21–28 of 28 posts
Graphs over time: http://politicszone.betfair.com/ To interpret the numbers do 100/(decimal odd) to get percentages as shown in the graphs.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"wisdom in the crowd" seems like a contradiction. Nice phrase.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wisdom_of_Crowds "a book written by James Surowiecki about the aggregation of information in groups, resulting in decisions that, he argues, are often better than could have been made by any single member of the group."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The user pays money in the hope of winning more back - it's gambling however you slice it. There is no information of any value here outside the context of the site itself - unless you're claiming that your audience is a representative sample of the UK population?
It's by far the most accurate prediction of the result. People putting their money where their mouth is - generally a lot more reliable than somebody with a clipboard in a shopping center asking voters, or the opinions of a TV reporter.
Do you have any evidence for this? E.g. comparisons of polling vs betting predictions from previous elections.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The user pays money in the hope of winning more back - it's gambling however you slice it. That describes investment as well.
Indeed - what's your point? Since both generally involve using guesswork (however educated) in an attempt to increase wealth, it seems reasonable to draw a parallel between the two.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
and as far as I know they are the best mechanism to predict the outcome of an election. It's an honest opinion since they are betting their own money independently of their personal preferences.
Are you suggesting that people will make bets in a purely rational way, and only by considering (in this case) what they know about the UK election? I suggest that plenty of people will either bet emotionally, choosing the option they prefer, or psuedo-rationally (i.e. reasoning poorly). I expect many will also use the odds provided on the website to guide their choices.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are you suggesting that people will make bets in a purely rational way, and only by considering (in this case) what they know about the UK election? I suggest that plenty of people will either bet emotionally, choosing the option they prefer, or psuedo-rationally (i.e. reasoning poorly). I expect many will also use the odds provided on the website to guide their choices.
If you truly believe this, why don't you take their money by betting against them?
I don't imagine a clear divide between 'rational' and 'irrational' betting (for want of a better description), I'm just saying that I would expect there to be a lot of both going on.
If you're wondering why I believe this, the book 'Predictably Irrational' by Dan Ariely springs to mind as a good read about the subject. Also 'The Tiger That Isn't' (Michael Blastland/Andrew Dilnot), not about human rationality as such but rather, how easily we can be foxed by information depending upon how it is presented to us (in the context of 'reasoning poorly' about the election).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Indeed - what's your point? Since both generally involve using guesswork (however educated) in an attempt to increase wealth, it seems reasonable to draw a parallel between the two.
Depends on what you define as gambling. E.g. playing crap or betting on fair coin-flips is decidedly different from prediction markets or investment; because everyone agrees on the probabilities already, so there's no information aggregation and discovery.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Depends on what you define as gambling. E.g. playing crap or betting on fair coin-flips is decidedly different from prediction markets or investment; because everyone agrees on the probabilities already, so there's no information aggregation and discovery.
It's the same basic process though isn't it? Making a bet on the basis of a guess about the future. Of course, it may be a very well educated guess or just a shot in the dark, but unless you can actually correctly predict the future, there is always some element of uncertainty involved.
In `pure' gambling, like betting on a coin flip, everyone already has all information. So it's less interesting, and warrants a different category of game.