@baldcyclist
You'll want to hope the bookies are wrong. The implied probability of a Yes vote, based the bookies' odds is only 25%.
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Debate!
White Paper (THE #indyref thread)
(2915 posts)- Started 11 years ago by Morningsider
- Latest reply from chdot
- This topic is
closed
-
Posted 10 years ago #
-
@stickman - good to raise these issues to which there are no answers.
Your options are then
1. Shangrila/Brigadoon just vote yes and things will be fine don't bother with fine detail
2. Don't take the risk on ventures where actual facts cannot be establishedI am GemNo but not because of the above. I see separation as sectarian and nationalism as running risks of fascism but mostly voting No because I like the English left and want to help them out of the bind they are in rather than abandon them. Note the English left is a bit less left than the Scottish socialist party.
Do not let my views influence you nor distract you from asking for actual data. John Swinney who I actually like was hammered by pro yes James naughtie on today prog th is morning
Eh, I am confident was his closing remark (all those years of training and still starting the statement of confidence with ehhh)
Still much prefer him to AS as less BS
Posted 10 years ago # -
@insto. Ahhh, I admit to nit really understanding betting odds, so relied on checking with a colleague.
The odds posted on Williiam Hills website are:
Yes: 11/4. << does this not mean you have to bet £11 to get £4 back?
No: 1/4 << pay £1 to get £4, is this not better?Apparently 80% of bets are on Yes. Would be a Yes bias at William Hill I would have thought in fairness, young poor males more likely to vote Yes, which would be their demographic?
Posted 10 years ago # -
2. Don't take the risk on ventures where actual facts cannot be established
Not "don't take the risk", just weigh up the unknowns, upsides, downsides and try to come up with a solution.
If I told you what I did for a living you may understand my thought process (or laugh)
Posted 10 years ago # -
@stickman
Absolutely
Are you an undertaker?
Posted 10 years ago # -
No, but I study their work closely, of at least keep an eye on how busy they are
Posted 10 years ago # -
"I like the English left and want to help them out of the bind they are in rather than abandon them"
That's fine. But as you know, there is no unified 'English left' wanting you (and everyone else) to 'stay' - I refer you to B Bragg and G Monbiot.
The reality is that, even with a No, things have been changed. Scotland has challenged the centrist 'establishment' 'status quo'. Already English cities are expecting a 'better deal'.
With a Yes, the impetus would be greater - AND there would be a lot of people who had just 'won' and be able to offer encouragement/advice/support/help.
"
When I saw the no office in Kirkcaldy yesterday it was clearly set up like a Labour Party election office: street maps, computers, earnest student activists and an atmosphere so controlled that they told me, if I wanted an interview I had to ring a number in Edinburgh and press #1.
But the yes campaign, at grassroots level, is more like a movement than a hierarchy; it actually maps onto the social media lifestyle, and presumably explains why in the face of media and officialdom, yes has managed to scare the pants off Westminster. And it’s not just down to different methods.
Mr McAlpine – a former press officer to the former Labour leader George Robertson – reels off their answers to the fiscal and macro-economic objections of the no side. They have credible (albeit unpalatable to the City of London) answers on the debt, the currency, the fiscal sustainability that are very different from those of the SNP.
"
http://blogs.channel4.com/paul-mason-blog/grassroots-groups-leading-indyref-debate/2263
Posted 10 years ago # -
The 11/4 means for every £1 you bet you'll make a profit of £2.75. 1/4 means for every pound you'd make a profit of 25p. The likelihood of something happening is reflected in the odds - if it's unlikely, you get good odds (11/4) because the bookies expect to win. If it's likely you'll get poor odds (1/4).
My understanding is that although the polls are close, the bookies are keeping the odds on Yes at that level because they are currently heavily exposed on bets for a No vote. So they're offering what looks like good odds to encourage bets to try to balance up their losses if, as they still expect, it's a No vote.
Posted 10 years ago # -
@stickman
Actuary?Posted 10 years ago # -
@baldycyclist no you have misunderstood the odds.
There are earlier posts trying to establish that the odds in bookies and the number of bets re not actually helpful. I will explain again as I was formerly very ivolved in gambling addiction research.
The odds of a no win that you quote mean you have to bet four pounds to get one pound back which unless you are bonkers you would avoid.
The odds of a yes are that if you place a bet of four pounds you receive eleven pounds back. Much better odds. So if you want to interpret this in any way feel free. The odds speak for themselves - one pound bet wins 25p if no or £2.75 if yes but bookies can get turned over, normally this involved a jockey called lesser piggott
The wise sage insto pointed out that turnout was a better thing to wager on and he and I agreed on about 73% but we appear to have lost as prediction is 80 % which would be a record. This involves don't knows and indeed never voting. Some unconscious Tories I know who have never voted are voting in this one. Again that may not be typical.
Gambling is a mugs game. I am still owed a lot of money from twenty five years back as Iraqi refugee we took in to our flat nicked all the phone bill money, lecky etc to blow on roulette. He did a moonlight and all we were left with was a pile of cards from casino under his bed with list of numbers the wee ball had fallen on. Note Alex salmond a good turf correspondent when the SNP sacked him before.
Posted 10 years ago # -
"Actuary?"
I'm sure someone on here has already said they are.
Are there two?
Quite probably!
'Everyone' seems to be in financial services or work for CEC. (I exaggerate.)
Posted 10 years ago # -
@insto - so good when you can make actual factual statements that are corroborated
@chdot - you have been to the Lang toon?
@stickman - Grim Reaper?
Posted 10 years ago # -
@ GemNo
Other 'left wingers' are available -
"
@sopHieMaRsh__: Confident that we can get a yes vote now. George Galloway made the no campaign a laughing stock #BigBigDebate
"
Wonder if the BBC will leave the good bits in. (9:00)
Posted 10 years ago # -
@stickman
Actuary?You're a stats man - you can work out the probability :-)
Posted 10 years ago # -
@gembo
I'm not so sure that turnover bet is lost. I was looking for some other comparable examples today - 1979 referendum MORI estimated certainty to vote at 71%, beating turnout by 7% but got the result within 2%. Not got figures for 1997 referendum.In 2011 Scottish Parliament elections we had CTV at 17 points over turnout and still got the result close (SNP within 1% and others 3%).
Recent Survation has 86% CTV and I suspect their panel is jammed with activist (which is why their numbers don't budge - not the sort of people whose opinions change). I can easily see that dropping by 10 points or more.
Posted 10 years ago # -
Grim Reaper?
Ha! I may start carrying a scythe on the bike - it will be handy for cutting back the foliage on the cycle paths. My selfless gardening acts can begin the healing of a divided nation :-)
Posted 10 years ago # -
"
@paulhutcheon: Breaking: YouGov poll shows NO back in the lead
YES: 48% (-3)
NO: 52% (+3) #indyref"
Posted 10 years ago # -
@gembo "I see separation as sectarian and nationalism as running risks of fascism"
Hmm. If that's the case, then why have the No side got these characters lined up behind them:
- Orange Order (marching iin Edinburgh on Saturday)
- UKIP (Rally in Glasgow soon)
- BNP
- Britannica Party (ex-BNP Glasgow branch)
- Ulster Unionist Party (repeating offer of help for No on Beeb today)There's your sectarians and fascists, all on the No side.
So away and boil yer heid.
Posted 10 years ago # -
YouGov. Really. Either they're really bad at their job or Murdoch's in the background yanking Salmond's chain looking for some kind of promise before he gives them the Sun's support.
Posted 10 years ago # -
2:1 for "no" in South of Scotland according to poll for ITV
Posted 10 years ago # -
"'Everyone' seems to be in financial services or work for CEC. (I exaggerate.)"
Indeed you do. I work in neither, don't even work in Edinburgh (technically at least).
Posted 10 years ago # -
As for the YouGov polls, surely both are margin of error stuff? It's basically neck and neck and clearly some volatility at the margins. Certainly an improvement for Yes over the 20 point gap a few months ago.
Will there be a late surge for either side?
Posted 10 years ago # -
Yes, the trend has long been with Yes - 18 months or so, I think. But I don't think YouGov is just margin of error stuff. YouGov moved 12 points to Yes in just three weeks when, by comparison, no one else budged. TNS moved +3 and the two best Yes pollsters stayed still. No, YouGov changed. Something.
The principal aim of pollsters at times like this is to be right. Your last poll wants to be somewhere very close to the result, which is relatively straightforward with elections but in this situation, very difficult. So it looks to me like YouGov is fine tuning to try to get somewhere close to where they think the result might be.
Adding 12 points in three weeks was always preposterous, overshooting, and needed to be dialled back.
Posted 10 years ago # -
If it helps, think of it as support for Yes hasn't gone down because it never went up by more than trend in the first place.
Posted 10 years ago # -
I'll say it again, I think that 'weighting' of polls by trying to squeeze an unrepresentative sample into something more representative is producing distortions. Not just weighting for age/class/gender, but also for prior/intended voting/party support. May help explain volatility in YouGov figures.
The massive voter registration puts in place a new factor: can the pollsters pick up the so-called "missing million"? Are they missing from consumer researchers' databases?
Oh, what I meant by "margin of error" is the apparent lead of either side. 4 points versus 2 points, could be a distortion effect? Or not?
Posted 10 years ago # -
At last! Cycle-related indyref content! Labour MPs greeted by cyclists in Glasgow....
Posted 10 years ago # -
Brilliant. "Welcome, our Imperial masters..."
Only in Glasgow?
Posted 10 years ago # -
Saw this last night.
Absolutely brilliant and classically poor management by the english labour contingent - did they really think that 100 of them could walk all the way up from the station with no counter-protests? In Glasgow???
I suppose the only slight negative was when the speaker was challenged as to where he lived (clearly wasnt a glaswegian) but nevertheless a very funny and well worked publicity stunt.
At least Cameron and Osborne when they did their flying visits to Edinburgh had the sense to be dropped in to selected places and plucked clear from the unwashed Scots hordes immediately thereafter.
I read something in the Guardian this morning about Browns popularity surge in Scotland..............really? Do these journos speak to real people??
IMO Labour is (potentially irreversibly) damaging and splitting its core vote.
Whatever happens next week, that is playing right into Camerons hands.
Posted 10 years ago # -
Don't forget the 'slaves' guy calling them white niggers and Uncle Toms. That was a particularly effective piece of 'counter protest'. To be honest it wasn't clear what his point was, especially when he started on the Latin roots of the word 'patriot'.
Posted 10 years ago # -
"
Farage: I'm coming to Glasgow today to say indy is really about separation from England
"
Posted 10 years ago #
Topic Closed
This topic has been closed to new replies.
posts
