Trump Opens Up 16 point lead with independents

Discussion in 'Politics' started by jem, Oct 31, 2016.

  1. Good1

    Good1

     
    #21     Oct 31, 2016
  2. Good1

    Good1

    Are you saying you would only bet on a longshot that pays out more than your bet?

    Or, are you saying you never bet on a favorite?

    I'm just trying to figure out why, in a trading forum, you don't have money behind your advice?
     
    #22     Oct 31, 2016
  3. Tony Stark

    Tony Stark


    Nothing less than a 1/1 risk reward ratio.
     
    #23     Oct 31, 2016
  4. fhl

    fhl

    New highs every day of people who hate Hillary Clinton.

    It's going parabolic!
     
    #24     Oct 31, 2016
  5. Good1

    Good1

    For that to happen your runner would have to drop to a 40-45% chance of winning because you have to figure in the bookies take. At which point you are betting on an underdog. So you are saying you would never bet on a presidential favorite...even though favored to win?

    You do understand that any bet is equally in favor of the bookie, yes?

    Caveat: In baseball the book designs it's odds to make more money from bets on the favorites.

    Is this the reason you won't bet a dime on Hillary Rotten?

    Because you don't like the size of the bookies take?
     
    #25     Oct 31, 2016
  6. Good1

    Good1

    So let me break this down so it's infinitely clear.

    First, let's back the bookies take out of the equation.

    If odds are set correctly, and do reflect reality, then you can bet an underdog or a favorite every day, even every hour of the day, and at the end of the year your balance will be exactly as if you flipped a coin and were paid out 1 dollar for every dollar you bet. That's a 1/1 risk reward.

    Now, if you throw in the bookies take, your balance will reflect exactly as stated above, minus all the commissions/vigs you gave away to play. (Pay-To-Play, sound familiar?)

    Thus, if odds are TRUE, your risk to reward is indeed 1/1.

    Since the odds are true as you say and/or advise, why don't you have a bet down?
     
    #26     Oct 31, 2016
  7. Good1

    Good1

    On the other hand, if the odds are not TRUE, and don't reflect reality, then it could be said that "the odds are too high", which is what you said. But is that what you meant...that the betting odds don't truly reflect Killary's actual chances, on the ground, at the ballot boxes?

    If so, then you are right, it's not a good bet...or at least not the kind of 1/1 bet you would take.
     
    #27     Oct 31, 2016
  8. Its worse than that. In this poll they fudged independents down to 14% to get Clinton up 6 points. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/docs/2016/2016_Reuters_Tracking_-_Core_Political_10.25_.16_.pdf
     
    #28     Nov 1, 2016
  9. Tony Stark

    Tony Stark

    This all over again:(









     
    #29     Nov 1, 2016
  10. achilles28

    achilles28

    #30     Nov 1, 2016