Categories
The Betfair next president market tops £1.016 BILLION of matched bets yet still it remains open – po
The Betfair next president market tops £1.016 BILLION of matched bets yet still it remains open – politicalbetting.com
This is getting ridiculous. Betfair has yet to close its next President market where the the rules state that “This market will be settled according to the candidate that has the most projected Electoral College votes won at the 2020 presidential election.“
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
edit - nope.
I said before that I'll never use Betfair again for political bets. I've now decided to end all betting with them. No more bets from now, and as soon as my last bets are settled, my account will be closed.
The longer it's open, and the more bets they match, the more commission they make.
I don't expect it to be settled until 14th December.
It is either that or incompetence.
1. Betfair may be in difficulties with punters who are currently placing losing bets on Trump in a contest the result of which is already known. When they do settle, they may well face demands for return of their stake money from such losing bets. The punters in question would appear to have a point.
2. Never mind the main market, what about the Vote Tally markets? It says in the rules:
' This market will be settled upon popular vote figures as published by CNN.'
Well, CNN have published figures showing Biden's Tally to be well in excess of 75 million, the highest level on which one could bet. So why has this not been settled? (The same considerations apply to the Trump Vote Tally market.)
Wtf are they playing at?
Like others here, I am closing my Betfair account when they have coughed up.
"... off with whom I am increasingly pissed."
In view of Betfair's behavior to date on this market, that's not a trifling consideration.
We are so in the shit.
Otherwise it is further proof that this government hates the North.
Can someone briefly update me on the Oxon full-full / half-full thing? I keep reading snippets on here but it seems to be a very stretched discussion, hard to piece together the responses.
I just hope it they do go tits up I'm not left out of pocket.
I am mighty, mighty pissed tonight.
https://twitter.com/jaketapper/status/1331698728483385346
There is a lot of poor management and excessive spending among the larger charities. As with any organisation the further you get from the coal face the more it is a career rather than a vocation
Their credibility is shot though, and when you lose confidence in a bookmaker, you have to stop betting with them.
It doesn't mean that the vaccine is a dud, just not yet sufficiently proven.
People are purchasing money from whosoever it is putting up the other side.
That win is nothing at all to be proud of.
I have a lot of time and respect for charities that aim to help others.
Paying millions to the former Right Honourable Member for South Shields doesn't seem like my first pick on how to spend millions meant for charity.
I'm out, and I won't touch them with a bargepole from now on. Others might have different risk appetites.
For example, it has since been revealed that the people who received an initial half-dose—and for whom the vaccine was said to have 90-percent efficacy—included no one over the age of 55.
Makes it very difficult for regulators, when we don't know about that the untested demographic is the one we need to know the level of protection.
What do the regulator and the government do, reserve pfizer and moderna vaccines for oldies? And only allow Oxford for the rest of us plebs.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/media/in-one-article-boris-manages-to-offend-an-entire-city-shy-and-his-boss-543923.html
https://arstechnica.com/science/2020/11/astrazenecas-best-covid-vaccine-result-was-a-fluke-experts-have-questions/
My conscience wouldn't allow me to vote for either. Anyone who did was doing it with their eyes wide open. Personally, I don't have any time for excuses along the lines of "but the other side" when there are more than two sides.
33 years of negative growth in the period 1750 -1850 by my count. 44 during the 18th century.
Weird.
I do wonder if mid-December we are going to see some numbers from the US that make the politicians here suddenly change their minds about Christmas.
Plus the rules increase her costs because of the need for table service.
If it cannot be Tier 1 it would be better to be in Tier 3.
The government really has hung the hospitality industry out to dry.
It is so hard seeing your child being in tears at seeing their hard work being rendered pointless. What makes it worse is that in this district, Covid has been very low for months and months. This area is being bundled in with places like Carlisle which are over 2 hours away, much like Manchester. It feels constantly like being punished for something you haven’t done.
People given full dose / full dose of the AZN/Oxford vaccine saw efficacy of 60-70%.
People given half dose / full dose of vaccine saw efficacy close to 90%.
HOWEVER, the half dose / full dose people were all under 55 (so this may simply be the case that the vaccine is much more efficacious on the young), and the numbers are too small to be certain that this isn't simply a statistical anomoly.
It is worth noting, however, that (AFAUI) none of the people who got the AZN/Oxford vaccine became seriously ill with CV19, and it does not require sub zero storage at all. It is therefore a vaccine that could be useful for (a) the young and (b) emerging markets.
The problem is that a certain amount of expertise, scale and logistics is needed for larger scale projects.
The reason that DFID outsources so much spending via NGOs is that they do have the infrastructure, something that can otherwise be of dubious quality, particularly in developing countries.
The other reason is that the ideological cutting of senior staff at DFID to reduce the Civil Service headcount means that there are few alternatives to outsourcing.
At the moment of course DFID is in the middle of a chaotic merger with the FCO, so most senior staff at each are concentrating on sorting out their place in the mess rather than the day job. Why DFID couldn't have been kept broadly the same, just turned into a sub-department of the FCO for ministerial purposes, I don't know.
Every bet has a buyer and a seller. For every £1 staked on Biden, there has to be £1 staked on Trump. It is only the ratio of winnings (i.e. the price) that changes.
https://www.wired.com/story/the-astrazeneca-covid-vaccine-data-isnt-up-to-snuff/
That strikes me as very serious allegation. And perhaps somewhat unfair?
There is no doubt that a president has broad power to confer pardons, but when they are deployed to insulate himself, his family, and his associates from criminal investigation, it is a corruption of the Framer's intent
If they didn't want it abused, but still wanted the power to exist, seems like they could have included a bit more detail - it's not as though they were short on detail in many other areas.
If it’s cheap and works for the under-55s, give it to us. Why bother with the complicated expensive solution - save that for the old and vulnerable.
Not that the detail is yet out. We are relying at present on press releases.
The one thing that can't be done is have a perfectly good vaccine sitting idle.
A lot depends on how wide the areas are defined by. Better figures on my patch this week, but I think the whole county will be in 2 or 3.
As @Charles says, if the vaccine performs better for the under-55s, give it to the bloody under-55s.
Are we allergic to good news?
My point is that it makes no sense to talk about all the bets being for Biden or for Trump, because for each person betting on Biden, there is another person on the other end of the trade betting on Not Biden.
Most of us on here in will have had between 32 and 64 ancestors alive in 1831. Which of your ancestors is your 'family', and why?
It might be first issue is fine and the second just means for the moment this is only authorised for under 55s for now.
GDBO, they've misled the country and the world, shame on them for raising the hopes of a nation.
Or, are we simply challenging the 90% figure? That’s nothing like as serious, as Oxon themselves soft pedalled on that.