Nimh...no gamblers here, I guess. But if we were, what do you mean by 1:2 or 2:5 or 1:20?
[edited to get the numbers right]
'K ... I'm no expert on this, but I think
this is how it works.
, however, well have it all
wrong. I've never placed a bet like that in my life. But this is what I thought:
If the bookie has a candidate (etc) set at 2/1, that means that if you bet one dollar on him and he wins, you get two dollars back.
If he's set him at 20/1, you would get 20 dollars back if he wins.
The more unlikely a candidate for victory you pick, the more money you'd get if he does
win, after all.
This makes sense - its kinda like the laws of supply and demand on the market place.
If everybody wants to buy 'Dean tickets', the bookie isnt going to promise huge returns on those - would become very costly when Dean does win, as everybody seems to believe. But he'll promise huge returns on 'Edwards tickets', cause there's only a few buying those - and hey, Edwards' not gonna win, anyway ;-).
The figures kinda correspond with the percentage chance of winning. In my example, I gave Lieberman and Edwards each a 5% chance of winning the primaries (20/1), and Dean a 40% chance (2,5/1 or 5/2).
For the November elections, I estimate a 60% chance of Bush winning (5/3) against a 40% chance of Dean winning (5/2) - if those will indeed be the candidates facing each other.
That would explain it? Then again, I coulda made that whole system up on the basis of some misunderstood vague impression ... I hope somebody who's actually got some experience in gambling will correct me!