them for the PL expecting to buy them back in a week's time at better price.
They dont seem that different to me. I would have thought the Tottenham scenario is in the price, and it wouldn't move that much if they lost all three games, because they are likely to drop points
Surely every bet you have you believe the market price would change in the direction you are betting, else you'd wait for the bigger price?
Yes, football is a pretty efficient market. Politics is less efficient.
Ultimately, you can make money by either correctly forecasting probabilities, or by correctly forecasting how the market will move.
If you think that Buttigieg will win Iowa, you should buy him for the nomination because the market will likely over-react to the news of his victory, irrespective of whether he has any realistic shot at the nomination.
Personally, I think there is a role for both kids of betting.
I'm still not really any the wiser as to why there is any need to call a bet a 'trading bet'. I mean, I know what you mean, and that's what I thought people meant by the term, but really, the logic applies to all long term bets. You don't back someone at 10/1 thinking the related events that follow immediately are going to be bad for them, and the market will go against you, but they'll win anyway, you do it because you think the odds offered will change in your favour, which applies to all long term bets, whether you call them 'trading' or not.
Whenever I’ve heard him he has not particularly impressed me. A bit of an automaton in the way he speaks. And, groan, another ex-GS alumni. Bad enough having an ex-DB banker as Chancellor. The amount of damage those two firms have caused ........
What we need is more lawyers in government.
There is no space-time continuum that would be improved by having Richard Burgon in government.
I think @TheScreamingEagles meant to say that we need more good lawyers in government.
Yes but in my defence there are so few bad lawyers in the world. Ahem.
What about Unite’s lawyer? I read the judgement in Turley v Unite and Walker this afternoon and I really enjoyed the moment where the judge mocked the counsel for the defence for suggesting no damage had been done because everyone knows Skwawkbox only publishes a pack of lies anyway.
The whole thing is worth reading, but the contortions revealed on pages 42-44 are something else.
Incredibly, Walker is now claiming that the judgement went against Turley because the judge told her off for not sharing a series of WhatsApp messages in a timely manner (P. 72) - and is editing Wikipedia to that effect, without mentioning that the judge considered the fact she was mistaken did not mean she had lied to the court as Walker and Unite repeatedly and publicly claimed.
Whenever I’ve heard him he has not particularly impressed me. A bit of an automaton in the way he speaks. And, groan, another ex-GS alumni. Bad enough having an ex-DB banker as Chancellor. The amount of damage those two firms have caused ........
What we need is more lawyers in government.
There is no space-time continuum that would be improved by having Richard Burgon in government.
I’ve actually got an explanation for how Richard Burgon was accepted into St John’s.
My friend’s brother was also at St John’s at the same time as Burgon and that Burgon was very good at English literature but he was a proper lefty (his uncle was a Labour MP) and that Burgon engaged in some shocking logic defying positions to support a left wing agenda, which has become worse with age.
He may have done it to impress a lady as well but he ended up as Chairman of CULC.
So the issue isn’t Cambridge letting in a duffer but the law firms that hired Burgon.
Didn't Nick Griffin go to Cambridge?
He did, which is a shame as Cambridge is well known and well honoured for producing alumni who fight against fascism.
Whenever I’ve heard him he has not particularly impressed me. A bit of an automaton in the way he speaks. And, groan, another ex-GS alumni. Bad enough having an ex-DB banker as Chancellor. The amount of damage those two firms have caused ........
What we need is more lawyers in government.
There is no space-time continuum that would be improved by having Richard Burgon in government.
I think @TheScreamingEagles meant to say that we need more good lawyers in government.
Yes but in my defence there are so few bad lawyers in the world. Ahem.
What about Unite’s lawyer? I read the judgement in Turley v Unite and Walker this afternoon and I really enjoyed the moment where the judge mocked the counsel for the defence for suggesting no damage had been done because everyone knows Skwawkbox only publishes a pack of lies anyway.
The whole thing is worth reading, but the contortions revealed on pages 42-44 are something else.
Incredibly, Walker is now claiming that the judgement went against Turley because the judge told her off for not sharing a series of WhatsApp messages in a timely manner (P. 72) - and is editing Wikipedia to that effect, without mentioning that the judge considered the fact she was mistaken did not mean she had lied to the court as Walker and Unite repeatedly and publicly claimed.
Thanks for that. Something to pass the time on a plane next week (and more amenable to fellow passengers than the B737 Max accident report that’s currently at the top of my reading list!).
He did, which is a shame as Cambridge is well known and well honoured for producing alumni who fight against fascism.
Having members at the forefront for and against any debate is probably what you want from a university.
So, Cambridge should produce biologists who believe in Intelligent Design?
Sure, if they can do so.
You tip up at Cambridge on day one and are just in awe of the place. Days two to quite a few. You're in the bar.
Day's beyond that you get to think. Frolic in the thought of others. Jive to your own intellectual thing.
If you finish up thinking Intelligent Design is wise and good, then I'm listening.
With all academia, there is the need to have a constant requestioning of assumptions, to test the truth. But there also comes a point where blindness to evidence becomes an issue.
It was good that Dr Wakefield questioned the assumptions about what caused autism. It was bad that he broke medical ethics rules. It was appalling that he continued pushing his agenda without mentioning his financial interest, or after the giant epistimological studies (Yokohama) proved way beyond reasonable doubt that multi-part vaccines didn't cause autism,.
I don't see it paying out. With 364 MPs to choose from - possibly more when Boris destroys the rest of the Red Wall in 2024 - there's likely to be more impressive candidates to choose from by then.
It is a fantastic trading bet.
What is the difference between a trading bet and any other kind of bet?
A regular bet is one where you think the market price is wrong - i.e., you believe that the probability of the actual event is meaningfully different to the priced probability.
A trading bet is one where you believe the market price will change for some reason. So, for example, you might believe that Tottenham's implied probability for the winning the PL is absolutely right, but you notice they have three away games in six days ahead of them. You think that they're likely to drop points, and therefore the market price is likely to move against them in the next week. So you sell them for the PL expecting to buy them back in a week's time at better price.
They dont seem that different to me. I would have thought the Tottenham scenario is in the price, and it wouldn't move that much if they lost all three games, because they are likely to drop points
Surely every bet you have you believe the market price would change in the direction you are betting, else you'd wait for the bigger price?
Essentially it comes down to whether you intend to hold to maturity or whether you expect - at the time of making the bet - to liquidate prior to maturity
That is a much more concise and pithy summary than my turgid efforts.
You do realise my job is basically to summarise turgid efforts concisely and pithily?
I don't see it paying out. With 364 MPs to choose from - possibly more when Boris destroys the rest of the Red Wall in 2024 - there's likely to be more impressive candidates to choose from by then.
It is a fantastic trading bet.
What is the difference between a trading bet and any other kind of bet?
A regular bet is one where you think the market price is wrong - i.e., you believe that the probability of the actual event is meaningfully different to the priced probability.
A trading bet is one where and therefore the market price is likely to move against them in the next week. So you sell them for the PL expecting to buy them back in a week's time at better price.
They dont seem that different to me. I would have thought the Tottenham scenario is in the price, and it wouldn't move that much if they lost all three games, because they are likely to drop points
Surely every bet you have you believe the market price would change in the direction you are betting, else you'd wait for the bigger price?
Yes, football is a pretty efficient market. Politics is less efficient.
Ultimately, you can make money by either correctly forecasting probabilities, or by correctly forecasting how the market will move.
If you think that Buttigieg will win Iowa, you should buy him for the nomination because the market will likely over-react to the news of his victory, irrespective of whether he has any realistic shot at the nomination.
Personally, I think there is a role for both kids of betting.
I'm still not really any the wiser as to why there is any need to call a bet a 'trading bet'. I mean, I know what you mean, and that's what I thought people meant by the term, but really, the logic applies to all long term bets. You don't back someone at 10/1 thinking the related events that follow immediately are going to be bad for them, and the market will go against you, but they'll win anyway, you do it because you think the odds offered will change in your favour, which applies to all long term bets, whether you call them 'trading' or not.
Maybe since the advent of bf where you can lay off your position it has become more of a thing. Previously you backed something you thought was going to happen and waited. Now you can back it knowing it won't happen but might get more likely.
I see @viewcode is compiling a list of things that happened to people who comment on here in 2019. Well, my first child, a son, was born on November 1st. Leading up to the big day I had thought it would be a happy coincidence if we left the EU at 11pm on October 31st, as the government had said we would, making him one of the first British children to be born a non EU citizen for forty odd years... but it wasn't to be.
It's not that detail that keeps me up at night though!
Condolences to all those on the list who had sad news this year.
Whenever I’ve heard him he has not particularly impressed me. A bit of an automaton in the way he speaks. And, groan, another ex-GS alumni. Bad enough having an ex-DB banker as Chancellor. The amount of damage those two firms have caused ........
What we need is more lawyers in government.
There is no space-time continuum that would be improved by having Richard Burgon in government.
I’ve actually got an explanation for how Richard Burgon was accepted into St John’s.
My friend’s brother was also at St John’s at the same time as Burgon and that Burgon was very good at English literature but he was a proper lefty (his uncle was a Labour MP) and that Burgon engaged in some shocking logic defying positions to support a left wing agenda, which has become worse with age.
He may have done it to impress a lady as well but he ended up as Chairman of CULC.
So the issue isn’t Cambridge letting in a duffer but the law firms that hired Burgon.
Didn't Nick Griffin go to Cambridge?
He did, which is a shame as Cambridge is well known and well honoured for producing alumni who fight against fascism.
He did, which is a shame as Cambridge is well known and well honoured for producing alumni who fight against fascism.
Having members at the forefront for and against any debate is probably what you want from a university.
So, Cambridge should produce biologists who believe in Intelligent Design?
Sure, if they can do so.
You tip up at Cambridge on day one and are just in awe of the place. Days two to quite a few. You're in the bar.
Day's beyond that you get to think. Frolic in the thought of others. Jive to your own intellectual thing.
If you finish up thinking Intelligent Design is wise and good, then I'm listening.
With all academia, there is the need to have a constant requestioning of assumptions, to test the truth. But there also comes a point where blindness to evidence becomes an issue.
It was good that Dr Wakefield questioned the assumptions about what caused autism. It was bad that he broke medical ethics rules. It was appalling that he continued pushing his agenda without mentioning his financial interest, or after the giant epistimological studies (Yokohama) proved way beyond reasonable doubt that multi-part vaccines didn't cause autism,.
I'm listening to you too.
Ideas in academia work because they're ideas. Politicians sometimes nab those ideas and dress them up like truth. That tends not to work out.
I'd suggest the whole field of Economics falls foul or this.
I don't see it paying out. With 364 MPs to choose from - possibly more when Boris destroys the rest of the Red Wall in 2024 - there's likely to be more impressive candidates to choose from by then.
It is a fantastic trading bet.
What is the difference between a trading bet and any other kind of bet?
A regular bet is one where you think the market price is wrong - i.e., you believe that the probability of the actual event is meaningfully different to the priced probability.
A trading bet is one where and therefore the market price is likely to move against them in the next week. So you sell them for the PL expecting to buy them back in a week's time at better price.
They dont seem that different to me. I would have thought the Tottenham scenario is in the price, and it wouldn't move that much if they lost all three games, because they are likely to drop points
Surely every bet you have you believe the market price would change in the direction you are betting, else you'd wait for the bigger price?
Yes, football is a pretty efficient market. Politics is less efficient.
Ultimately, you can make money by either correctly forecasting probabilities, or by correctly forecasting how the market will move.
If you think that Buttigieg will win Iowa, you should buy him for the nomination because the market will likely over-react to the news of his victory, irrespective of whether he has any realistic shot at the nomination.
Personally, I think there is a role for both kids of betting.
I'm still not really any the wiser as to why there is any need to call a bet a 'trading bet'. I mean, I know what you mean, and that's what I thought people meant by the term, but really, the logic applies to all long term bets. You don't back someone at 10/1 thinking the related events that follow immediately are going to be bad for them, and the market will go against you, but they'll win anyway, you do it because you think the odds offered will change in your favour, which applies to all long term bets, whether you call them 'trading' or not.
Maybe since the advent of bf where you can lay off your position it has become more of a thing. Previously you backed something you thought was going to happen and waited. Now you can back it knowing it won't happen but might get more likely.
Yes, every long term bet seems to be a trading bet, in my opinion
I don't see it paying out. With 364 MPs to choose from - possibly more when Boris destroys the rest of the Red Wall in 2024 - there's likely to be more impressive candidates to choose from by then.
It is a fantastic trading bet.
What is the difference between a trading bet and any other kind of bet?
A regular bet is one where you think the market price is wrong - i.e., you believe that the probability of the actual event is meaningfully different to the priced probability.
A trading bet is one where and therefore the market price is likely to move against them in the next week. So you sell them for the PL expecting to buy them back in a week's time at better price.
They dont seem that different to me. I would have thought the Tottenham scenario is in the price, and it wouldn't move that much if they lost all three games, because they are likely to drop points
Surely every bet you have you believe the market price would change in the direction you are betting, else you'd wait for the bigger price?
Yes, football is a pretty efficient market. Politics is less efficient.
Ultimately, you can make money by either correctly forecasting probabilities, or by correctly forecasting how the market will move.
If you think that Buttigieg will win Iowa, you should buy him for the nomination because the market will likely over-react to the news of his victory, irrespective of whether he has any realistic shot at the nomination.
Personally, I think there is a role for both kids of betting.
I'm still not really any the wiser as to why there is any need to call a bet a 'trading bet'. I mean, I know what you mean, and that's what I thought people meant by the term, but really, the logic applies to all long term bets. You don't back someone at 10/1 thinking the related events that follow immediately are going to be bad for them, and the market will go against you, but they'll win anyway, you do it because you think the odds offered will change in your favour, which applies to all long term bets, whether you call them 'trading' or not.
Maybe since the advent of bf where you can lay off your position it has become more of a thing. Previously you backed something you thought was going to happen and waited. Now you can back it knowing it won't happen but might get more likely.
More exactly - a large number of other people will believe it is more likely to happen.
They dont seem that different to me. I would have thought the Tottenham scenario is in the price, and it wouldn't move that much if they lost all three games, because they are likely to drop points
Surely every bet you have you believe the market price would change in the direction you are betting, else you'd wait for the bigger price?
Yes, football is a pretty efficient market. Politics is less efficient.
Ultimately, you can make money by either correctly forecasting probabilities, or by correctly forecasting how the market will move.
If you think that Buttigieg will win Iowa, you should buy him for the nomination because the market will likely over-react to the news of his victory, irrespective of whether he has any realistic shot at the nomination.
Personally, I think there is a role for both kids of betting.
I'm still not really any the wiser as to why there is any need to call a bet a 'trading bet'. I mean, I know what you mean, and that's what I thought people meant by the term, but really, the logic applies to all long term bets. You don't back someone at 10/1 thinking the related events that follow immediately are going to be bad for them, and the market will go against you, but they'll win anyway, you do it because you think the odds offered will change in your favour, which applies to all long term bets, whether you call them 'trading' or not.
I currently run a Democratic nomination bot on Betfair. Basically, I have my general probabilities for each of the candidates, and it tries to maintain a fairly balanced book based on what I think are the likely eventual outcomes and my tolerence for risk. (Disclaimer: I lose a lot of H Clinton is the nominee.)
But it's all based on my views as to the likelihood of who will win, and I update my internal forecasts all the time. So, I've raised my Biden likelihood pretty much every day for the last two weeks, while Buttigieg has faded somewhat. It's pretty pure, and seems likely to make me a reasonable sum.
What it doesn't do is forecast short-term moves. If a price spikes away from my central forecast it dabbles. It does a small amount of market making, and regularly has offers in on a number of candidates. It doesn't really making trading bets, it makes bets based on when the price is away from what I regard as the real probability of an event taking place.
I don't see it paying out. With 364 MPs to choose from - possibly more when Boris destroys the rest of the Red Wall in 2024 - there's likely to be more impressive candidates to choose from by then.
It is a fantastic trading bet.
What is the difference between a trading bet and any other kind of bet?
A regular bet is one where you think the market price is wrong - i.e., you believe that the probability of the actual event is meaningfully different to the priced probability.
A trading bet is one where you believe the market price will change for some reason. So, for example, you might believe that Tottenham's implied probability for the winning the PL is absolutely right, but you notice they have three away games in six days ahead of them. You think that they're likely to drop points, and therefore the market price is likely to move against them in the next week. So you sell them for the PL expecting to buy them back in a week's time at better price.
They dont seem that different to me. I would have thought the Tottenham scenario is in the price, and it wouldn't move that much if they lost all three games, because they are likely to drop points
Surely every bet you have you believe the market price would change in the direction you are betting, else you'd wait for the bigger price?
Yes, football is a pretty efficient market. Politics is less efficient.
Ultimately, you can make money by either correctly forecasting probabilities, or by correctly forecasting how the market will move.
If you think that Buttigieg will win Iowa, you should buy him for the nomination because the market will likely over-react to the news of his victory, irrespective of whether he has any realistic shot at the nomination.
Personally, I think there is a role for both kids of betting.
Whenever I’ve heard him he has not particularly impressed me. A bit of an automaton in the way he speaks. And, groan, another ex-GS alumni. Bad enough having an ex-DB banker as Chancellor. The amount of damage those two firms have caused ........
What we need is more lawyers in government.
There is no space-time continuum that would be improved by having Richard Burgon in government.
I’ve actually got an explanation for how Richard Burgon was accepted into St John’s.
My friend’s brother was also at St John’s at the same time as Burgon and that Burgon was very good at English literature but he was a proper lefty (his uncle was a Labour MP) and that Burgon engaged in some shocking logic defying positions to support a left wing agenda, which has become worse with age.
He may have done it to impress a lady as well but he ended up as Chairman of CULC.
So the issue isn’t Cambridge letting in a duffer but the law firms that hired Burgon.
Didn't Nick Griffin go to Cambridge?
He did, which is a shame as Cambridge is well known and well honoured for producing alumni who fight against fascism.
I don't see it paying out. With 364 MPs to choose from - possibly more when Boris destroys the rest of the Red Wall in 2024 - there's likely to be more impressive candidates to choose from by then.
It is a fantastic trading bet.
What is the difference between a trading bet and any other kind of bet?
A regular bet is one where you think the market price is wrong - i.e., you believe that the probability of the actual event is meaningfully different to the priced probability.
A trading bet is one where and therefore the market price is likely to move against them in the next week. So you sell them for the PL expecting to buy them back in a week's time at better price.
They dont seem that different to me. I would have thought the Tottenham scenario is in the price, and it wouldn't move that much if they lost all three games, because they are likely to drop points
Surely every bet you have you believe the market price would change in the direction you are betting, else you'd wait for the bigger price?
Yes, football is a pretty efficient market. Politics is less efficient.
Ultimately, you can make money by either correctly forecasting probabilities, or by correctly forecasting how the market will move.
If you think that Buttigieg will win Iowa, you should buy him for the nomi
Personally, I think there is a role for both kids of betting.
I'm still not really any the wiser as to why there is any need to call a bet a 'trading bet'. I mean, I know what you mean, and that's what I thought people meant by the term, but really, the logic applies to all long term bets. You don't back someone at 10/1 thinking the related events that follow immediately are going to be bad for them, and the market will go against you, but they'll win anyway, you do it because you think the odds offered will change in your favour, which applies to all long term bets, whether you call them 'trading' or not.
Maybe since the advent of bf where you can lay off your position it has become more of a thing. Previously you backed something you thought was going to happen and waited. Now you can back it knowing it won't happen but might get more likely.
Yes, every long term bet seems to be a trading bet, in my opinion
Whenever I’ve heard him he has not particularly impressed me. A bit of an automaton in the way he speaks. And, groan, another ex-GS alumni. Bad enough having an ex-DB banker as Chancellor. The amount of damage those two firms have caused ........
What we need is more lawyers in government.
There is no space-time continuum that would be improved by having Richard Burgon in government.
I’ve actually got an explanation for how Richard Burgon was accepted into St John’s.
My friend’s brother was also at St John’s at the same time as Burgon and that Burgon was very good at English literature but he was a proper lefty (his uncle was a Labour MP) and that Burgon engaged in some shocking logic defying positions to support a left wing agenda, which has become worse with age.
He may have done it to impress a lady as well but he ended up as Chairman of CULC.
So the issue isn’t Cambridge letting in a duffer but the law firms that hired Burgon.
Didn't Nick Griffin go to Cambridge?
He did, which is a shame as Cambridge is well known and well honoured for producing alumni who fight against fascism.
That’s an extremely generous interpretation of their position.
Almost as generous as a review that gives The Last Jedi one star out of five rather than a minus number.
I think you mean Cats rather than The Last Jedi
Wouldn’t know, haven’t seen cats. Well, other than my two, obviously.
It currently has a 17% favourable rating on Rotten Tomatoes
Blimey. It must be very nearly as bad as Solo then.
The Solo trailer had you questioning your sanity and/or the future of civilisation ?
It was the more subtle, mind numbingly paint by numbers kind of bad, so the trailer was able to fool us - from the sounds of it the terrifying Cats trailer has saved many of us from an awful experience, so it should be applauded.
I don't see it paying out. With 364 MPs to choose from - possibly more when Boris destroys the rest of the Red Wall in 2024 - there's likely to be more impressive candidates to choose from by then.
It is a fantastic trading bet.
What is the difference between a trading bet and any other kind of bet?
A regular bet is one where you think the market price is wrong - i.e., you believe that the probability of the actual event is meaningfully different to the priced probability.
A trading bet is one where you believe the market price will change for some reason. So, for example, you might believe that Tottenham's implied probability for the winning the PL is absolutely right, but you notice they have three away games in six days ahead of them. You think that they're likely to drop points, and therefore the market price is likely to move against them in the next week. So you sell them for the PL expecting to buy them back in a week's time at better price.
They dont seem that different to me. I would have thought the Tottenham scenario is in the price, and it wouldn't move that much if they lost all three games, because they are likely to drop points
Surely every bet you have you believe the market price would change in the direction you are betting, else you'd wait for the bigger price?
Essentially it comes down to whether you intend to hold to maturity or whether you expect - at the time of making the bet - to liquidate prior to maturity
That is a much more concise and pithy summary than my turgid efforts.
You do realise my job is basically to summarise turgid efforts concisely and pithily?
They dont seem that different to me. I would have thought the Tottenham scenario is in the price, and it wouldn't move that much if they lost all three games, because they are likely to drop points
Surely every bet you have you believe the market price would change in the direction you are betting, else you'd wait for the bigger price?
Yes, football is a pretty efficient market. Politics is less efficient.
Ultimately, you can make money by either correctly forecasting probabilities, or by correctly forecasting how the market will move.
If you think that Buttigieg will win Iowa, you should buy him for the nomination because the market will likely over-react to the news of his victory, irrespective of whether he has any realistic shot at the nomination.
Personally, I think there is a role for both kids of betting.
I'm still not really any the wiser as to why there is any need to call a bet a 'trading bet'. I mean, I know what you mean, and that's what I thought people meant by the term, but really, the logic applies to all long term bets. You don't back someone at 10/1 thinking the related events that follow immediately are going to be bad for them, and the market will go against you, but they'll win anyway, you do it because you think the odds offered will change in your favour, which applies to all long term bets, whether you call them 'trading' or not.
I currently run a Democratic nomination bot on Betfair. Basically, I have my general probabilities for each of the candidates, and it tries to maintain a fairly balanced book based on what I think are the likely eventual outcomes and my tolerence for risk. (Disclaimer: I lose a lot of H Clinton is the nominee.)
But it's all based on my views as to the likelihood of who will win, and I update my internal forecasts all the time. So, I've raised my Biden likelihood pretty much every day for the last two weeks, while Buttigieg has faded somewhat. It's pretty pure, and seems likely to make me a reasonable sum.
What it doesn't do is forecast short-term moves. If a price spikes away from my central forecast it dabbles. It does a small amount of market making, and regularly has offers in on a number of candidates. It doesn't really making trading bets, it makes bets based on when the price is away from what I regard as the real probability of an event taking place.
I guess my definition of a trading bet is "a bet that I might get out of for profit or loss rather than let run" which is every bet barring punts on today's racing /football etc.. But fine, thanks for your take on what it means
I see @viewcode is compiling a list of things that happened to people who comment on here in 2019. Well, my first child, a son, was born on November 1st. Leading up to the big day I had thought it would be a happy coincidence if we left the EU at 11pm on October 31st, as the government had said we would, making him one of the first British children to be born a non EU citizen for forty odd years... but it wasn't to be.
It's not that detail that keeps me up at night though!
Condolences to all those on the list who had sad news this year.
I see @viewcode is compiling a list of things that happened to people who comment on here in 2019. Well, my first child, a son, was born on November 1st. Leading up to the big day I had thought it would be a happy coincidence if we left the EU at 11pm on October 31st, as the government had said we would, making him one of the first British children to be born a non EU citizen for forty odd years... but it wasn't to be.
It's not that detail that keeps me up at night though!
Condolences to all those on the list who had sad news this year.
According to Twitter (so caveat emptor) Iain Duncan Smith is being awarded a knighthood.
Fair reward for his leadership of the party, his social justice campaigns and holding Chingford and Woodford Green against the Momentum onslaught. Well done Sir Iain
Comments
Whenever I’ve heard him he has not particularly impressed me. A bit of an automaton in the way he speaks. And, groan, another ex-GS alumni. Bad enough having an ex-DB banker as Chancellor. The amount of damage those two firms have caused ........
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-50925321
(Insufficient pineapple in the diet to really work mind)
My friend’s brother was also at St John’s at the same time as Burgon and that Burgon was very good at English literature but he was a proper lefty (his uncle was a Labour MP) and that Burgon engaged in some shocking logic defying positions to support a left wing agenda, which has become worse with age.
He may have done it to impress a lady as well but he ended up as Chairman of CULC.
So the issue isn’t Cambridge letting in a duffer but the law firms that hired Burgon.
A trading bet is one where you believe the market price will change for some reason. So, for example, you might believe that Tottenham's implied probability for the winning the PL is absolutely right, but you notice they have three away games in six days ahead of them. You think that they're likely to drop points, and therefore the market price is likely to move against them in the next week. So you sell them for the PL expecting to buy them back in a week's time at better price.
However he would have to see off the likes of Javid, Raab and Patel if they are still around and also face the problem he would be seeking an unprecedented third decade of the Tories in power, something they have not achieved since Lord Liverpool.
Despite the current uselessness of the opposition by then even Labour and the LDs might have got their act together
A lot of idiots go to Cambridge (or Oxford or Harvard), and a lot of very smart people either didn't go to University at all, or went somewhere without the history or the reputation.
It turns out that people develop at different rates. Top of the primary school class at six years old does not mean likely CEO.
https://nyti.ms/2Q0slra
Moreover, it didn’t exactly last for the full decade.
Look at South America. Those countries that buckled to Trump's pressure in 2017/18 and introduced voluntary export controls (Brazil and Argentina) have been royally shat upon by Trump when he chucked tariffs on them both.
They won't make that mistake again: China keeps its promises and Trump will have just moved two likely Western/US allies into the China camp.
Surely every bet you have you believe the market price would change in the direction you are betting, else you'd wait for the bigger price?
Having members at the forefront for and against any debate is probably what you want from a university.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=MhX3ez_Onvo
Ultimately, you can make money by either correctly forecasting probabilities, or by correctly forecasting how the market will move.
If you think that Buttigieg will win Iowa, you should buy him for the nomination because the market will likely over-react to the news of his victory, irrespective of whether he has any realistic shot at the nomination.
Personally, I think there is a role for both kids of betting.
If Boris is a success he has 5-10 years as PM, by which time Rishi will be a senior Cabinet minister while the Javids and Patels of the world will be long in the tooth
If Boris is a failure then you are likely not getting a Tory next PM anyway
You can’t make sensible public policy just by looking at a spreadsheet.
Almost as generous as a review that gives The Last Jedi one star out of five rather than a minus number.
I think @TheScreamingEagles meant to say that we need more good lawyers in government.
You tip up at Cambridge on day one and are just in awe of the place. Days two to quite a few. You're in the bar.
Day's beyond that you get to think. Frolic in the thought of others. Jive to your own intellectual thing.
If you finish up thinking Intelligent Design is wise and good, then I'm listening.
Ferfuxsake.
Floor plans of MI6's central London headquarters were lost by building contractors during a refurbishment.
The documents, most of which were recovered inside the building, held sensitive information on the layout, including entry and exit points.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-50927854
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Btb8gLy3-E
He worked on a project in a prison in the U.K. a decade or so ago. As expected, all copies of the plans were numbered and watermarked, had to be signed in an out, had to be kept in a certain safe and viewed in certain rooms, computers containing digital copies couldn’t access a network etc etc.
How the hell do you lose copies of plans to such a secure building, and how the hell were the plans even allowed off the site in the first place?
He actually told me that he had done the right thing - the fact that it was a disaster was outside his remit.
He replaced a group of... basically gun nuts in the MoD who had done ammo procurement up to that point.
The whole thing is worth reading, but the contortions revealed on pages 42-44 are something else.
Incredibly, Walker is now claiming that the judgement went against Turley because the judge told her off for not sharing a series of WhatsApp messages in a timely manner (P. 72) - and is editing Wikipedia to that effect, without mentioning that the judge considered the fact she was mistaken did not mean she had lied to the court as Walker and Unite repeatedly and publicly claimed.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/films/0/cats-review-sinister-all-time-disaster-no-one-emerges-unscathed/
(b) Boris is a slightly less rapid failure and is dumped by the electorate in 2024. Chance: a bit higher. Result: a non-Conservative is next PM.
(c) Boris is a relative success and hands over in the next Parliament. Chance: reasonable. Result: someone who is not currently a senior Cabinet Minister becomes PM.
Personally, I'd simply sell the favourites right now.
It was good that Dr Wakefield questioned the assumptions about what caused autism. It was bad that he broke medical ethics rules. It was appalling that he continued pushing his agenda without mentioning his financial interest, or after the giant epistimological studies (Yokohama) proved way beyond reasonable doubt that multi-part vaccines didn't cause autism,.
It's not that detail that keeps me up at night though!
Condolences to all those on the list who had sad news this year.
Ideas in academia work because they're ideas. Politicians sometimes nab those ideas and dress them up like truth. That tends not to work out.
I'd suggest the whole field of Economics falls foul or this.
But it's all based on my views as to the likelihood of who will win, and I update my internal forecasts all the time. So, I've raised my Biden likelihood pretty much every day for the last two weeks, while Buttigieg has faded somewhat. It's pretty pure, and seems likely to make me a reasonable sum.
What it doesn't do is forecast short-term moves. If a price spikes away from my central forecast it dabbles. It does a small amount of market making, and regularly has offers in on a number of candidates. It doesn't really making trading bets, it makes bets based on when the price is away from what I regard as the real probability of an event taking place.
(Article here)
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/dec/27/tom-watson-i-quit-because-of-labour-brutality
Other than to think what was he doing hanging on so long ?
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/new-years-honours-list-2019