Howdy, Stranger!

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

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Rishi Sunak – tipped here for next PM when he was 200/1 now 25

SystemSystem Posts: 11,731
edited December 2019 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Rishi Sunak – tipped here for next PM when he was 200/1 now 25/1

My Ladbrokes betting slip

Read the full story here


«13

Comments

  • Options
    tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,223
    First. I didn't get on. I should have. :(
  • Options
    paulyork64paulyork64 Posts: 2,461
    First?
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,571
    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.
  • Options
    paulyork64paulyork64 Posts: 2,461
    DavidL said:

    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.
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,255
    You can still get 33/1 on him on Ladbrokes.

    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 ........
  • Options
    I guess I’m going to have give Philip some lessons about legendary modesty.
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,919
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 63,245
    Cyclefree said:

    You can still get 33/1 on him on Ladbrokes.

    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.
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,193
    tlg86 said:

    First. I didn't get on. I should have. :(

    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.
  • Options

    tlg86 said:

    First. I didn't get on. I should have. :(

    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.
  • Options
    Cyclefree said:

    You can still get 33/1 on him on Ladbrokes.

    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.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,611

    Cyclefree said:

    You can still get 33/1 on him on Ladbrokes.

    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.
  • Options
    Cyclefree said:

    You can still get 33/1 on him on Ladbrokes.

    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 ........

    The value is gone now.
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 41,118

    tlg86 said:

    First. I didn't get on. I should have. :(

    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?
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 63,245

    tlg86 said:

    First. I didn't get on. I should have. :(

    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.
    Indeed it was. Slightly less so now....
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 63,245
    isam said:

    tlg86 said:

    First. I didn't get on. I should have. :(

    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.
  • Options
    OmniumOmnium Posts: 9,850

    I guess I’m going to have give Philip some lessons about legendary modesty.

    I feel its likely that he has you on toast there. Assuming it's the DoE. And if he quite literally wants TSE on toast then I think we should do that :)

    (Insufficient pineapple in the diet to really work mind)

  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 41,118
    Nigelb said:

    isam said:

    tlg86 said:

    First. I didn't get on. I should have. :(

    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
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,760
    edited December 2019
    ydoethur said:

    Cyclefree said:

    You can still get 33/1 on him on Ladbrokes.

    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.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,295
    isam said:

    tlg86 said:

    First. I didn't get on. I should have. :(

    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.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 92,137

    Seems quite relevant, though an old tweet:
    https://twitter.com/simongerman600/status/1097468280669917184

    Who dares constrain China? They get huffy if sport stars tweet something disapproving, let alone anything real.
  • Options
    OmniumOmnium Posts: 9,850

    ydoethur said:

    Cyclefree said:

    You can still get 33/1 on him on Ladbrokes.

    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.

  • Options

    ydoethur said:

    Cyclefree said:

    You can still get 33/1 on him on Ladbrokes.

    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?
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,308
    edited December 2019
    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
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,295

    ydoethur said:

    Cyclefree said:

    You can still get 33/1 on him on Ladbrokes.

    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.
  • Options

    ydoethur said:

    Cyclefree said:

    You can still get 33/1 on him on Ladbrokes.

    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.

    https://nyti.ms/2Q0slra
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 63,245

    ydoethur said:

    Cyclefree said:

    You can still get 33/1 on him on Ladbrokes.

    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 ?

  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,611
    HYUFD said:

    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.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 63,245
    HYUFD said:

    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...

    200/1 about right, then.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,295
    kle4 said:

    Seems quite relevant, though an old tweet:
    https://twitter.com/simongerman600/status/1097468280669917184

    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.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,295
    rcs1000 said:

    kle4 said:

    Seems quite relevant, though an old tweet:
    https://twitter.com/simongerman600/status/1097468280669917184

    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.
    https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/02/business/economy/trump-tariffs-brazil-argentina-metal.html
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 41,118
    rcs1000 said:

    isam said:

    tlg86 said:

    First. I didn't get on. I should have. :(

    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?
  • Options
    OmniumOmnium Posts: 9,850


    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.



  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 50,108
    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
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,295
    isam said:

    rcs1000 said:

    isam said:

    tlg86 said:

    First. I didn't get on. I should have. :(

    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.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,295
    Omnium said:


    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?
  • Options
    Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 25,690
    rcs1000 said:

    isam said:

    rcs1000 said:

    isam said:

    tlg86 said:

    First. I didn't get on. I should have. :(

    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.
    Should we be encouraging minors to bet?
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,295
    Sandpit said:

    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.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,295

    rcs1000 said:

    isam said:

    rcs1000 said:

    isam said:

    tlg86 said:

    First. I didn't get on. I should have. :(

    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.
    Should we be encouraging minors to bet?
    :lol:
  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    The biggest advantage he has is time

    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
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,255
    Nigelb said:

    Cyclefree said:

    You can still get 33/1 on him on Ladbrokes.

    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.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,611

    ydoethur said:

    Cyclefree said:

    You can still get 33/1 on him on Ladbrokes.

    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.

    https://nyti.ms/2Q0slra
    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.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,611

    rcs1000 said:

    isam said:

    rcs1000 said:

    isam said:

    tlg86 said:

    First. I didn't get on. I should have. :(

    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.
    Should we be encouraging minors to bet?
    That sort of thing gets my goat, it really does.
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,255
    ydoethur said:

    Cyclefree said:

    You can still get 33/1 on him on Ladbrokes.

    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.
  • Options
    OmniumOmnium Posts: 9,850
    rcs1000 said:

    Omnium said:


    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.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,760
    edited December 2019
    Cyclefree said:

    ydoethur said:

    Cyclefree said:

    You can still get 33/1 on him on Ladbrokes.

    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.
  • Options
    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Cyclefree said:

    You can still get 33/1 on him on Ladbrokes.

    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.

    https://nyti.ms/2Q0slra
    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.
    You can see why someone suggested I would have made a fantastic spin doctor.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,611

    Cyclefree said:

    ydoethur said:

    Cyclefree said:

    You can still get 33/1 on him on Ladbrokes.

    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.
  • Options
    ydoethur said:

    Cyclefree said:

    ydoethur said:

    Cyclefree said:

    You can still get 33/1 on him on Ladbrokes.

    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.
    Do you have a link please?
  • Options
    paulyork64paulyork64 Posts: 2,461
    Cyclefree said:

    ydoethur said:

    Cyclefree said:

    You can still get 33/1 on him on Ladbrokes.

    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.
    They are. Both of them.
  • Options
    I guess this means Balfour Beatty will no longer get government contracts.

    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
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,308
    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Cyclefree said:

    You can still get 33/1 on him on Ladbrokes.

    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.

    https://nyti.ms/2Q0slra
    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
  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    isam said:

    rcs1000 said:

    isam said:

    tlg86 said:

    First. I didn't get on. I should have. :(

    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
  • Options
    HYUFD said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Cyclefree said:

    You can still get 33/1 on him on Ladbrokes.

    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.

    https://nyti.ms/2Q0slra
    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
    Honestly if I had to choose between rewatching Cats or watching my parents having sex I'd have to think about it.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,308
    ydoethur said:

    HYUFD said:

    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
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,295
    Has anyone commented on Tom Cruise's entry into the US Presidential race?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Btb8gLy3-E
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 50,108

    I guess this means Balfour Beatty will no longer get government contracts.

    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

    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?
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,919
    Cyclefree said:

    ydoethur said:

    Cyclefree said:

    You can still get 33/1 on him on Ladbrokes.

    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.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,295
    Charles said:

    isam said:

    rcs1000 said:

    isam said:

    tlg86 said:

    First. I didn't get on. I should have. :(

    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.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,611
    edited December 2019

    ydoethur said:

    Cyclefree said:

    ydoethur said:

    Cyclefree said:

    You can still get 33/1 on him on Ladbrokes.

    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.
    Do you have a link please?
    https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/Turley-v-Unite-2019-EWHC-3547-QB-Final-for-handdown.pdf

    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.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,611
    HYUFD said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Cyclefree said:

    You can still get 33/1 on him on Ladbrokes.

    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.

    https://nyti.ms/2Q0slra
    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.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,308

    HYUFD said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Cyclefree said:

    You can still get 33/1 on him on Ladbrokes.

    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.

    https://nyti.ms/2Q0slra
    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
    Honestly if I had to choose between rewatching Cats or watching my parents having sex I'd have to think about it.
    The Telegraph review of Cats is brilliant

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/films/0/cats-review-sinister-all-time-disaster-no-one-emerges-unscathed/
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,594
    Cyclefree said:

    Nigelb said:

    Cyclefree said:

    You can still get 33/1 on him on Ladbrokes.

    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.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,308
    ydoethur said:

    HYUFD said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Cyclefree said:

    You can still get 33/1 on him on Ladbrokes.

    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.

    https://nyti.ms/2Q0slra
    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
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,295
    Charles said:

    The biggest advantage he has is time

    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.
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 41,118
    rcs1000 said:

    isam said:

    rcs1000 said:

    isam said:

    tlg86 said:

    First. I didn't get on. I should have. :(

    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.
  • Options
    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Cyclefree said:

    ydoethur said:

    Cyclefree said:

    You can still get 33/1 on him on Ladbrokes.

    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.
    Do you have a link please?
    https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/Turley-v-Unite-2019-EWHC-3547-QB-Final-for-handdown.pdf

    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.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,611
    HYUFD said:

    ydoethur said:

    HYUFD said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Cyclefree said:

    You can still get 33/1 on him on Ladbrokes.

    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.

    https://nyti.ms/2Q0slra
    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.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 50,108
    edited December 2019
    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Cyclefree said:

    ydoethur said:

    Cyclefree said:

    You can still get 33/1 on him on Ladbrokes.

    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.
    Do you have a link please?
    https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/Turley-v-Unite-2019-EWHC-3547-QB-Final-for-handdown.pdf

    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!).
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,295
    Omnium said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Omnium said:


    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,.
  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    rcs1000 said:

    Charles said:

    isam said:

    rcs1000 said:

    isam said:

    tlg86 said:

    First. I didn't get on. I should have. :(

    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?
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,594
    isam said:

    rcs1000 said:

    isam said:

    rcs1000 said:

    isam said:

    tlg86 said:

    First. I didn't get on. I should have. :(

    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.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,308
    edited December 2019
    ydoethur said:

    HYUFD said:

    ydoethur said:

    HYUFD said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Cyclefree said:

    You can still get 33/1 on him on Ladbrokes.

    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.

    https://nyti.ms/2Q0slra
    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.
    Solo has a 70% rating, which tells you how bad the Cats film is to get just 17%
  • Options
    OmniumOmnium Posts: 9,850
    rcs1000 said:

    Omnium said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Omnium said:


    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.
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 41,118
    TOPPING said:

    isam said:

    rcs1000 said:

    isam said:

    rcs1000 said:

    isam said:

    tlg86 said:

    First. I didn't get on. I should have. :(

    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
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,919
    TOPPING said:

    isam said:

    rcs1000 said:

    isam said:

    rcs1000 said:

    isam said:

    tlg86 said:

    First. I didn't get on. I should have. :(

    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.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,295
    isam said:

    rcs1000 said:

    isam said:

    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.
  • Options
    According to Twitter (so caveat emptor) Iain Duncan Smith is being awarded a knighthood.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 92,137

    rcs1000 said:

    isam said:

    rcs1000 said:

    isam said:

    tlg86 said:

    First. I didn't get on. I should have. :(

    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.
    Should we be encouraging minors to bet?
    If you're the videogame industry, certainly.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 63,245
    ydoethur said:

    HYUFD said:

    ydoethur said:

    HYUFD said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Cyclefree said:

    You can still get 33/1 on him on Ladbrokes.

    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.

    https://nyti.ms/2Q0slra
    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 ?
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,594
    isam said:

    TOPPING said:

    isam said:

    rcs1000 said:

    isam said:

    rcs1000 said:

    isam said:

    tlg86 said:

    First. I didn't get on. I should have. :(

    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
    Many congratulations on your new addition Sam.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 92,137
    edited December 2019
    Nigelb said:

    ydoethur said:

    HYUFD said:

    ydoethur said:

    HYUFD said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Cyclefree said:

    You can still get 33/1 on him on Ladbrokes.

    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.

    https://nyti.ms/2Q0slra
    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.
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,594

    According to Twitter (so caveat emptor) Iain Duncan Smith is being awarded a knighthood.

    When is it all announced?
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 92,137

    According to Twitter (so caveat emptor) Iain Duncan Smith is being awarded a knighthood.

    He's a grandee now. Such is our political existence. Christ, Jeremy Corbyn will likely get one as a beloved party icon now.
  • Options
    All happening at Molineux tonight.
  • Options
    TOPPING said:

    According to Twitter (so caveat emptor) Iain Duncan Smith is being awarded a knighthood.

    When is it all announced?
    Tonight apparently.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 63,245
    Charles said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Charles said:

    isam said:

    rcs1000 said:

    isam said:

    tlg86 said:

    First. I didn't get on. I should have. :(

    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?
    Nope. :smile:
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,594

    TOPPING said:

    According to Twitter (so caveat emptor) Iain Duncan Smith is being awarded a knighthood.

    When is it all announced?
    Tonight apparently.
    Thanks is there a govt website or crown one whereon it's listed?
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,760
    edited December 2019
    Ahem.

  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 41,118
    rcs1000 said:

    isam said:

    rcs1000 said:

    isam said:

    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
  • Options
    Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 25,690
    isam said:

    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.

    Congratulations!
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 63,245

    Ahem.

    Yes, I wasn’t really sure what to make of that.
    (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 ?
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 50,108

    Ahem.

    He doesn’t do irony, does he?
  • Options
    isam said:

    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.

    Congratulations.
  • Options
    So that Guardian front page does confirm a knighthood for IDS.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 92,137

    Ahem.

    Drove him out and he said and did nothing, in fact he did worse than nothing because he kept them together under the great JC
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,308

    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
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 92,137
    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    According to Twitter (so caveat emptor) Iain Duncan Smith is being awarded a knighthood.

    When is it all announced?
    Tonight apparently.
    Thanks is there a govt website or crown one whereon it's listed?
    It'll be on the main gov.uk site like so.

    https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/new-years-honours-list-2019
This discussion has been closed.