politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Why even this 4 percent lead on votes projection might not

I tipped this one up when it was a crackers 8-1 a while back.

It is a fair proxy for No Overall Majority, Labour Most seats.

TSE has filled his boots at 8-1 for loads I think too.

19/01/2014 Single To Win Labour to poll fewer votes and win more seats than Conservatives @ 11/2
Effect Of Electoral Bias
No. of Votes v No. of Seats Pending £3.66 (Max)

15/01/2014 Single To Win Labour to poll fewer votes and win more seats than Conservatives @ 8/1
Effect Of Electoral Bias
No. of Votes v No. of Seats Pending £9.97 (Max)

16/09/2013 Single To Win Labour to poll fewer votes and win more seats than Conservatives @ 7/4
Effect Of Electoral Bias
No. of Votes v No. of Seats Pending £10.00

At 10:11am this morning I said Andy Flower wouldn't be England coach by the summer.

He was gone two hours after that prediction.

All hail PB's tipster of the year 2014.

My Six Nations piece should be going up this evening.

I'm on this bet (at 8/1 though). 4/1 still seems a fair price.

taffys said:

Mike really knows how to cheer his tory posters up!!

Why, because he pretends they have still got a chance of getting the most votes?

As you may have gathered from my somewhat morose contribution to the previous thread it is not really working!

FPT
I genuinely fear for our politics. We have a Labour party that seems to have learned nothing from the worst economic disaster in a century. Against them we have a tory party that has been virtually ungovernable for more than 30 years and is also self indulgent beyond belief.

The tories have forgotten what party politics is all about. They are instead obsessed with issues and are completely uninhibited in the way that they are willing to show splits, disgreements and to tick off large tranches of potential voters. It is more important to win the argument than to win power, to be "right" than actually have influence on the result or the path forward. Compromise is the enemy, not Labour.

Cameron has done an amazing job in trying to keep this bunch of eccentrics and nutters together and all he gets for it is abuse and cries of betrayal. Are we really going to have to go through 10 or 15 more years of Labour destruction before the tories get the message? Are they even capable of understanding it?

The country deserves better, a lot better.

TheScreamingEagles said:

Pulpstar said:

All that lot means I'm on for £23.63 at 4.96/1

I keep on telling you, go to a Paddy Power shop, over the counter they let you put on £40 at a time.

Don't know where any is, plus I'm happy staking at the current level/price. I'll admit though I should have probably found a shop when it was 8-1 - oh well !

Pulpstar said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Pulpstar said:

All that lot means I'm on for £23.63 at 4.96/1

I keep on telling you, go to a Paddy Power shop, over the counter they let you put on £40 at a time.

Don't know where any is, plus I'm happy staking at the current level/price. I'll admit though I should have probably found a shop when it was 8-1 - oh well !

http://www.paddypower.com/bet/shop-locator

Pulpstar said:

Anyone else building up a list of outstanding bets for the GE and thinking !crikey! thats alot of wagers in total.

Up past a grand now ^^;;; (I'm normally a £5/£10 per bet man)

One of the good things is that the money goes out incrementally, so you don't notice it quite so much - but will come in all at the same time. :-)

GE2015 will be decided in 100 seats with the other 531 mainland being almost foregone conclusions. In the latter I’d expect even poorer turnout levels by LAB voters than we’ve seen before.

Poorer than 2010? Isn't Ed's leftward move supposed to be motivating the base? Won't that get a few more into the polling booths? Even if 2010 voters behave the same, surely LD-Lab switching in places like Liverpool will see Lab vote share increase?

National Health Action Party on Cameron NHS policies

On the Daily Politics, Andrew Neil asked her about candidate Rufus Hound, who said in a blog "David Cameron and Jeremy Hunt want your kids to die unless you are rich", and asked if she regretted the words

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-25982714#

Tykejohnno said:

National Health Action Party on Cameron NHS policies

On the Daily Politics, Andrew Neil asked her about candidate Rufus Hound, who said in a blog "David Cameron and Jeremy Hunt want your kids to die unless you are rich", and asked if she regretted the words

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-25982714#

Piss poor

DavidL said:

taffys said:

Mike really knows how to cheer his tory posters up!!

Why, because he pretends they have still got a chance of getting the most votes?

As you may have gathered from my somewhat morose contribution to the previous thread it is not really working!

FPT
I genuinely fear for our politics. We have a Labour party that seems to have learned nothing from the worst economic disaster in a century. Against them we have a tory party that has been virtually ungovernable for more than 30 years and is also self indulgent beyond belief.

The tories have forgotten what party politics is all about. They are instead obsessed with issues and are completely uninhibited in the way that they are willing to show splits, disgreements and to tick off large tranches of potential voters. It is more important to win the argument than to win power, to be "right" than actually have influence on the result or the path forward. Compromise is the enemy, not Labour.

Cameron has done an amazing job in trying to keep this bunch of eccentrics and nutters together and all he gets for it is abuse and cries of betrayal. Are we really going to have to go through 10 or 15 more years of Labour destruction before the tories get the message? Are they even capable of understanding it?

The country deserves better, a lot better.

It deserves UKIP.

The William Hill Market is up now

http://sports.williamhill.com/bet/en-gb/betting/g/1023636/England-Specials.html

Otis Gibson at 20/1 - Former England bowling coach, coach of the West Indies.

I'm on

Gary Kirsten is 7/1 but doesn't want to be an international coach again.

Young family and 250 days a year away from home, not really ideal

Lennon said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Gary Kirsten is 7/1 but doesn't want to be an international coach again.

Young family and 250 days a year away from home, not really ideal

Agree - if it was longer than 20's then potentially worth a couple of bob. Don't disagree with your approach to pick a number of long-odds options - basically I think Giles is way too short and that it is much more open than that suggests.

Paddy Power have also opened a market

Moody 10/1

Gibson at 22/1

http://www.paddypower.com/bet/cricket/cricket-specials?AFF_ID=16562

England must reject currency union with Scotland
By Martin Wolf
It would be folly for the rest of the UK to enter such an arrangement voluntarily
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/891e4db2-88fe-11e3-bb5f-00144feab7de.html#axzz2rzHHebxf

CarlottaVance said:

England must reject currency union with Scotland
By Martin Wolf
It would be folly for the rest of the UK to enter such an arrangement voluntarily
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/891e4db2-88fe-11e3-bb5f-00144feab7de.html#axzz2rzHHebxf

Of course, all uncontroversial and obvious stuff. As I've posted before, no UK government would enter into a currency union with an independent Scotland. It's a non-starter, for all the reasons Martin Wolf lays out. At most there would be a vague, face-saving assurance that we'd take Scotland's needs into consideration when formulating policy.

If I had to bet I'd back Jason Gillespie at 16/1, not withstanding the fact I think only British coaches shoud be eligible

Pulpstar said:

@Thescreamingeagles Backed Gibson with Paddy Power and William Hill at 25 and 22-1.

Paddy Power max £2.47, WIlliam Hill max 100 pennies :!

Blinking hell, get limited by William Hill to a stake less than Publicity Shy Paddy Power will give you?

Unprecedented.

rcs1000 said:

It is worth remembering that when Ireland broke from Britain 90 pdd years ago, they kept the pound right through until the 1970s.

We didnt - we kept the pound for about 8 years and then brought in a new currency that was pegged at parity to sterling for about 50 more years. Either option would be open to Scotland if a currency union was rejected by the rUK and neither would need the rUK's approval.

Good afternoon, everyone.

Just catching up with the F1 livefeed. Apparently Red Bull finished at 12:38. If they start Bahrain well, they can get back on top of things. If not, it bodes very ill.

MikeK said:

Looks like another bad day for the markets. What is going on? We are supposed to be in a recovery phase, but is that phase already over?

There are three main reasons why the markets are weak:

1. Concerns about the Chinese credit bubble. There are a lot of very scary things coming out of China and in particular about its shadow banking system. If China were to have serious problems, it would have implications for the rest of the world (and in particular those countries which are big exporters to China, notably Germany, Australia and Brazil).

2. The Fed has begun reducing its stimulus, which means there is incrementally less cheap money sloshing round the system. Because investors know the stimulus is being removed, they are trying to get out 'first'.

3. December quarter profits, particularly in the US, are coming in slightly weaker than expected. It's notable that the two markets which are doing best in the world (Spain, Italy) are the pretty much the only ones where earnings estimates for 2014 are being raised.

Pulpstar said:

Anyone else building up a list of outstanding bets for the GE and thinking !crikey! thats alot of wagers in total.

Up past a grand now ^^;;; (I'm normally a £5/£10 per bet man)

Get on YES for Scotland before the price plummets. I wish I had some spare cash.

malcolmg said:

Pulpstar said:

Anyone else building up a list of outstanding bets for the GE and thinking !crikey! thats alot of wagers in total.

Up past a grand now ^^;;; (I'm normally a £5/£10 per bet man)

Get on YES for Scotland before the price plummets. I wish I had some spare cash.

I'm on that at 4-1

malcolmg said:

rcs1000 said:

CarlottaVance said:

England must reject currency union with Scotland
By Martin Wolf
It would be folly for the rest of the UK to enter such an arrangement voluntarily
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/891e4db2-88fe-11e3-bb5f-00144feab7de.html#axzz2rzHHebxf

It is worth remembering that when Ireland broke from Britain 90 pdd years ago, they kept the pound right through until the 1970s.

I suspect that - if Scotland promised to either get its own currency within 10 years or to join the Euro - they would be allowed to keep the pound, even if only as a transitional arrangement.

Robert, we own part of the pound and will keep using it if we want to , it is not for anybody to allow us to use it. Rump UK will be begging for it once they accept they are whipped.

"we own part of the pound"

Really?

Hey, I know what - we'll keep the Bank of England, and you can have Royal Bank of Scotland

Deal?

malcolmg said:

RichardNabavi said:

CarlottaVance said:

England must reject currency union with Scotland
By Martin Wolf
It would be folly for the rest of the UK to enter such an arrangement voluntarily
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/891e4db2-88fe-11e3-bb5f-00144feab7de.html#axzz2rzHHebxf

Of course, all uncontroversial and obvious stuff. As I've posted before, no UK government would enter into a currency union with an independent Scotland. It's a non-starter, for all the reasons Martin Wolf lays out. At most there would be a vague, face-saving assurance that we'd take Scotland's needs into consideration when formulating policy.

LOL< Tory with head stuck up orifice pontificates. Are you on with Ladbrokes at 50-1 then, bet they have not taken a punt even at that price.

Have you read the terms of that bet? Anyone backing either side of it needs their head examined.

"At most there would be a vague, face-saving assurance that we'd take Scotland's needs into consideration when formulating policy."

Why on Earth should we do that, Mr. Navabi? Telling even white lies seldom helps and never in the case of formulating policy. Why shouldn't everyone be told the truth, "Scotland's needs, as far as they differ from those of England, will be accorded the same degree of consideration as those of Burkina Faso".

Neil said:

malcolmg said:

RichardNabavi said:

CarlottaVance said:

England must reject currency union with Scotland
By Martin Wolf
It would be folly for the rest of the UK to enter such an arrangement voluntarily
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/891e4db2-88fe-11e3-bb5f-00144feab7de.html#axzz2rzHHebxf

Of course, all uncontroversial and obvious stuff. As I've posted before, no UK government would enter into a currency union with an independent Scotland. It's a non-starter, for all the reasons Martin Wolf lays out. At most there would be a vague, face-saving assurance that we'd take Scotland's needs into consideration when formulating policy.

LOL< Tory with head stuck up orifice pontificates. Are you on with Ladbrokes at 50-1 then, bet they have not taken a punt even at that price.

Have you read the terms of that bet? Anyone backing either side of it needs their head examined.

Very naughty of Ladbrokes that bet, I wouldn't consider it value if they offered 500,000/1

AveryLP said:

Charles said:

MikeK said:

Looks like another bad day for the markets. What is going on? We are supposed to be in a recovery phase, but is that phase already over?

Tapering and Contagian

Charles

Is Contagian a Roman Emperor?

I haven't heard of him before.

He should be...

My six nations piece should be up this evening

Could you give us a sneak preview? as I remember you backed Wales last year. I fancy France to beat England.....

So do the bookies

CarlottaVance said:

Having tax and spend dictated from London

It wouldnt be tax and spend dictated by London. A currency union would be shared sovereignty. Both sides would have to agree to certain rules on how it would operate. You could just as easily view it as Edinburgh dictating the rUK's tax and spend policies.

I'm backing Dynamo Kiev to win 3-0. *cough*

AveryLP said:

rcs1000 said:

MikeK said:

Looks like another bad day for the markets. What is going on? We are supposed to be in a recovery phase, but is that phase already over?

There are three main reasons why the markets are weak:

1. Concerns about the Chinese credit bubble. There are a lot of very scary things coming out of China and in particular about its shadow banking system. If China were to have serious problems, it would have implications for the rest of the world (and in particular those countries which are big exporters to China, notably Germany, Australia and Brazil).

2. The Fed has begun reducing its stimulus, which means there is incrementally less cheap money sloshing round the system. Because investors know the stimulus is being removed, they are trying to get out 'first'.

3. December quarter profits, particularly in the US, are coming in slightly weaker than expected. It's notable that the two markets which are doing best in the world (Spain, Italy) are the pretty much the only ones where earnings estimates for 2014 are being raised.

4. Deflation risks in EU.

5. Emerging Markets Currency crisis.

6. Disappointing results from US major stocks (e.g. Amazon, MasterCard but Google countering trend).

Ummm: your six is my number three

And your four is probably not that much of factor, given the weakest markets are the Asian ones (who are the least affected), and the strongest ones are the peripheral European ones (the Italian market is actually up year-to-date).

Mr. Eagles, that's greatly appreciated. I only have accounts with Betfair and Ladbrokes, however, so I shall place small bets there (probably on Ladbrokes as my Betfair account is looking a bit thin).

Neil said:

CarlottaVance said:

Having tax and spend dictated from London

You could just as easily view it as Edinburgh dictating the rUK's tax and spend policies.

Which is why no rUK politician seeking re-election will agree to it.....

taffys said:

My six nations piece should be up this evening

Could you give us a sneak preview? as I remember you backed Wales last year. I fancy France to beat England.....

So do the bookies

Open tournament, some sides planning for the world cup, best of betting on the individual matches, though Ireland is a decent trading bet.

I may have also engaged in some trolling, that may annoy some Welsh Rugby fans.

TheScreamingEagles said:

Re Scotland and the currency union.

There was a comment on one of the Times articles that brought a smile.

Scots should remember, Alex Salmond says he will be able to force

1) The EU to accept Scotland as a continuing member

2) The rump UK into a currency union.

Yet this is the man who can't even force David Cameron into a debate.

Or to put it another way, it'd be easier to get the EU to accept Scotland as a continuing member and rUK into a currency union than to get the Blancmangeron to man up.

Neil said:

CarlottaVance said:

Having tax and spend dictated from London

It wouldnt be tax and spend dictated by London. A currency union would be shared sovereignty. Both sides would have to agree to certain rules on how it would operate. You could just as easily view it as Edinburgh dictating the rUK's tax and spend policies.

In the same way, the earth technically speaking orbits the moon.

Herself is back from shopping and we are going to have sausages, proper butcher's sausages, for tea. Huzzah!

One of my gay friends says, this is a waste of eggs, and he would have used something else, but this is a family site

David Silvester gay marriage flood row councillor's home 'egged'

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-oxfordshire-25977349

RichardNabavi said:

HurstLlama said:

"At most there would be a vague, face-saving assurance that we'd take Scotland's needs into consideration when formulating policy."

Why on Earth should we do that, Mr. Navabi? Telling even white lies seldom helps and never in the case of formulating policy. Why shouldn't everyone be told the truth, "Scotland's needs, as far as they differ from those of England, will be accorded the same degree of consideration as those of Burkina Faso".

Well, it would be an amicable separation, or perhaps more accurately, would be like a minor subsidiary of a company being floated on the stock exchange as a separate company. In such a scenario it makes sense to offer a friendly hand to help make the transition smooth.

But Richard that is the problem of sharing a currency. The subsidiary is left with the major shareholder being the company it has split off from determining how much it can invest, how much it can borrow, what it can spend, what the terms of its loans are, what is the appropriate interest rate, etc etc.

I really cannot conceive of something more likely to make the separation of Scotland and rUK acrimonous than supposedly sharing a currency which in fact is completely dominated by the 92% partner. Are we really going to have all of our whiney, lefty politicians running about moaning about tory cuts after independence? What on earth is the point of that?

TheScreamingEagles said:

One of my gay friends says, this is a waste of eggs, and he would have used something else, but this is a family site

David Silvester gay marriage flood row councillor's home 'egged'

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-oxfordshire-25977349

They'd have been better off buying more copies of 'It's raining men'.

rcs1000 said:

AveryLP said:

rcs1000 said:

MikeK said:

Looks like another bad day for the markets. What is going on? We are supposed to be in a recovery phase, but is that phase already over?

There are three main reasons why the markets are weak:

1. Concerns about the Chinese credit bubble. There are a lot of very scary things coming out of China and in particular about its shadow banking system. If China were to have serious problems, it would have implications for the rest of the world (and in particular those countries which are big exporters to China, notably Germany, Australia and Brazil).

2. The Fed has begun reducing its stimulus, which means there is incrementally less cheap money sloshing round the system. Because investors know the stimulus is being removed, they are trying to get out 'first'.

3. December quarter profits, particularly in the US, are coming in slightly weaker than expected. It's notable that the two markets which are doing best in the world (Spain, Italy) are the pretty much the only ones where earnings estimates for 2014 are being raised.

4. Deflation risks in EU.

5. Emerging Markets Currency crisis.

6. Disappointing results from US major stocks (e.g. Amazon, MasterCard but Google countering trend).

Ummm: your six is my number three

And your four is probably not that much of factor, given the weakest markets are the Asian ones (who are the least affected), and the strongest ones are the peripheral European ones (the Italian market is actually up year-to-date).

I noted and edited the coincidence between your three and my six.

Interesting article in the Economist of the threat of deflation in the EU:

http://econ.st/1fqQj4V

[A bit dry - avoid if you don't like use of words such as 'exogenous']

Here is the key paragraph:

An adjustment strategy based on the expectation that already over-indebted countries will pay back what they owe in an environment of falling prices seems doomed to failure; all the more so if “internal devaluation” at the level of individual member-states is replaced by euro-zone-wide deflation. But outright deflation would be much more costly than that. If economic historians have learned anything from the Great Depression, it is that deflation is dangerous. First, nominal wages are sticky downward: as Ben Bernanke and Kevin Carey showed for the interwar period, this implies that price deflation, if achieved at all, leads to higher real wages and unemployment. Second, deflation is harmful in other ways, increasing the real value of private as well as public debt, raising real interest rates, and leading agents to postpone expensive purchases. And interwar deflation ultimately had terrible political consequences, as well as economic ones.

Theuniondivvie said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Dave agrees with Alex that it should be a debate for Scots.

And Osborne, Hammond, May, Hague, Putin, Rajoy, all the countries that UK embassies have been instructed to brief, the UK civil service, love-bombing English celebrities and so on; pretty much everyone except that 'non Scot', David William Donald Cameron.

Make up your mind, either David William Donald Cameron is a English Home Counties Posh Boy Tory Fop or he is a Scot.

To be honest, I don't know why the SNP wants to debate Dave, he'll spank Alex Salmond silly in the debate.

The best option for Alex Salmond is to debate Darling, who is vastly overrated.

Put it this way, if Farage wanted a debate with Dave, and Dave sent William Hague or someone else, Farage would debate with whomever Dave sent.

To be fair to Rajoy, I and others have been saying for a long time, the outcome of the referendum may well be determined by Rajoy having to deal with his Catalonian secessionists, which is very unfair on Scottish secessionists.

Mr. Llama, what sort of sausages?

Beef with mustard and red pepper was probably the nicest I can recall having.

Neil said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

One of my gay friends says, this is a waste of eggs, and he would have used something else, but this is a family site

David Silvester gay marriage flood row councillor's home 'egged'

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-oxfordshire-25977349

They'd have been better off buying more copies of 'It's raining men'.

I'd have got my karaoke equipment out and serenaded him with It's raining men.

AveryLP said:

I noted and edited the coincidence between your three and my six.

Interesting article in the Economist of the threat of deflation in the EU:

http://econ.st/1fqQj4V

[A bit dry - avoid if you don't like use of words such as 'exogenous']

Here is the key paragraph:

An adjustment strategy based on the expectation that already over-indebted countries will pay back what they owe in an environment of falling prices seems doomed to failure; all the more so if “internal devaluation” at the level of individual member-states is replaced by euro-zone-wide deflation. But outright deflation would be much more costly than that. If economic historians have learned anything from the Great Depression, it is that deflation is dangerous. First, nominal wages are sticky downward: as Ben Bernanke and Kevin Carey showed for the interwar period, this implies that price deflation, if achieved at all, leads to higher real wages and unemployment. Second, deflation is harmful in other ways, increasing the real value of private as well as public debt, raising real interest rates, and leading agents to postpone expensive purchases. And interwar deflation ultimately had terrible political consequences, as well as economic ones.

I agree with you that deflation is probably the greatest risk for the whole Eurozone right now. Inflation is limping along, and adjustments in the periphery are (much) easier in a 3% inflation (-> 5% nominal growth) world.

However, the question was "why are stock markets weak?"

And given that pretty much the only markets in the world that are up right now are Portugal, Italy, Ireland and Greece (and Spain is only marginally down), it seems hard to make the case that Eurozone deflationary fears are at the heart of the falls seen in the UK, the US and the Asian markets.

By the way, Abenomics has got inflation moving in Japan - we're now at 1.5%.

Moderators: the first link, "PaddyPower", doesn't seem to be working.

Hurrah!

The referendum bill breathes its last.

Let the Tory infighting begin.