Betting markets are not good at predicting outcomes. They are good at making money. Book makers just balance the bets coming in.
Imagine an event that has a perfect 50/50 chance of happening, but one side has more people and money betting on it. Book makers just use the odds offered to balance the money so they always make 10%. That means they don’t offer 50/50 odds.
Even if it was good at predicting, it doesn’t mean one person or another is going to win. It just means what is more likely. If something has a 10% chance of happening and it happens, it doesn’t mean the predictions were bad.
This applies to any predictive method. The predictive methods can be bad, but not necessarily so.
Once you questioned it I realized it must have been ambiguously worded. There was a bit of brain lag which is why I had to go back and edit to clarify my “clarification” 😅🤪
To be fair that’s a very different situation. Predicting how one person is going to decide is very difficult. Predicting how a large group is going to decide when you ask a subset of them first is much more predictable.
Just look at how bad they got the VP pick if you need reminding how little this means…
Can you elaborate on what you mean?
The bookmakers had Shapiro way ahead of Walz regarding who Harris would pick in the lead up to her decision.
ETA: I guess to put a point on it:
VOTE!
It’s fine to be motivated and enthused by information like this so long as it doesn’t make you complacent.
Betting markets are not good at predicting outcomes. They are good at making money. Book makers just balance the bets coming in.
Imagine an event that has a perfect 50/50 chance of happening, but one side has more people and money betting on it. Book makers just use the odds offered to balance the money so they always make 10%. That means they don’t offer 50/50 odds.
Even if it was good at predicting, it doesn’t mean one person or another is going to win. It just means what is more likely. If something has a 10% chance of happening and it happens, it doesn’t mean the predictions were bad.
This applies to any predictive method. The predictive methods can be bad, but not necessarily so.
Oh yeah, I completely misread your original comment. You’re right.
Once you questioned it I realized it must have been ambiguously worded. There was a bit of brain lag which is why I had to go back and edit to clarify my “clarification” 😅🤪
To be fair that’s a very different situation. Predicting how one person is going to decide is very difficult. Predicting how a large group is going to decide when you ask a subset of them first is much more predictable.