French election 23/04 - Page 2

On April 24 2017 23:11 Liquid`Drone wrote: Not gonna say 100%, but 99.5% seems totally reasonable... 5:1 is absolutely horrible for Le Pen. Make it 50:1 and I still wouldn't bet on her.

Please Eri show us the ticket where you bet your net worth on Macron, otherwise you are just spitting dumb shit come on -_-

I don't have any free cash atm (I guess I have about $1000 that I could go without the next 12 days) and I'm not gonna sell my apartment to get any, that'd take more time than that anyway. But if I had $2 million and a bookmaker let me place $1 million on Macron, giving me $1160000 for him winning, I'd do that in a heartbeat. well not in a heartbeat cuz I'm not really a gambler, but I have a hard time seeing better value for your money. I just don't have enough for it to be worth the bother, kinda.

I'll bet $50, 1:1 with the first taker, that Macron gets more than 58%. Anyone who thinks Le Pen's chance of actually winning is greater than 20% should jump at this.

From an Ifop poll:
Ifop also asked directly who supporters of candidates defeated in the first round would vote for in the runoff. Among Fillon supporters, 37 percent broke for Macron with 32 percent for Le Pen, while 31 percent wouldn’t answer. Among Melenchon supporters, 48 percent said Macron, 9 percent Le Pen, and 43 percent had no answer. Hamon voters would go 71 percent for Macron, 3 percent Le Pen, and 26 percent declined to say.

Looking at those numbers quickly (approximating); Fillon gives 7% to Macron, 6% to le pen
Melenchon gives 9.5 to Macron, 2% Le pen
Hamon gives 5% Macron, 0% Le pen
so for decided voters it's pretty much 45.5:30

Le Pen is hated outside her base. And she needs more than 80% of the currently not decided base (and more of the not-decided base is on the left). There's just no way. IS could destroy the Eiffel Tower tomorrow and she'd still lose.

So you anti-le pen folks like what France has become? I don't get it
Or is it Le Pen's or a.k.a. people like Trump/Farrage/Wilder/Hitler/Stalin that caused great outrage from Muslims so they deserve what's coming

It's not like France is doing all that poorly. Look at this : http://hdr.undp.org/en/composite/trends

Human development index compiled over time.
The HDI isn't flawless of course, but it's about the best attempt at quantifying living standards there is. Today, France is in 21th place. In 1990, they were about the same. Done slightly better than most comparable countries since 2010. I'm not saying that people have no reason to be discontent, but like.. The US has had a much worse trajectory over the past 25 years. France's annual improvement has been better than Norway's, both if you compare to the 1990 or 2010 point of departure. Yes, terrorism has become a real problem, yes, youth unemployment is high. Both need to be addressed. But living standards are still improving, the whole, portrayal of western society as if it's going to complete shit, when by any objective measurement living standards are continuously rising throughout the entire not-war-torn world, is ridiculous.

Yeah I know it stops at 2015 and yes terrorism has obviously become a bigger problem since then, but man, have some perspective.

Not even gonna start answering to whamm.
MIpwnya and i bet on macron before first round quite heavily and am about to bet again. It is definitely a lock

On April 25 2017 00:48 Liquid`Drone wrote: It's not like France is doing all that poorly. Look at this : http://hdr.undp.org/en/composite/trends Human development index compiled over time. The HDI isn't flawless of course, but it's about the best attempt at quantifying living standards there is. Today, France is in 21th place. In 1990, they were about the same. Done slightly better than most comparable countries since 2010. I'm not saying that people have no reason to be discontent, but like.. The US has had a much worse trajectory over the past 25 years. France's annual improvement has been better than Norway's, both if you compare to the 1990 or 2010 point of departure. Yes, terrorism has become a real problem, yes, youth unemployment is high. Both need to be addressed. But living standards are still improving, the whole, portrayal of western society as if it's going to complete shit, when by any objective measurement living standards are continuously rising throughout the entire not-war-torn world, is ridiculous. Yeah I know it stops at 2015 and yes terrorism has obviously become a bigger problem since then, but man, have some perspective.

I dont know about the state of France but HDI shows a 2015 0.7 growth on Venezuela, which makes me believe its an useless metric.

I'll let you off the hook on the 99.5% bullshit but only this time 8)

On April 25 2017 00:23 whamm! wrote: So you anti-le pen folks like what France has become? I don't get it Or is it Le Pen's or a.k.a. people like Trump/Farrage/Wilder/Hitler/Stalin that caused great outrage from Muslims so they deserve what's coming

Your reasoning is terrible. If the previous leader failed people should instantly vote for the right-wing populist crap option? World doesn't work with two pole views.


Edit: not to mention its Bush that started current events in Mid East, who is part of Trump's party so...

Look at this

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_presidential_election,_2002

In round 1, Chirac got 19.88%, 5.6 million votes.
Jean Marie Le Pen got 16.86%., 4.8 million votes. The other 63% were divided between 13 other candidates.

In round 2, Chirac got 82.21%, 25.5 million votes.
Jean Marie Le Pen got 17.79%, 5.5 million votes.

Now, Marine Le Pen is more palatable to more people than her dad was. And yes the political climate changes over 15 years. But there are still so many french voters who will absolutely always reject Le Pen that she has no shot at this.

the betting sites obviously know all of this before they set their odds. Well at least normally, maybe when there is politics it's a bit different than sports. But I would assume they know all of this and more.. and still decided 1.20 is +ev by some margin

People who gamble want high rewards for low risks. I mean, professional gamblers go for low margins and any +ev, but the regular guy doesn't look for a way to turn his $1000 into $1150, he looks for a way of turning his $100 into $1000+. So people aren't taking the macron bet even though it's massively +ev. And they don't want to risk huge payouts if there actually ends up being a Le Pen victory. I mean the fact that this forum with professional gamblers has people thinking that 5:1 on Le Pen is a good deal showcases how they can be profitable, because that is an ass horrible deal. Then in politics, much like sports, people are more likely to bet on candidates they support.

But like, okay. So any of you thinking that she has a chance. Read my posts, read the graphs, read the polls. What's her road to 50.1% of the votes? How is there a 20% chance of that happening? She's 25% behind with 11 days to go. I literally don't know if there has ever been an important election, at least not in a western country, where this kind of margin was changed in that time span.

http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-39705062


enough of a reason to vote for him

On April 25 2017 09:41 Liquid`Drone wrote: People who gamble want high rewards for low risks. I mean, professional gamblers go for low margins and any +ev, but the regular guy doesn't look for a way to turn his $1000 into $1150, he looks for a way of turning his $100 into $1000+. So people aren't taking the macron bet even though it's massively +ev. And they don't want to risk huge payouts if there actually ends up being a Le Pen victory. I mean the fact that this forum with professional gamblers has people thinking that 5:1 on Le Pen is a good deal showcases how they can be profitable, because that is an ass horrible deal. Then in politics, much like sports, people are more likely to bet on candidates they support. But like, okay. So any of you thinking that she has a chance. Read my posts, read the graphs, read the polls. What's her road to 50.1% of the votes? How is there a 20% chance of that happening? She's 25% behind with 11 days to go. I literally don't know if there has ever been an important election, at least not in a western country, where this kind of margin was changed in that time span.

it isnt so simple otherwise betting on favourites every time would print money

On April 25 2017 18:45 Spitfiree wrote: http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-39705062 enough of a reason to vote for him

except that last time it turned to be out bullshit

when in doubt, blame Russia.

On April 26 2017 02:05 Baalim wrote: Show nested quote + On April 25 2017 09:41 Liquid`Drone wrote: People who gamble want high rewards for low risks. I mean, professional gamblers go for low margins and any +ev, but the regular guy doesn't look for a way to turn his $1000 into $1150, he looks for a way of turning his $100 into $1000+. So people aren't taking the macron bet even though it's massively +ev. And they don't want to risk huge payouts if there actually ends up being a Le Pen victory. I mean the fact that this forum with professional gamblers has people thinking that 5:1 on Le Pen is a good deal showcases how they can be profitable, because that is an ass horrible deal. Then in politics, much like sports, people are more likely to bet on candidates they support. But like, okay. So any of you thinking that she has a chance. Read my posts, read the graphs, read the polls. What's her road to 50.1% of the votes? How is there a 20% chance of that happening? She's 25% behind with 11 days to go. I literally don't know if there has ever been an important election, at least not in a western country, where this kind of margin was changed in that time span. it isnt so simple otherwise betting on favourites every time would print money

Yup. If you play a lot of live poker you hear about these "amazing bets" every night from the fun players. To me its funny that people acctually believe their information is not already calculated into the odds. If you think the odds is in your favour its way more likely there are factors you havent thought about (but the betting sites did) than you acctually found a +EV bet. The kind of bets i like more is 8 betting sites giving f.example 1.20 and then you find another scin giving 1.40. Its likely the 8 sites got information that the site nr 9 didnt have (yet). But still, if you make a bet against the house you should probably always consider it as "fun", not as "+EV".

I'm not saying this principle holds true in general. But the explanation for the 1/6 for macron or 5:1 for le pen is not that this represents how likely they are to win, and I tried to come up with an alternative. If bookmakers overall think that the actual chance for a Le Pen victory is in the 15-20% range, they're clueless.

Its not like they base their odds purely on the chances of the outcome... They try to hedge themselves and put such odds that whatever happens they've profited. I have no clue about the mathematics behind that, but 1.2 coef doesnt represent their belief of 20% chance for Le Pen to win

Not sure if this entire thread is trying to mush Macron.