politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The message from bookies offering GE2015 seat markets is t

Anorak said:

First?

A question: to what extent will the inevitable bickering, backstabbing and all-out hostility between the Blues and the Yellows over the next 18 months lead to a decline in their combined share, to Labour's benefit?

We're seeing the first signs already, and it's not pretty.

According to many there has been bickering and backstabbing and all-out hostility since June 2010 and the coalition government was going to end in October 2010 then in 2011/2012/2013/2014

The Conservatives and the Lib Dems need separate identities. They need more visible tensions, more fake rows and more enjoyable infra-coalition manoeuvring to persuade the public that there is a difference between them.

In effect, they need to crowd Labour out of the debate in the way that the rows between Gordon Brown and Tony Blair crowded the Conservatives out of the debate.

Charles said:

Polruan said:

RichardNabavi said:

I'd recommend a look at the Guardian breaking news

Can anyone tell me what the acceptable parameters of discussion of such matters are these days?

I think the general view is nada

Seriously? For avoidance of doubt, I was clearly referring to the just-published "12 Great Celebrity Hallowe'en Costumes" feature in the Graun; I can't believe such innocent fun would be modded.

Polruan said:

Charles said:

Polruan said:

RichardNabavi said:

I'd recommend a look at the Guardian breaking news

Can anyone tell me what the acceptable parameters of discussion of such matters are these days?

I think the general view is nada

Seriously? For avoidance of doubt, I was clearly referring to the just-published "12 Great Celebrity Hallowe'en Costumes" feature in the Graun; I can't believe such innocent fun would be modded.

A Cornish guy who really thinks Hallowe'en is innocent?

Wow, something new every day!

TGOHF said:

Any idea why bookies no longer run a spread betting market ?

I would think a combination of the fact that there is no underlying Betfair market to copy, most people who can make a price without using Betfair being made redundant, and the Bookies experience of Long Term markets being profitable for punters

Roger said:

@Moderator


"Mike Smithson doesn't want any more letters from M'Learned friends on this topic."

It's going to struggle to remain "Britain's Most Read Political Blog" I would say......

I'm sure if you would agree to indemnify OGH he would be more open to discussion

Current polls suggest Labour on about 350 seats - the betting odds assume that the Tories will recover somewhat prior to the GE which is fair enough.

It doesn't mean either assumption is correct though .... all is still to play for.

peter_from_putney said:

Current polls suggest Labour on about 350 seats - the betting odds assume that the Tories will recover somewhat prior to the GE which is fair enough.

It doesn't mean either assumption is correct though .... all is still to play for.

Labour 350 can't see it - Labour 300 however...

Charles said:

Polruan said:

Charles said:

Polruan said:

RichardNabavi said:

I'd recommend a look at the Guardian breaking news

Can anyone tell me what the acceptable parameters of discussion of such matters are these days?

I think the general view is nada

Seriously? For avoidance of doubt, I was clearly referring to the just-published "12 Great Celebrity Hallowe'en Costumes" feature in the Graun; I can't believe such innocent fun would be modded.

A Cornish guy who really thinks Hallowe'en is innocent?

Wow, something new every day!

My house is next to one of the most significant leylines in west Penwith, apparently. Around here paganism isn't just for Hallowe'en, I'd say.

Can anyone think of an example where a quickie cost so many lives?


http://www.theguardian.com/world/video/2013/oct/30/costa-concordia-dancer-admits-affair-captain-video

RichardNabavi said:

On topic: The sum of the Conservative, Labour and LibDem seats in 2010 was 621, about the same as the sum of the corresponding Ladbrokes lines shown above (620.5). However, the sum of the three Paddy Power lines is 614.5. So, either Paddy has good reason to think some fourth party (the SNP?) will make a net 6 or 7 gains, or they're a bit low in at least one of the lines. Conversely, if you think the SNP might achieve a big net improvement, the Ladbrokes lines look a shade high.

Without taking a view on the main result, the two which look like value to me are SNP greater than 6.5 with Ladbrokes, and LibDem greater than 32.5 with Paddy.

As ever Richard good analysis and I agree with your conclusion.

Judging by the lack of fanboy posts Ed had a more normal PMQs. Funny how over excited some people get.

@Uniondivvie

LOL!

On Topic - in the absence of the spreads, perhaps Betfair could be persuaded to put up their seat line market?

Oh, and FPPPT - thanks PtP for the US analysis, one of the best threads for a while.

Pulpstar said:

MikeSmithson said:

RichardNabavi said:

On topic: The sum of the Conservative, Labour and LibDem seats in 2010 was 621, about the same as the sum of the corresponding Ladbrokes lines shown above (620.5). However, the sum of the three Paddy Power lines is 614.5. So, either Paddy has good reason to think some fourth party (the SNP?) will make a net 6 or 7 gains, or they're a bit low in at least one of the lines. Conversely, if you think the SNP might achieve a big net improvement, the Ladbrokes lines look a shade high.

Without taking a view on the main result, the two which look like value to me are SNP greater than 6.5 with Ladbrokes, and LibDem greater than 32.5 with Paddy.

As ever Richard good analysis and I agree with your conclusion.

Where the heck is the Ladbrokes market ?

Found it... £20 on SNP over 6.5 it is @ 4/5 with Shadsy and
£20 on Lib Dems over 32.5 it is @ 5/6 with Paddy

M

Ricardohos said:

One thing I don't fully understand, which perhaps Mike can answer: if Spread betting is essentially against other punters why shouldn't the betting firms be running them? It's not as if they are set to lose?

My guess is a combination of low punter interest and mismatched stakes on the buy/sell side, 'sitting duck' danger (eg, Cameron falls under a bus and someone buys CON at £100/seat) and possibly still some uncertainty over the number of MPs in 2015.

Most likely it's because the market doesn't really make much money though. Too much risk for not much reward.

One question - Bookies and Punters underestimated Labour's performance at GE2010.

Is that because they were Labour or they were the Government though ?

MikeSmithson said:

RichardNabavi said:

On topic: The sum of the Conservative, Labour and LibDem seats in 2010 was 621, about the same as the sum of the corresponding Ladbrokes lines shown above (620.5). However, the sum of the three Paddy Power lines is 614.5. So, either Paddy has good reason to think some fourth party (the SNP?) will make a net 6 or 7 gains, or they're a bit low in at least one of the lines. Conversely, if you think the SNP might achieve a big net improvement, the Ladbrokes lines look a shade high.

Without taking a view on the main result, the two which look like value to me are SNP greater than 6.5 with Ladbrokes, and LibDem greater than 32.5 with Paddy.

As ever Richard good analysis and I agree with your conclusion.

Mike is the Lib Dem vote going to be the most unevenly distributed, holding seats it shouldn't and losing deposits it also shouldn't according to UNS that modern British politics has ever seen ?

Ricardohos said:

One thing I don't fully understand, which perhaps Mike can answer: if Spread betting is essentially against other punters why shouldn't the betting firms be running them? It's not as if they are set to lose?

Spread betting isn't punter vs punter anymore than fixed odds betting is

Shy Chuka? Surely not?

"Labour MP Chuka Umunna was uncharacteristically shy at last night’s launch of FIXR, a new free app that allows users to search for nightlife venues and to buy tickets on their smartphones. He told snappers at Nobu Berkeley in Mayfair that he didn’t wish to be photographed. "

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/londoners-diary/app-for-it-amber-le-bon-says-yes-8913286.html

corporeal said:

Ricardohos said:

One thing I don't fully understand, which perhaps Mike can answer: if Spread betting is essentially against other punters why shouldn't the betting firms be running them? It's not as if they are set to lose?

I think it's to do with the open ended nature of the profits/losses. A quick google shows it to be regulated by the FCA rather than the gambling commission.

yes - that's pretty crucial, too. Also, being regulated by the FSA means they can't weasel their way out of a bet, claiming palpable error like bookies sometimes do.

Fun story on R4 - the Halloween before she died, Liz Taylor called her favourite hang out in West Hollywood and asked if it was worth coming by. She was told, no, its packed to the rafters and there are already half a dozen Liz Taylors here already.....

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/25/us/25abbey.html?_r=0

Pulpstar said:

Yes, in one you have to make better EV decisions than the over-round from a field of bookies (Typically ~5-8% I think) & other punters, and in the other you need to beat other punters + the spread.

SpreadFAIR was nominally peer-to-peer spread betting (as per Betfair for fixed odds). In practice they had to seed most of their markets to generate any liquidity.

However most spread firms are regular risk-taking bookies - you're not trying to beat other punters any more than you are when you play with Ladbrokes or bet365.

For the spread firms, occasionally offering seat lines is reasonably safe business - but if they offered as many markets and specials as the likes of Hills / Paddy Power they'd get their pants pulled down too.

Generally there's insufficient interest in political punting this far out from an election to make it anything much more than a PR or customer service exercise for the bookies. Leaving prices up 24/7 is inherently risky and/or time-consuming to monitor - they'll only take chunky bets this far out if they get them wrong or something happens.

TwistedFireStopper said:

TGOHF said:

RM strike planned for Monday called off.

Grangemouth, Firefighters, Teachers, Posties - all calling off strikes - hmm.

Nah, we're striking Friday and Monday. Mind you, there's still time for the bosses to do the right thing.

They are already doing the right thing, there is no need for them to change.

Pulpstar said:

Pong said:

Norm said:

The Times is reporting that Cleggy has set a line in the sand re HS2. If Labour don't give it their backing the Lib Dems will not form a coalition government with them after GE 2015.

If the numbers stack up, they'll do a deal. HS2 or not.

Supply & Confidence rather than coalition though ?

You could be right as the phrase used was "would not form a coalition"

I'm slightly unsure what is going on in relation to press regulation. According to the Press Gazette, HMG have [edit:] offered Pressbof a veto on any future changes to HMG's Royal Charter on press regulation. Meanwhile, the Court of Appeal (Civil Division) (Lord Dyson MR, Elias & Moore-Bick LJJ) have refused to grant an injunction, restraining the approval of HMG's draft Royal Charter by the Privy Council, 'administratively', before the application for permission to appeal against the order of the Divisional Court, dated today, is heard. It is now clear that Pressbof intend to make that application, but it is (as of yet) not listed to be heard tomorrow. The Privy Council are supposed to be meeting now to recommend the approval of HMG's draft Royal Charter to Her Majesty. Confused?

RichardNabavi said:

On HS2, I was very struck by a comment that it is projected to cost only four times what was spent on the Olympics. That makes it sound incredibly good value in comparison.

But will it be opened with a ceremony directed by Danny Boyle showing British Rail as a national treasure?

antifrank said:

RichardNabavi said:

On HS2, I was very struck by a comment that it is projected to cost only four times what was spent on the Olympics. That makes it sound incredibly good value in comparison.

But will it be opened with a ceremony directed by Danny Boyle showing British Rail as a national treasure?

LoL. Presumably with tens of Jimmy Savile (hmm) lookalikes cooing in unison, "this is the age of the train".

RichardNabavi said:

On HS2, I was very struck by a comment that it is projected to cost only four times what was spent on the Olympics. That makes it sound incredibly good value in comparison.

Or a little over four times what the West Coast Main Line upgrade cost. An upgrade that delivered much less than expected (e.g. 125 MPH running instead of 140 MPH), years late, and at about five times the estimated cost. It also led to the closure of some local stations, less services at others (from memory, Nuneaton was one), and caused passengers widespread misery.

People who want us to spend money upgrading the existing network to cope with more traffic need to remember the above. There is lots that can be done on the existing network - and some of it is being done - but the WCML upgrade shows that there are limits to what can be achieved on an operational railway.

As someone once said: they should just have closed the entire line for nine months and done it properly ...

@JosiasJessop
What would be the problem with ditching HS2 and reopening the Great Central Main Line?

Pong said:

The problem with LD 'lines in the sand' or 'pledges' for 2015 is that, I suspect, 2010 LD>Lab switchers will be deeply sceptical after the tuition fees debacle. It will be interesting to see some specific polling on the LD credibility problem once they start making firm manifesto commitments.

Labour and Conservatives will remind voters of LibDem credibility problems once the campaign starts. Several times a day, most likely.

Life_ina_market_town said:

@JosiasJessop
What would be the problem with ditching HS2 and reopening the Great Central Main Line?

It depends what you mean by reopening the GCML. Trying to reopen it through Leicester and Nottingham will probably be a no-go. Whether you subscribe to the conspiracy theories of the route deliberately having been obliterated after closure or not, it's greatly obliterated in both those cities. You'd have to dig deep under Nottingham, and HS2 did not even consider that. Sheffield is, from memory, not as big a problem.

The stretch between London and Aylesbury Parkway is still in use; south of Amersham by main line and tube trains, although south of Harrow there are shared tracks. It could (fairly) easily be rebuilt from Aylesbury to Rugby, and perhaps from Rugby to the Leicester-Nuneaton line. But the 4-6 tracks from Marylebone to Harrow are already shared by Jubilee line and mainline services, so are fairly busy. There is *some* capacity on that line, especially with a little work, but not as much as a new line. And it is slow.

Also Marylebone does not have much room for long or more trains, apparently. You should not underestimate the length of the new trains.

I can see the stretch to Rugby being rebuilt in the nest twenty years anyway, in a similar manner to the Oxford<->Cambridge route, and mainly as a freight line.

So in short: it would give less capacity of the wrong sort.

This link has more info:
http://blog.railnews.co.uk/?p=183

HS2 is an anti-trainspotter conspiracy - the idea is to make the trains so fast that you can't take pics of them or note down their numbers!

Sunil_Prasannan said:

HS2 is an anti-trainspotter conspiracy - the idea is to make the trains so fast that you can't take pics of them or note down their numbers!

How many stops is it from Charing Cross to get to Greenwich?

Edit: Via the tube

RichardNabavi said:

On HS2, I was very struck by a comment that it is projected to cost only four times what was spent on the Olympics. That makes it sound incredibly good value in comparison.

Are you sure ? The proposed budget for HS2 is £42 Bn, the Olympics £9 Bn = 4 2/3 times... http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2012/oct/23/london-2012-olympics-cost-total

TheScreamingEagles said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

HS2 is an anti-trainspotter conspiracy - the idea is to make the trains so fast that you can't take pics of them or note down their numbers!

How many stops is it from Charing Cross to get to Greenwich?

Edit: Via the tube

The boat is the nicest way to do this journey:

http://www.thamesclippers.com/images/pdf/ThamesClippers_timetable.pdf

antifrank said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

HS2 is an anti-trainspotter conspiracy - the idea is to make the trains so fast that you can't take pics of them or note down their numbers!

How many stops is it from Charing Cross to get to Greenwich?

Edit: Via the tube

The boat is the nicest way to do this journey:

http://www.thamesclippers.com/images/pdf/ThamesClippers_timetable.pdf

Having watched Thor 2 last night, Thor ended up on the tube, at Charing Cross, and he asked a passenger how far was it to Greenwich, and the lady replied with about 3 stops.

It just seemed wrong.

This may have been my geekiest post on PB ever.

TheScreamingEagles said:

antifrank said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

HS2 is an anti-trainspotter conspiracy - the idea is to make the trains so fast that you can't take pics of them or note down their numbers!

How many stops is it from Charing Cross to get to Greenwich?

Edit: Via the tube

The boat is the nicest way to do this journey:

http://www.thamesclippers.com/images/pdf/ThamesClippers_timetable.pdf

Having watched Thor 2 last night, Thor ended up on the tube, at Charing Cross, and he asked a passenger how far was it to Greenwich, and the lady replied with about 3 stops.

It just seemed wrong.

This may have been my geekiest post on PB ever.

Via National Rail it's close enough:

Waterloo Ost
London Bridge
Deptford

Bobajob said:

Just picked up the Standard - dire front page for the government, closing casualty units in London.

"The NHS is safe in our hands"

I obviously don't know the geography surrounding those hospitals, but it really does make sense to have well equipped, specialist A&Es in strategic locations. You have more chance of survival, if you've suffered trauma, or say, a cardiac event, if you go to the best hospital to deal with your case, even if that means driving right past another hospital.

Sunil_Prasannan said:

There are actually 8 tracks through Wembley Park (two Chiltern sans platforms, four Metropolitan platforms and two Jubilee line platforms).

Marylebone is thoroughly underused, there are currently only two trains per hour all the way to Birmingham. Places like Sudbury Hill and South Ruislip get only one train an hour. And why stop there? You could conceivably connect to Crossrail to provide through trains, in fact Crossrail originally was supposed to have a branch connecting to the Aylesbury line.

Yep to the lines, but the capacity and speed problems still exist on that line.

As for Marylebone. From memory, there is not much room for expansion - new platforms were built there recently to cope with possible increased services.

There's a bigger problem. The new trains are upwards of 400 metres long, much longer than existing trains (witness the St Pancras HS1 trainshed extension). Marylebone's platforms are a maximum of around 240 metres (only 2 faces), with little prospect of extension due to surrounding buildings and curves.

A better alternative would be to link the route to the GC/GW joint 1906 Chiltern line and take a HS route into the Paddington environs (Old Oak Common?) But that has its own problems ...

Having said that, altering Euston for HS2 is going to be massively costly as well.

I've never heard of the Crossrail - GC links - do you have any further info?