2
   

If you were a bookie... Polls and bets on the 2004 elections

 
 
nimh
 
Reply Sat 15 Nov, 2003 08:20 pm
EDIT:

The original question was:

"What odds would you set for the presidentials 2004 (primaries and real ones)?

And remember - you're a bookie, it's your business that's at stake here - you have no time for ideology or wishful thinking!"

16/05: Edited the title of this thread, to make it more generally about all opinion poll news and "other" bets on the candidates' chances ...
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 2 • Views: 85,316 • Replies: 2,095
No top replies

 
Wilso
 
  1  
Reply Sat 15 Nov, 2003 08:45 pm
If the US opinions reflected this site, it'd be a no brainer. Unfortunately I don't know that the rest of the States is as smart as those here.
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Sat 15 Nov, 2003 09:02 pm
Wilso just a hint, Richard M Nixon won TWICE
0 Replies
 
Wilso
 
  1  
Reply Sat 15 Nov, 2003 09:09 pm
dyslexia wrote:
Wilso just a hint, Richard M Nixon won TWICE


If you're trying to make me feeling better, you're failing dismally. Crying or Very sad
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Sat 15 Nov, 2003 09:15 pm
not only that Wilso, Spiro Agnew could have become president. I dont think you will find many conservatives on A2K or elsewhere that will defend that.
0 Replies
 
mikey
 
  1  
Reply Sat 15 Nov, 2003 09:15 pm
it seems like the majority of 'sheep' in this country continue to vote the "Dickheads" into the highest office constantantly.

if i rember in the morning i'll call eddie fingers and see what the line is or would be and report in...i don't gamble so he'll tell me straight up.
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Sat 15 Nov, 2003 09:18 pm
I have a number for "Marvin the Torch" working out of Detroit who can alter the odds.
Hey Mickey long time no see.
0 Replies
 
mikey
 
  1  
Reply Sat 15 Nov, 2003 09:22 pm
we need an alterer dys,,,,,CALL him
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Sat 15 Nov, 2003 09:52 pm
OK, lemme start, then:

[edited to get the phrasing of the numbers in line with betting convention]

for the Dem primaries, right now I'd have Dean at 5/2, Gephardt at 5/1, Clark at 6/1, Kerry 8/1, Edwards at 20/1, Lieberman at 20/1

(am i doing this right? i dont gamble, really ..)

the brits do this at every election, dont they - gambling on the outcomes?

bush vs dean - not going on what i'd want to happen, but how i would realistically put the chances - i'd give bush the edge, at 5/3, put dean at 5/2.

anyone wanna buy? :-D

someone else wanna give it a shot now? you can always change your odds over time ...

would even be a good indicator of how the campaigns are unfolding, away from the opining at the "2004 elections thread" - just the who's up, who's down, and why, according to you?
0 Replies
 
mikey
 
  1  
Reply Sat 15 Nov, 2003 10:01 pm
i'm in,,,,

do you need cash NIMH? or will my trashed credit rating do?
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Sat 15 Nov, 2003 10:04 pm
heh! if this were abuzz you could bet your smileys ... ;-)
0 Replies
 
eoe
 
  1  
Reply Sat 15 Nov, 2003 10:06 pm
The pickins' are still too slim to even talk about!
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Sat 15 Nov, 2003 11:02 pm
nimh

I also have no idea if you are doing this correctly. And I couldn't break these odds down to the level you have. Can I be more general? I give Dean the victory to lead the Democrats. And if Clark is the running mate, that will, I guess, help in the presidential election (though Cheney will be tough in any debate that might be set up).

For Bush to be beat, I think things have to continue going wrong such that more folks understand what a dangerous dolt he is. But his marketing machine is quite without scruples and will try pretty much anything if the boy looks in trouble.

I'm pessimistic, I confess. I think Bush likely to win again though by a small margin.
0 Replies
 
mikey
 
  1  
Reply Sat 15 Nov, 2003 11:05 pm
unfortunately for us in the US i think you hit the nail right on the head in you're predictions Blatham.

too many sheep here,,,,
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  1  
Reply Sun 16 Nov, 2003 05:44 pm
blatham wrote:
... I think Bush likely to win again though by a small margin.


I agree that Bush will win, but suspect the margin will be several percent of the popular vote. Life is good.
0 Replies
 
realjohnboy
 
  1  
Reply Sun 16 Nov, 2003 06:11 pm
Nimh...no gamblers here, I guess. But if we were, what do you mean by 1:2 or 2:5 or 1:20?
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Sun 16 Nov, 2003 06:39 pm
realjohnboy wrote:
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.

I could, 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!
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Sun 16 Nov, 2003 07:43 pm
You've pretty much got a handle on it nimh, though the real bookie game is a little more complex. Bookie odds begin with statistical probability, derived from analysis of prior similar events or matchups ("Track Record", which term comes directly from horse racing, where it is the recorded performance of a horse), often with allowance or adjustment for condition such as weather or momentum, injured, unknown or new-to-team but proven-elsewhere players or coaches, that sort of stuff. Then, as betting proceeds, the odds, or payback, are inluenced by the volume of betting on either possible outcome, and if one outcome is bet more heavily than the other, it becomes proportionately the "Favorite", and correspondingly, the ratio of payback-to-wager declines. It should be noted bookies always make money, while gamblers decidedly do not do so, occasional successes aside. Bookies don't gamble. They collect more than they pay out, and they adjust the payout to ensure that.
0 Replies
 
Italgato
 
  1  
Reply Sun 16 Nov, 2003 07:56 pm
Blatham wrote that Bush is a dangerous dolt.

Does he think that Clinton was a dangerous scumbag?

If he doesn't, Blatham should read the speech that Clinton gave in December 1998 during his impeachment hearings, no less, saying that he was ordering bombings of Baghdad to take place because Saddam was sure to develop WMD's and to threaten us with them.


Hello!!! Blatham!!!!!
0 Replies
 
Italgato
 
  1  
Reply Sun 16 Nov, 2003 08:10 pm
Ok, nimh, I'm a bookie. No emotion. Just cold facts.

l. Bush's Job Approval Rating has been dropping but is still above 50%

2. The Economy shows signs of recovery. Unemployment is dropping.

3. The Administration has signaled that they will turn much of the control of the country to the Iraqis in June and begin to withdraw troops.

4. The Democrats who are running are engaging in vicious inter-necine warfare, savaging each other with charges. The Republicans are sure to savor and save these comments.

5. Dean has gathered 25 Million. Bush, with no primary fight ahead, has gathered 100 Million. Money is the mother's milk of politics.

6. Republicans have won three governorships this month. The Democrats won one. There appears to be no "backlash" affecting Republicans running for office.

7. The Republicans in Texas have redistricted in such a way that they will gain at least 4 seats in the Federal House.

8. At least four incumbent Senators from the Democratic party
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Oz fest 2004 - Question by Love2is0evol
Human Events Names Man of the Year, 2004 - Discussion by gungasnake
Your 2004 mix tape - Discussion by boomerang
BUSH WON FAIR AND SQUARE... - Discussion by Frank Apisa
Weeping and gnashing of teeth - Discussion by FreeDuck
WOW! Why Andrew Sullivan is supporting John Kerry - Discussion by BumbleBeeBoogie
Margarate Hassan - hostage in Iraq - Discussion by msolga
 
  1. Forums
  2. » If you were a bookie... Polls and bets on the 2004 elections
Copyright © 2019 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 05/20/2019 at 04:23:47