Anthony Albanese - How long? -2-

[Gralin]

They’re far more accurate than the polls
… freedom of choice my friend, that’s the way democracies should work huh?

You think gambling on elections is a pillar of democracy?

Oh but, how will the greedy corrupt Govt get their dirty, ill-gotten money from suffering then?

I'm sure they have other revenue streams Marc

 

[Bloods86]

Betting odds do nothing but move to ensure money comes in on both sides. Bookies don't care who wins, only that they balance books either way

The odds move according to how much money comes in. If someone drops $5k on Albo (for whatever reason), the odds will shorten that way to entice money comes in on Dutton

Polls are borderline useless and I'm not sure why anyone pays them any mind. How many people are even polled and when they make predictions they have a bob each way to cover their arses being wrong. Completely useless

Pollsters don't have a bob each way to cover their arses.

That's just how polling and statistics works, there will always be margins of error and an amount of educated guessing as to whether the sample is representative, particularly in non compulsory voting settings.

If you're expecting polls to give you a highly probable or guaranteed winner all of the time, you don't understand polls.

 

[Rotayjay]

On Monday odds were 1.88 v1.88
Today
View attachment 2164613

Albanese with a big drift,I'd say he's gone come May next year.

I'd say that's a bunch of Liberal-supporting gambling addicts throwing lots of money on Liberal, skewing the odds. The bookies are out to make money, not predict an outcome.

 

[burge13]

Pollsters don't have a bob each way to cover their arses.

That's just how polling and statistics works, there will always be margins of error and an amount of educated guessing as to whether the sample is representative, particularly in non compulsory voting settings.

If you're expecting polls to give you a highly probable or guaranteed winner all of the time, you don't understand polls.

If they're not giving highly probable, they serve absolutely zero purpose. People needn't pay them any mind

 

[Bloods86]

What I think happened in 2016 and 2019 is that punters were led by polling, which seemed to be more clear cut. Plus the media, particularly in the US, misrepresented what polls mean, making it seem like a Clinton win was almost assured.

In 2024, polling was very tight. There was a later shift towards Trump in the polling averages, but it was still tight. With tight polling, I think the demographic who bets mostly (men) pushed betting in the direction of the candidate that betting demographic preferred.

 

[Bloods86]

If they're not giving highly probable, they serve absolutely zero purpose. People needn't pay them any mind

Seems a bit absolutist.

 

[peetoo]

Why would you believe Dutton could be PM and put hard earned on it, when he himself doesn’t believe it?

 

[RedStarUncle]

Betting odds do nothing but move to ensure money comes in on both sides. Bookies don't care who wins, only that they balance books either way

The odds move according to how much money comes in. If someone drops $5k on Albo (for whatever reason), the odds will shorten that way to entice money comes in on Dutton

Polls are borderline useless and I'm not sure why anyone pays them any mind. How many people are even polled and when they make predictions they have a bob each way to cover their arses being wrong. Completely useless

And yet... amazingly... when you read the polls in aggregate and with understanding of what they're trying to say, they pretty much tell you exactly how elections are likely to play out.

If you read a series of polls showing somewhere between 48% and 53% support for a candidate averaging at 50.5% as "polls showing that candidate is likely to win"... then that's on your inability to read polls.



The advantage betting markets have had historically over polls is that polls have tended to focus on what "you - the person being polled" intend, whereas betting markets reflect what the gambler thinks will happen... so even if they personally prefer one candidate, if they see their friends, colleagues, general media narrative, etc. moving a certain way - they might gamble against their own personal preference.


Polls are starting to catch up on that with the wording of their questions.

 

[RedStarUncle]

What I think happened in 2016 and 2019 is that punters were led by polling, which seemed to be more clear cut. Plus the media, particularly in the US, misrepresented what polls mean, making it seem like a Clinton win was almost assured.

In 2024, polling was very tight. There was a later shift towards Trump in the polling averages, but it was still tight. With tight polling, I think the demographic who bets mostly (men) pushed betting in the direction of the candidate that betting demographic preferred.

Polls tell a story. Betting markets tell a story. When the betting market doesn't line up with the polls... that's when I start to trust the market more than the polls.

Neither the polls nor the betting markets decide who wins an election. The election results do that. Just because the polls don't tell us the actual election result doesn't make them "useless". It makes them exactly what they're intended to be... and if people misunderstand them, that's not the fault of the poll.

 

[FlowersByIrene]

Dutton just pulled out the trump card (pun intended) for the next election - committing to pull out of the Paris Accord. Goddam were back baby.

 

[Gralin]

Dutton just pulled out the trump card (pun intended) for the next election - committing to pull out of the Paris Accord. Goddam were back baby.

What's pulling out of Paris mean?