Originally posted by hotspur
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Bad beat/Moaning/Venting thread - Wordle Gummidge
Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
-
Originally posted by hotspur View PostAs a rule I don't really bet anymore, but if I were to go in on the election what are the kinds of limit online bookies have if any? I suppose it's the biggest betting event ever so not like a novelty political bet with low limits."We are not Europeans. Those people on the continent are freaks."
Comment
-
Originally posted by Hitchhiker's Guide To... View PostI just don't get the Biden odds. It's perplexing me no end. How is it 4/9.
8/10 bets are still on Trump apparently."We are not Europeans. Those people on the continent are freaks."
- Likes 2
Comment
-
I am absurdly confident that Biden wins. I think they'll carry the Senate too.
To put it another way: if Trump wins then it would rock the fundamentals of how we analyse and predict public sentiment. Opinion polling and surveying sentiment is a foundational aspect of so much to do with politics, business, science and learning. If Trump were to win it would indicate that we aren't capable of it in the modern world anywhere near the extent we think we are. That would be quite frightening tbh - never mind four more years of this nonsense."Worldly wisdom teaches that it is better for reputation to fail conventionally than to succeed unconventionally." - John Maynard Keynes
- Likes 8
Comment
-
Originally posted by Raoul Duke III View Post
The only site to restrict me was Betway, €999.
Decided to go in and will use the winnings to fly to New York when it's possible, walk around it, and bask in the post-Trump era of a country I love.
- Likes 6
Comment
-
Originally posted by LuckyLloyd View PostI am absurdly confident that Biden wins. I think they'll carry the Senate too.
To put it another way: if Trump wins then it would rock the fundamentals of how we analyse and predict public sentiment..
Between that and the cluster fuck of models and public pronouncements about COVID. If it happened, 2020 would be a big reexamination of our confidence in our understanding.
Last edited by Denny Crane; 28-10-20, 23:18.
- Likes 4
Comment
-
Originally posted by Denny Crane View Post
I obviously think Biden will win, part of me is funking for a Trump victory for this reason. It would be the epistemological event of a lifetime.
Between that and the cluster fuck of models and public pronouncements about COVID. If it happened, 2020 would be a big reexamination of our confidence in our understanding.
Need a GTFO emoji
Comment
-
Originally posted by Denny Crane View Post
I obviously think Biden will win, part of me is funking for a Trump victory for this reason. It would be the epistemological event of a lifetime.
Between that and the cluster fuck of models and public pronouncements about COVID. If it happened, 2020 would be a big reexamination of our confidence in our understanding.
But what do you have to benefit from a fundamental inability to predict events like this? How could a dagger through our confidence in the fundamentals of how we interpret and analyse human preference be a good thing?
The Libs were "owned" the fallout and outrage was fun for a couple of years, I do appreciate that on some level. But an even deeper and more fundamental prediction error this time around would surely be well beyond funny? Or not...genuinely interested to understand your point of view here."Worldly wisdom teaches that it is better for reputation to fail conventionally than to succeed unconventionally." - John Maynard Keynes
Comment
-
Originally posted by LuckyLloyd View Post
Why would you want that...philosophically? I do get it that smart people young (ish ) men like yourself who profess support for Trump were always partially in it for the lols over the past half decade. I also don't ignore that as much as Trump is an "imperfect instrument" (as Bannon put it) he represented the other side of societal discourse and a pushback against a culture politics consensus that had lost the run of itself (not that they've derailed that train at all, but it's another topic).
But what do you have to benefit from a fundamental inability to predict events like this? How could a dagger through our confidence in the fundamentals of how we interpret and analyse human preference be a good thing?
The Libs were "owned" the fallout and outrage was fun for a couple of years, I do appreciate that on some level. But an even deeper and more fundamental prediction error this time around would surely be well beyond funny? Or not...genuinely interested to understand your point of view here.
The light remains the light, even though a blind man cannot see it.
Does putting Trump on a 3% chance seem realistic?
SPOILER
https://i.ibb.co/LvG8q1c/Chmy20p-XIAAt-LKY-1.jpg
The data suggests pre-election polls are largely right about the composition of the state’s electorate, but it doesn’t mean the pre-election polls will be right.
It's only a few months since the FT published this study from Cambridge. Things are bonkers.
Coronavirus may have infected half of UK population — Oxford studyLast edited by Denny Crane; 29-10-20, 01:06.
- Likes 3
Comment
-
Originally posted by oleras View PostIf it was such a sure thing, ye boys should be remortaging...ill be keeping well enough away, scary thought its not even nailed on with secret polls.
A few ended up in hospital.
In any normal world, that would be a terminal gaffe. Its probably not the dumbest thing in the last 24 hours. From next week he'll be a lame duck hawking trump branded pardons on ebay or whatever dwindling TV airtime he gets in a last desperate grab for cash before the vultures descend.People say I should be more humble I hope they understand, they don't listen when you mumble
Get a shiny metal Revolut card! And a free tenner!
https://revolut.com/referral/jamesb8!G10D21
- Likes 3
Comment
-
Guest
Originally posted by hotspur View Post
Alright just went in. If you ever get out of your gig there's a role in marketing for you. Wore me down with daily updates on how I would be a fool not to (but still kind of a fool taking half the price you originally were taking).
Decided to go in and will use the winnings to fly to New York when it's possible, walk around it, and bask in the post-Trump era of a country I love.
The ability is most evident during the US Election and Cheltenham tipping contest.
He'd do great in marketing but I think RD3 would truly shine as a late night host for FoxyBingo or virtual roulette.
- Likes 8
Comment
-
Guest
Originally posted by Denny Crane View Post
It's more about an illumination of our over-confidence, rather than hoping for an inability to predict.
The light remains the light, even though a blind man cannot see it.
]
Although I feel low probability events happen frequently and I don't think this fundamentally alters our understanding of much in a particularly profound manner.
It should certainly raise additional inquiry regarding certain predictive blindspots.
I read a great piece by Tetlock on structuring US foreign policy using a combination of scenario analysis and probabilistic reasoning.
No mention of Trump but FWIW his prediction experts have a 68% probability assigned to a vaccine for Covid by March 31st 2021.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by Murdrum View Post
His ability to apply pressure to gamble by sheer attrition is otherworldly.
The ability is most evident during the US Election and Cheltenham tipping contest.
He'd do great in marketing but I think RD3 would truly shine as a late night host for FoxyBingo or virtual roulette.
For the US election. Hes is trying to give money back to the mugs
Method .
- Likes 3
Comment
-
Originally posted by Murdrum View PostHe'd do great in marketing but I think RD3 would truly shine as a late night host for FoxyBingo or virtual roulette."We are not Europeans. Those people on the continent are freaks."
- Likes 3
Comment
-
Guest
Originally posted by Raoul Duke III View Post
Excellent idea for the second job I'll need if Trump wins this sucker.
However Alito said that he thinks the original decision violates the constitution and the case may be reexamined post election.
In some ways-especially as punter, I think that might be a worse outcome than simply ruling against because it may open up a pandoras box post election.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Murdrum View Post
I mentioned the Pennsylvania ruling a couple of days ago. It seems Barrett didn't have time to review the ruling so its stand at 4-4 ergo votes posted by Nov 3rd-even non postmarked- are eligible to be counted for up to 3 days afterwards.
However Alito said that he thinks the original decision violates the constitution and the case may be reexamined post election.
In some ways-especially as punter, I think that might be a worse outcome than simply ruling against because it may open up a pandoras box post election."We are not Europeans. Those people on the continent are freaks."
Comment
-
Originally posted by Denny Crane View Post
I obviously think Biden will win, part of me is funking for a Trump victory for this reason. It would be the epistemological event of a lifetime.
Between that and the cluster fuck of models and public pronouncements about COVID. If it happened, 2020 would be a big reexamination of our confidence in our understanding.
Now, if you were sitting at a poker table and someone bet the case loots on their hand v someone drawing to an inside straight, and that inside straight hit, would you consider that to be a fundamental challenge to our understanding of risk and predictive modelling?You are technically correct...the best kind of correct
World Record Holder for Long Distance Soul Reads: May 7th 2011
- Likes 2
Comment
-
Originally posted by Denny Crane View Post
It's more about an illumination of our over-confidence, rather than hoping for an inability to predict.
Turning millions into thousands
Comment
-
Guest
Originally posted by Raoul Duke III View Post
The race needs to be (a) really close (like, a gap of a few hundred votes) in PA, and (b) for PA to be the tipping point for any of this to be relevant.
On A, I don't know if it simply means a few hundred votes but given it's just outside the margin of error, it's not non-zero.
Nevertheless, that wasn't as much my point as was the idea that it indicates the willingness of the Supreme Court to investigate results post election which could potentially delay an official result. Unlikely yes but not off the table.
As I said, I'd be hesitant as a punter so I'd be exiting the market early and not waiting for an official result.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Kayroo View Post
What? According to the most reasonable models, Trump's chances of winning are roughly equivalent to hitting an inside straight.
Now, if you were sitting at a poker table and someone bet the case loots on their hand v someone drawing to an inside straight, and that inside straight hit, would you consider that to be a fundamental challenge to our understanding of risk and predictive modelling?
Economist is 4%? A large selection of the population is treating it as 1%. There were models that had Clinton at 99%. I think claiming probabilities that are smaller than the error bars shows a lack of understanding of risk and predictive modeling.
Even just reconciling the betting market versus polling & models is going to take some doing.Last edited by Denny Crane; 29-10-20, 10:42.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Guest
Originally posted by Denny Crane View Post
Economist is 4%? A large selection of the population is treating it as 1%. There were models that had Clinton at 99%. I think claiming probabilities that are smaller than the error bars shows a lack of understanding of risk and predictive modeling.
Even just reconciling the betting market versus polling & models is going to take some doing.
However the idea of it being the epistemological event of our lifetime or that it fundamentally changes the way in which we look at business, science & education is a little histrionic to me.
If it occurs given the general sentiment then of course it is worthy of further review but I don't believe it's that big of a shock or that the fundamentals of qualitative research across all domains need investigation as a result.
Comment
-
Nothing wrong with histrionics, it get’s you many an unwarranted penalty J
Irrespective of the attitude of looking this via probability models and shake ups , most of Denny’s Trump posts over the past 4 years have been that of an ‘admirer’ . Ok, for someone with such an obvious lack of emotional and intellectual nous, TRUMP is a MAJOR overachiever in becoming president. I’ll give him that. However there is very little to admire. In fact he is a dangerous threat to all the progress made over the past 30/40 years. He is a man for the 50s, where he would no doubt been shot. The past few months he has been campaigning for the democrats unbeknownst to himself and his questionable enablers. A TRUMP victory will defy logic itself. All the signs are there of a landslide defeat. There is no need to
project figures , or look too much into this. The electorate are out in droves , there Isn’t a snowballs chance in hell they have come out to ensure he says in power. The only route he has back in is disruption and chaos and NOT the actual election itself. He is already TOAST.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Guest
-
Originally posted by Denny Crane View Post
If I saw the other guy doing a victory lap before the river was dealt I'd suspect he hadn't played much poker.
Economist is 4%? A large selection of the population is treating it as 1%. There were models that had Clinton at 99%. I think claiming probabilities that are smaller than the error bars shows a lack of understanding of risk and predictive modeling.
Even just reconciling the betting market versus polling & models is going to take some doing.
At some point, we're going to see a severe tightening as facts on the ground become solidified. One thing we do see is that the betting market appears to be pretty impervious to polling news. For example, there's a great poll out for Biden this morning; A+ rated Marist have him +4 in Florida. Not a flicker in the betting.
So far, 77m Americans have voted. We're probably looking at record turnout - that is never, ever good for an unpopular incumbent. The signs seem to be that the Dems are mobilising their vote much more efficiently than four years ago, when Trump won by a whisker in a fluke result. As I have posted ad nauseum, the circumstances of this election are light years removed from that fluke - this is a referendum on Trump.
So, for our predictions competition, I predict the following EC result: Biden 413, Trump 125.
"We are not Europeans. Those people on the continent are freaks."
- Likes 2
Comment
-
Looking at early voting trends:- Texas now at 94% of the 2016 vote total
- North Carolina at 82%
- Georgia at 83%
"We are not Europeans. Those people on the continent are freaks."
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by DeadParrot View Post
The man held a rally last night for seniors on an air field, bussed them in, then in an effort to get cars away, they made the access road outbound only - so the buses could only make one trip - and couldn't get back to the site. Leaving 100s of oaps to walk 4 miles in frigid conditions back to their cars.
A few ended up in hospital.
In any normal world, that would be a terminal gaffe. Its probably not the dumbest thing in the last 24 hours. From next week he'll be a lame duck hawking trump branded pardons on ebay or whatever dwindling TV airtime he gets in a last desperate grab for cash before the vultures descend.Turning millions into thousands
- Likes 6
Comment
-
Originally posted by Raoul Duke III View PostLooking at early voting trends:- Texas now at 94% of the 2016 vote total
- North Carolina at 82%
- Georgia at 83%
When they all wake up maybe the price will change. Ive went with the 1.54 on betfair , hoping its the max or near it. Ive added 2 zeros to my normal bet so sweat time.
sigpic
Longshotvalue.com
- Likes 2
Comment
-
In other news, the Johnny Depp libel trial ruling is due on Monday https://news.sky.com/story/johnny-de...-week-12115862Gone full 'Glinner' since June 2022.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by Raoul Duke III View PostLooking at early voting trends:- Texas now at 94% of the 2016 vote total
- North Carolina at 82%
- Georgia at 83%
No beast so fierce but knows some touch of pity, but I know none, therefore am no beast.
- Likes 2
Comment
-
Originally posted by Raoul Duke III View PostLooking at early voting trends:- Texas now at 94% of the 2016 vote total
- North Carolina at 82%
- Georgia at 83%
Comment
-
Guest
I bought my first cookbook in effort not to fall off the wagon during the current situation: https://www.easons.com/eat-up-raise-...SABEgLxFPD_BwE
Nutritionist for the Dubs and Leinster Rugby
Comment
-
Originally posted by Murdrum View Post
Well on B, according to 538 and The Economist, PA is the most important state in relation to changes in the probability of the result.
On A, I don't know if it simply means a few hundred votes but given it's just outside the margin of error, it's not non-zero.
Nevertheless, that wasn't as much my point as was the idea that it indicates the willingness of the Supreme Court to investigate results post election which could potentially delay an official result. Unlikely yes but not off the table.
As I said, I'd be hesitant as a punter so I'd be exiting the market early and not waiting for an official result.Happiness is not a goal; it is a by-product. ~Eleanor Roosevelt
Comment
-
Originally posted by Wombatman View Post
Bookies pay out if Biden becomes president. Do these models take into account external factors, like him dying or a disputed result, or are they only looking at his chance of winning based polling trends?
Things like faithless electors are thus n/a."We are not Europeans. Those people on the continent are freaks."
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Guest
Originally posted by Wombatman View Post
Bookies pay out if Biden becomes president. Do these models take into account external factors, like him dying or a disputed result, or are they only looking at his chance of winning based polling trends?
He describes the models here: https://fivethirtyeight.com/features...e-of-covid-19/
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by Keane View PostAny mattress recommendations?
https://www.arnotts.ie/furniture/bed...NSTANDARD.html
Definitely go and lie on the mattresses if you can.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by Solksjaer! View Post
In fairness to him for Cheltenham, he is looking for mug money ..eg ME .
For the US election. Hes is trying to give money back to the mugs
Method .
- Likes 5
Comment
-
I'm not sure I've ever made a bet and not sure I want the first one to be due to a tip from RD
But he does make me want to.
Originally posted by Murdrum View Post
If Trump 2020 occurs then we have 3 low probability events in a similar domain-Brexit & Trump 2016- which certainly call into question the validity of the current methodologies used to predict political events.
However the idea of it being the epistemological event of our lifetime or that it fundamentally changes the way in which we look at business, science & education is a little histrionic to me.
If it occurs given the general sentiment then of course it is worthy of further review but I don't believe it's that big of a shock or that the fundamentals of qualitative research across all domains need investigation as a result.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by LuckyLloyd View PostI just put a rather large bet on Biden at 4 / 9. I think the price is absolutely ridiculous given the data we have to hand.
The way things are going, I wouldn't be surprised if we can back Biden at 4/6-ish some time over the next 3 days."We are not Europeans. Those people on the continent are freaks."
Comment
-
Originally posted by Raoul Duke III View Post
fair bit of 8/15 out there if you shop around.
The way things are going, I wouldn't be surprised if we can back Biden at 4/6-ish some time over the next 3 days.
- Likes 2
Comment
Comment