Interesting. And unusual.

Love poker players that think they know how sportsbooks work.

Noob question, for Americans where can you bet US politics besides predictit?

None of those books take action from sharps which frequently leaves them exposed.

Any offshore book

That is my initial assumption as well. Sigley knows this market far better then most of us and he isn’t skeptical of the books line being off at all.

Poly.market

I'm curious if polls or books is a more reliable indicator.

What on earth are you talking about?

Curious if bookies betting on trump how does the Betfair price make any sense with 250m+ matched

My point exactly. If they did take money from sharps, I'd be significantly more concerned.

And to be fair, I'm not sure that this is a huge deal or anything. I just responded to the comment who didn't believe that this is happening among bookies. The bookies have been wrong before, and for example in 2016 a notable Irish bookie paid out 1m worth of Hillary bets before the election because they thought she can't lose. So yeah, I didn't mean that as = you should bet everything on Biden. But in general, I find being on the same side with the bookies who scalp the general public for a living an encouraging little sign.

I don't think you're making the point you think you're making by pointing this out

You realize they are all copying their odds from places that do take sharp action and move on it right?

....

the more some of you post the more you get exposed it seems lol

lol at taking those "the books are going broke if side x wins" articles at face value. You see that nonsense published every time they have a "bad week" during football season where the public doesn't get slaughtered and curiously, none of them actually go broke.

any thoughts domer?

Yeah, and I'm not capable of analyzing this any further. I think there's a large chance the following is completely off base and I'm being an idiot, but I don't know if it'd be crazy to suggest that the effect goes both ways at least a little bit. If the bookies offer say +200 for Trump, the Betfair markets for Trump won't just shoot to +150 very easily, because the average person who wants to bet Trump can get better odds elsewhere. Yes I understand that $ being wagered on Betfair is of a different magnitude, yes I realize the Betfair market is where the markets are "made", and yes this is all very puzzling to me. I really wish someone smarter than me would explain the whole thing here because the odds don't make any sense to me. But what is undeniably happening is that pleb bookies with huge markets where ~ all the money is from casual players are taking 8-figure risks on Biden, and they don't have to do that, at least to that effect. Maybe they are selling off their risk themselves on Betfair, I really have no idea, my point about this whole thing was meant as relatively minor compared to the whole situation. All I'm saying is that I'm happy to side with the bookies here, at least compared to the opposite side.

No one said anything about going broke. The Ladbrokes risk is something like 1-1.5% of their annual income. I assume it's similar for other bookies. It's significant but pretty far from going broke. And yeah, I don't know how much stock you're supposed to give these articles. But there's a ton of them from difference sources and companies from different continents and they are all saying the same thing. I don't see how any of that is positive news to Trump bettors at the very very least?

it's even funnier to think that books would be in a position to go broke...they would just deny the bet or bet the other side on another bookie

especially aussie bookies

did you actually sportsbet for 12 years? or just poker?

In this hour of A Numbers Game, Gill Alexander is joined by Pamela Maldonado and Mac VerStandig to dissect the political betting market one week out from the 2020 election. Gill and his guests go through several States, Senate races, and political props and analyze the best to bet.

https://pca.st/nfdebcf4

SUP?

Chuck, if those books are

1) Not taking any action from sharps
2) Getting only Trump action

Why are the lines Trump +170 instead of something like Trump -130? Wouldn't the books make even more money that way? Why would they be giving the public side better lines if they don't care what the odds are anyways and are betting Trump regardless?

I admire your confidence haha. Although I get you kinda have to emotionally at this point, since you put so much on the line already. I would be so nervous haha.

Never was a sportsbet pro for a second. I'm up lifetime a fairly significant number from sportsbetting (6 figures) but I sportsbet only on soft markets. Namely the Eurovision song contest, futures, entertainment betting, super bowl props, etc. My biggest bet this year so far was on the length of the national anthem in seconds at the super bowl. Last year it was on whether Australia would make top 10 in a singing contest. I regularly have like 5 months without a single bet. I couldn't beat a single sport in moneylines or totals. I don't think I could do sportsbetting for a living on a day-to-day basis even if I gave it my everything. I also don't know anything about American politics, and 2 months ago I wouldn't have been able to point Pennsylvania on a map. Everything I say should be taken in with a load of healthy skepticism.

On the other hand, I'm the kind of guy who bets very very irregularly and only when he sees a huge edge. 5% edges don't interest me. When I do take interest in something, I completely dive in and over the last 1.5 months or so I've been digging into this election probably 10-12 hours a day. This obviously doesn't mean that I'm right, but as someone who generally is right on the very few occasions he does indeed bet, I'm not just randomly going "lol Trump let's bet on Biden". I have way too much $ invested for my own mental health here, and also way too much invested in terms of having recommended the same bet to others so now I'm also stressed out about the prospect of them losing $ because of me, so trust me for the last 1.5 months I've mostly spent trying to find reasons to cash out for a handsome profit (most of my bets were made around 1:1, so I could take a nice profit whenever I want to). All I want is a sharp or two to explain to me why Trump would have more than 10%, or if you wanna be generous let's say 15% to win this election. I'm not trying to debate anything to sound sharp, I don't care how people view me because in all likelyhood regardless of the outcome the next time I'll post about betting will be in like 6 months. I just want to hear something to make me second-guess my bets here. I'm not emotionally invested at all in the sense that I really would LOVE to be able to sell off my bets. If I wasn't able to take them back, it'd be different, and maybe I'd be posting nonsense to boost my confidence so I could sleep better. But there it is, a cashout button, it'd take 2 seconds to get rid of all the stress. I just can't do it until I hear good reasons why, and that's why I'm here. Sharps for Trump, let's hear you. I would love to be convinced by you. It's not fun backing a half-demented old man against Trump, if anything this is a bandwagon I would very much like to hop off.

It's a good question, and I don't claim to have any confident answers. The way I see this overall situation is basically: non-sharps insisting on siding hugely with Trump on bookies is a component, potentially a fairly important component, in why the odds are wrong. I assume the answer to your actual question is something along the lines of that they do still take some sharps action and obviously people wouldn't take just any lines to bet Trump, and the people could always go to another sportsbook or Betfair to get a better price. Lots of strings being pulled from different directions, and I wouldn't be surprised if the bookies were canceling the risk they are claiming to take by secretly betting Trump on Betfair etc. But I think the part in cursive is somewhat accurate and a part of the reason why the odds are behaving the way they are.

A case for Trump wouldn't take a wall of text to figure out. Incumbents win ties, the courts are stacked, state legislatures are stacked, and the dems have shown repeatedly that they are at least ambivalent about a Trump re-election (he's good for fundraising). That's not nothing.