politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The polls have the battle broadly tied – the spread betting
Comments
-
The english have now taken over the mantle of voting fodder. You really don't count unless you're in a marginal.john_zims said:@tyson
'As well as alienate English voters who cannot stand this lurching, blatant, politicking. It seems like we have the worst of Gordon Brown back- someone always looking for cheap Daily Mail headlines.'
And how about the mass of English voters that cannot stand the grossly unfair settlement between Scotland & England?
0 -
I've not put it into Excel, but this formula would entail getting the house on the Tories in Bristol NW.RodCrosby said:
In Excel try...RodCrosby said:
i) Maybe Lab majority is too short. (^_-)Richard_Nabavi said:If someone could explain to me why you can get on Lab Maj at around 49/1 and sometimes more on Betfair, when the Conservatives are on 3/10 to retain Dover, 1/3 to retain Crawley, 1/5 to retain NW Leics, 2/7 to retain Redditich, and 1/3 to retain Filton & Bradley Stoke, I'd be interested to hear the explanation.
ii) In any case the seat odds are broadly consistent with national level-pegging in the polls, given the likely variation in swing.
iii) Maybe some favourite-longshot bias. Cons should perhaps be a bit shorter.
1 - NORMDIST( (LABNLEAD+0.073)/2, CONSMAJ/2, 0.037, 1 )
for the Tories' chance of holding the seat, where:-
LABNLEAD is the national Labour % lead (expressed as a percentage/decimal < 1.0)
CONSMAJ is the Tory % lead in the seat in question (expressed as a percentage/decimal < 1.0)0 -
Along the lines of Nabavi's posts:
Aberconwy is Labour's 326th seat by odds @ 9-4
Coral is 4-9 top price Tories.
Lab Maj is 50-1
Seems 4-9 is worth a small bet to me.
DYOR anyway0 -
Your post is a good point and demonstrates clearly the lack of coherence in a Tory campaign lurching from theme to theme. It alienates more than it enthuses.paulyork said:
Apologies for the garbage first sentence. Combination of beer and moble phone rather than laptop.paulyork said:I was true blue until the tories because i value personal responsibility. Then their manifesto wants my taxes to subsidise others getting cheap houses from housing associations and paying for childcare. Now i might be the only voter in the country to switch to libdem.
From memory, post midnight posting here is dominated by the wine effect- usually posters being very unpleasant towards each other.
Anyway off to bed now.
0 -
-
Tyson - I find it slightly concerning that the papers seem willing to run these sorts of articles. Now clearly all these men are dead but it could easily be seen as smearing based on one man's word. If a serving cabinet minister is involved then why aren't the police knocking on doors.
Similarly with Lord Janner, the implication is he is guilty and has got away with it. Actually he has been badly served by the CPS too as he has not had the chance to defend himself and clear his name.
Lord McAlpine was falsely accused of course but at least as he was alive at the time he had the chance to defend himself and clear his name.0 -
An outright Tory Majority is not "something substantial" to over-ride "once in a generation".Itwasrigged said:0 -
This formula seems to suggest Nick Palmer is going to get back inRodCrosby said:
In Excel try...RodCrosby said:
i) Maybe Lab majority is too short. (^_-)Richard_Nabavi said:If someone could explain to me why you can get on Lab Maj at around 49/1 and sometimes more on Betfair, when the Conservatives are on 3/10 to retain Dover, 1/3 to retain Crawley, 1/5 to retain NW Leics, 2/7 to retain Redditich, and 1/3 to retain Filton & Bradley Stoke, I'd be interested to hear the explanation.
ii) In any case the seat odds are broadly consistent with national level-pegging in the polls, given the likely variation in swing.
iii) Maybe some favourite-longshot bias. Cons should perhaps be a bit shorter.
1 - NORMDIST( (LABNLEAD+0.073)/2, CONSMAJ/2, 0.037, 1 )
for the Tories' chance of holding the seat, where:-
LABNLEAD is the national Labour % lead (expressed as a percentage/decimal < 1.0)
CONSMAJ is the Tory % lead in the seat in question (expressed as a percentage/decimal < 1.0)
0 -
About 70% chance of a Tory hold, just considering Con/Lab swing.Pulpstar said:
I've not put it into Excel, but this formula would entail getting the house on the Tories in Bristol NW.RodCrosby said:
In Excel try...RodCrosby said:
i) Maybe Lab majority is too short. (^_-)Richard_Nabavi said:If someone could explain to me why you can get on Lab Maj at around 49/1 and sometimes more on Betfair, when the Conservatives are on 3/10 to retain Dover, 1/3 to retain Crawley, 1/5 to retain NW Leics, 2/7 to retain Redditich, and 1/3 to retain Filton & Bradley Stoke, I'd be interested to hear the explanation.
ii) In any case the seat odds are broadly consistent with national level-pegging in the polls, given the likely variation in swing.
iii) Maybe some favourite-longshot bias. Cons should perhaps be a bit shorter.
1 - NORMDIST( (LABNLEAD+0.073)/2, CONSMAJ/2, 0.037, 1 )
for the Tories' chance of holding the seat, where:-
LABNLEAD is the national Labour % lead (expressed as a percentage/decimal < 1.0)
CONSMAJ is the Tory % lead in the seat in question (expressed as a percentage/decimal < 1.0)
However the fly in the ointment is that the LDs were in second place in 2010. The formula is really only applicable in the classic two-party marginal where there's no chance of a third-party upset.
And of course it can never account for local/regional or special factors in any case. It assumes the likely standard deviation in swing (3.7% in 2010, could be higher this time) is randomly distributed across all seats.
Not foolproof, but without any additional knowledge, a good starting point, perhaps...0 -
80-85% chance, assumingPulpstar said:
This formula seems to suggest Nick Palmer is going to get back inRodCrosby said:
In Excel try...RodCrosby said:
i) Maybe Lab majority is too short. (^_-)Richard_Nabavi said:If someone could explain to me why you can get on Lab Maj at around 49/1 and sometimes more on Betfair, when the Conservatives are on 3/10 to retain Dover, 1/3 to retain Crawley, 1/5 to retain NW Leics, 2/7 to retain Redditich, and 1/3 to retain Filton & Bradley Stoke, I'd be interested to hear the explanation.
ii) In any case the seat odds are broadly consistent with national level-pegging in the polls, given the likely variation in swing.
iii) Maybe some favourite-longshot bias. Cons should perhaps be a bit shorter.
1 - NORMDIST( (LABNLEAD+0.073)/2, CONSMAJ/2, 0.037, 1 )
for the Tories' chance of holding the seat, where:-
LABNLEAD is the national Labour % lead (expressed as a percentage/decimal < 1.0)
CONSMAJ is the Tory % lead in the seat in question (expressed as a percentage/decimal < 1.0)
i) the polls are currently accurate
ii) they don't change
iii) no significant regional/local/special factors to make Broxtowe an outlier0 -
But of course, with an 80% probability, we shouldn't be terribly surprised if he lost, even if he has average luck...RodCrosby said:
80-85% chance, assumingPulpstar said:
This formula seems to suggest Nick Palmer is going to get back inRodCrosby said:
In Excel try...RodCrosby said:
i) Maybe Lab majority is too short. (^_-)Richard_Nabavi said:If someone could explain to me why you can get on Lab Maj at around 49/1 and sometimes more on Betfair, when the Conservatives are on 3/10 to retain Dover, 1/3 to retain Crawley, 1/5 to retain NW Leics, 2/7 to retain Redditich, and 1/3 to retain Filton & Bradley Stoke, I'd be interested to hear the explanation.
ii) In any case the seat odds are broadly consistent with national level-pegging in the polls, given the likely variation in swing.
iii) Maybe some favourite-longshot bias. Cons should perhaps be a bit shorter.
1 - NORMDIST( (LABNLEAD+0.073)/2, CONSMAJ/2, 0.037, 1 )
for the Tories' chance of holding the seat, where:-
LABNLEAD is the national Labour % lead (expressed as a percentage/decimal < 1.0)
CONSMAJ is the Tory % lead in the seat in question (expressed as a percentage/decimal < 1.0)
i) the polls are currently accurate
ii) they don't change
iii) no significant regional/local/special factors to make Broxtowe an outlier
About the same chance as throwing a six with a dice.
(^_-)
0 -
It looks like the Conservatives have finally hit on something that should score points for them Labour propped up by the SNP - and they are going to stick with it. I thought Cameron did a good job with the Marr interview today hammering the point relentlessly. It's the right thing to do and yes it should worry people.
He wasn't convinced when talking about trying to win an overall majority, and it's pretty obvious Cameron knows it can't be done from here. But he can't concede that point openly because it risks deflating some voters and having them not turn out.
I think if the SNP polling holds up then the Conservatives have a shot at getting most seats and keeping Cameron as PM after the election. But I think most seats is lot closer to a toss of a coin than the odds imply.
Labour aren't winning a majority without Scotland so I see no value backing them at all. 50/1 doesn't look big to me. I'd suggest the Tories majority odds are still very short and NOM is still overpriced (on Betfair at least) and will fall to about 1/33 with a week to go in the election.
I'm focusing most of my attention on next pm and most seats now. I'll look to close my position on NOM out when it hits that magic figure I'm targeting a week before polling day.
0 -
65-70% chance of a Tory hold, based on a 0-1% Labour national lead.Pulpstar said:Along the lines of Nabavi's posts:
Aberconwy is Labour's 326th seat by odds @ 9-4
Coral is 4-9 top price Tories.
Lab Maj is 50-1
Seems 4-9 is worth a small bet to me.
DYOR anyway
Special info: Wales has been gradually trending Tory for 50 years...0 -
trublue
I saw the two interviews on Marr - Sturgeon looking relaxed and engaging and then someone who used to look like a Prime Minister coming across bully and a pretty desperate one at that.0 -
I don't understand this line. If you're worried that Labour will be a bit short and need the SNP, isn't the obvious thing to do to vote Labour so they don't need the SNP?trublue said:It looks like the Conservatives have finally hit on something that should score points for them Labour propped up by the SNP - and they are going to stick with it. I thought Cameron did a good job with the Marr interview today hammering the point relentlessly. It's the right thing to do and yes it should worry people.
0 -
Isn't it to attract wavering Kippers?edmundintokyo said:
I don't understand this line. If you're worried that Labour will be a bit short and need the SNP, isn't the obvious thing to do to vote Labour so they don't need the SNP?trublue said:It looks like the Conservatives have finally hit on something that should score points for them Labour propped up by the SNP - and they are going to stick with it. I thought Cameron did a good job with the Marr interview today hammering the point relentlessly. It's the right thing to do and yes it should worry people.
0 -
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/politics/article4416700.eceScott_P said:the SNP was examining whether it could scupper parliamentary authorisation of the annual Ministry of Defence budget
Such a move would put in jeopardy troops’ salaries, the supply of equipment and the financing of ongoing operations and contracts, in addition to spending on Trident.
a Tory whip, hinted yesterday that a future Labour minority government could not rely on Tory backing to stop the move since the party would not want to be seen to endorse Labour cuts to the military.
Ironically, it is the Conservatives who have taken a hatchet to the armed forces. Of course, as with Labour on the NHS, defence remains a Conservative issue.0 -
So the SNP will be able to veto all defence spending in the UK if they win 50 seats or so next month. What I don't get is what happens to the 280-300 votes the Tories get. Are their MPs prevented from passing through the lobbies? In effect, what the Tories seem to be saying is that they will vote with the SNP to deliver chaos. Bizarre.0
-
Grammar! "For you and ME!"TheScreamingEagles said:
Tomorrow's guest article may also include some inconvenient truths for you and I.antifrank said:Could Lord Ashcroft stop polling Scottish constituencies? I'm not sure I want any inconvenient truths just now.
0 -
I think it's 50/50 right now who wins the most seats. In this scenario, the best bet for the country is to vote for the party who unequivocally say they will not do a deal with the SNP. And the party who the SNP say they will not to any kind of deal with. That party is the Conservative party. Give the Conservative party as many seats as you can because it's the only way to guarantee we keep SNP influence over our affairs out.edmundintokyo said:
I don't understand this line. If you're worried that Labour will be a bit short and need the SNP, isn't the obvious thing to do to vote Labour so they don't need the SNP?0 -
The only way that the SNP can block legislation is if the Tories vote with them to do it.trublue said:
I think it's 50/50 right now who wins the most seats. In this scenario, the best bet for the country is to vote for the party who unequivocally say they will not do a deal with the SNP. And the party who the SNP say they will not to any kind of deal with. That party is the Conservative party. Give the Conservative party as many seats as you can because it's the only way to guarantee we keep SNP influence over our affairs out.edmundintokyo said:
I don't understand this line. If you're worried that Labour will be a bit short and need the SNP, isn't the obvious thing to do to vote Labour so they don't need the SNP?
0 -
Only if enough people vote conservative to give them the influence they need to stop the SNP from implenting their destructive plans.SouthamObserver said:
The only way that the SNP can block legislation is if the Tories vote with them to do it.
0 -
