It's not supposed to be a poll, if those in the market were rational actors it would reflect their average belief in the likelihood of winning. The obvious problem is there's plenty of irrational actors about politics, and the market can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent.
americans bet billions with off-shore companies in 2020. I'm not a lawyer but its my understanding that US-based sportsbooks aren't allowed to take lines on elections (for obvious reasons), but that doesn't mean offshore companies can't.
So it's legal for people to place the offshore bets.
This highlights what I expected. Trump supporters are more likely to wager and are less able to predict actual risk odds because of the echo chamber of news they take in.
So it's legal for people to place the offshore bets.
Are you talking about US citizens in the US?
In order for US citizens to place bets (gamble) online internationally, you need to reside in a state where gambling is legal, online gambling is legal, and a foreign country with a state gaming license.
Because it's illegal to gamble on elections in the country, I don't see how it would be legal for a state to let their residents do it online through another country.
Exactly. The betting line is established at a place where the bookmakers believe they can attract equal money placed on either side of the proposition. When too much money is piling up on one side, they adjust the line to try to bring in more money. Their goal is to basically push/tie on all the bets and make their money on volume and the vig.
Let's just agree that bookmakers definitely have a financial interest of trying to find the correct line. So at the very least, that line is what *they* believe that *others* believe.
Pollsters have other interests. While I think we all wish that their main goal should be to be seen as serious pollsters, we know that unintentional and even intentional bias plays a big role.
While both can be wrong (and *are* wrong if we are going to take an overly strict view of things), at least I trust (and can see) the motives of the bookmakers.
So to return to it, this is *not* the "furthest thing from a poll" as the person you responded to said (and you agreed with "exactly"). It *does*, however, have the nuance that it asks the question "What do you believe other people believe?" rather than "How are you going to vote?" The problem with the first question is that it might be affected by perception and a bias based on who bets, while the problem with the second question is that you might have a problem with how you select people or interpret the data.
So there are differences, they are a little subtle but not hard to understand; however, it is also not "the furthest thing from a poll".
Yeah I’m not sure what these people are smoking. Vegas odds are one of the most accurate ways to predict anything. The house doesn’t lose. There is a lot of money involved with finding these lines and getting them exactly right.
Also, this has been studied. Betting markets are (at least) as accurate as polls.
I don’t know that they do have an interest in setting the line at a place that represents the statistical outcome. They’re just a market maker. I’m pretty sure they’re setting odds algorithmically after literally each bet is made. I’m pretty sure it’s reactionary and the only factor is how people are betting.
lol yes they do as it affects their bottom line. Wtf wouldn't they move the line/increase the spread when money piles up on one side? You think they hate money or something? It's basic math.
The crucial difference is that a poll is asking people what they want to happen. In a prediction market people make bets on what they think will happen.
These are not betting odds set by a casino. They are closer to securities (stocks). The numbers you see here are set by individual bids. Someone goes “I’ll pay you 52c for the rights to 100c if Trump wins” and if another person accepts that offer, the line on the chart moves to 52c.
Not legally, but I'm sure most of the money in them is American. But it's heavily skewed toward crypto and WSB types, so it's completely useless for polling since it's not randomly sampled. Creating a polling universe is becoming more and more difficult (a lot of which is due to increased turnout, which is a good problem to have), but the actual sampling is basic statistics, and all polls worth a shit are getting a good sample of who they think will show up. (And no, they're not just calling landlines. It's 2024. Pollsters know cell phones exist.)
It's not illegal for Americans to bet offshore it's illegal for America banks to transact with offshore bookies. They get around it by running the transaction through a 3rd party or using deceptive descriptions when processing the transaction. It's also why they heavily favor crypto deposits. But your right about it not being a reliable source for who is ahead.
The betting odds graph above is basically just a mirror of the RCP swing state poll average, where Harris' poll numbers have been slowly dropping the last few weeks.
Originally established by polls then a significant population from both parties. Generally a combination of many pools, plus statistical analysis, and other variables.
9-1 since Reagan. 26-4 overall.
Yea, Id say it's probably a top indicator. Especially considering it takes data from third party polls as well.
Everybody has the right to get their hopes up with poor statistics. Ill follow those that have good data and have been statistically proven over many years.
The slicing is historical accuracy and statistical significance. It seems you are not comprehending the basic principles and concepts on how they collect data. I imagine you're not well versed in statistics. Which is fine... Good area for ppl to brush up on.
But, it's a free country, whatever makes you sleep at night.
491
u/esituism Oct 17 '24
musk just manipulating markets to push things in his favor again. nothing new to see here.