latest Betfair odds

[Beet]

The betting markets are totally discredited. Both Bremain and Hillary traded at 85-90% literally minutes before the decisive votes started getting reported. These reflects the biases of their urban, center-left, sources of dumb money.

[Beet]

The betting markets are totally discredited. Both Bremain and Hillary traded at 85-90% literally minutes before the decisive votes started getting reported. These reflects the biases of their urban, center-left, sources of dumb money.

If Betfair had existed Since WW2, then it (or any other betting markets out there) would have had the guy who ended up winning the presidency favored in their market on election eve in every presidential election from 1952 to 2012.  Now, because the underdog wins one time, they're "discredited"?

Then all they do is reflect conventional wisdom, and magnify it. There's no evidence they add anything of value.

[Beet]

The betting markets are totally discredited. Both Bremain and Hillary traded at 85-90% literally minutes before the decisive votes started getting reported. These reflects the biases of their urban, center-left, sources of dumb money.

If Betfair had existed Since WW2, then it (or any other betting markets out there) would have had the guy who ended up winning the presidency favored in their market on election eve in every presidential election from 1952 to 2012.  Now, because the underdog wins one time, they're "discredited"?

Then all they do is reflect conventional wisdom, and magnify it. There's no evidence they add anything of value.

Yes, they are conventional wisdom aggregators.  I thought that was obvious.

The point is that it's not always obvious to everyone reading about politics how to synthesize the conventional wisdom into a number.  X is the frontrunner to win the primary or the general election or whatever, but how much of a frontrunner?  How much of a chance does the 2nd or 3rd place guy have?  Sure, any of us who follows this stuff can come up with our own numbers, and if we track the races closely enough, we can potentially even beat the market.  But seeing what the collective CW of the market is in numerical form is still something that's of interest to some of us.

This is philosophical Mumbo jumbo. The point is, if a 90% chance of a result 30 minutes before poll closing on election night can be wrong, what is the hope of any number being predictive this far out? These markets claim to predict events, not capture conventional wisdom. When the average person looks at these numbers, they are thinking about the likelihood of the event happening. No one wakes up from bed in the morning and thinks, "I wonder what the conventional wisdom about the 2020 election is today? I better check Betfair!"

[Beet]

Warren is way too high, and I saw that as a Warren fan.

Betting markets are, as a whole nothing but a reflection of conventional wisdom. In the last two cycles there have been markets that have gone from 10% to 100% on election nights.

[Beet]

Sanders is absurdly low and I've just loaded up on him on PredictIt @9 cents.