Vegas/Offshore odds vs. Nate Silver

[SheenaR]

Here are the odds currently being offered:



US Presidential Election

Odds to Win the Democratic Party Nevada Caucus

701 Hillary Clinton 5/6
702 Bernie Sanders 10/11

That's a "virtual tie" for those not familiar with odds. And Bernie was 6/5 yesterday, so that's actually an improvement.

But what do the oddsmakers know... Since when do they make money..

If Clinton was a 69% chance winner, they would get buried here. The books don't get buried.

Just a nice dose of real odds as opposed to odds based on questionable polling.

[Depaysement]

1. Well . . .

I like "Skill Not Luck" in the 3rd at Aqueduct tomorrow.

[jham123]

2. I never tried to understand Odds

Splain it a little deeper

What does "Clinton 5/6" mean?? and so on??

[SheenaR]

10. Good question

Clinton at 5/6.... means that to win 100 you would have to put up 120 dollars.


Sanders at 10/11 means that to win 100, you would have to put up 110 dollars

So pretty much even odds for both.

[gcomeau]

3. Sigh...

Look, I'm rooting for Bernie, but the data over time shows that the Vegas odds do not outperform actual modern scientific poling. They don't have any information anyone else doesn't have just because they're putting money on it.

[SheenaR]

6. Growing up in a heavy gambling family

with relatives who ran books and lived in Vegas. Follow the money, not the polls. These people do have the info...On everything from football to politics to the Oscars.

[gcomeau]

8. As someone who has read the actual research...

...feel free to believe any mythology you like based on anecdotal evidence instead of hard data.

http://www.utexas.edu/cola/government/_files/wlezien-web/EriksonandWlezienElectoralStudies2012published.pdf

[DemocratSinceBirth]

16. Since you like academic papers as do I here's another great one.

Simply put, if you want to know who is going to win an election, ask the people who will be voting:


https://forecasters.org/wp-content/uploads/gravity_forms/7-2a51b93047891f1ec3608bdbd77ca58d/2013/07/Graefe_vote_expectations_ISF.pdf

[gcomeau]

19. Yup... simple but effective. Just ask (properly). -eom

[DemocratSinceBirth]

21. The article you cited was interesting...

You have the correlation versus causation dynamic. The market goes up for a candidate when his or her polls go up or vice versa.

I don't know if it's dispositive of anything but Nate's poll plus model picked Cruz to win IA when everybody and their brother including Bing picked Trump.

[randys1]

26. I believe Bernie is likely to be the Democratic nominee. If not likely it is now VERY possible

which is amazing if you think about it in a vacuum without any preexisting attitudes about who we/you like or dont like

Anyway, if he does get the nod, we have to be prepared for the onslaught of horrific distortions and lies Rove and company will unleash.

Imagine the millions of attacks that have occurred against Hillary for over 25 years but over SIX MONTHS.

I really think Bernie can beat the con, whoever the prick is, by the way.

[kristopher]

18. That's a good paper I've referred to before. However...

The data at 538 does not support their conclusion. They've seemingly just inserted a 36 point spread for no justified reason.

[firebrand80]

4. I don't think there has been enough polling in NV

for Nate's numbers to hold much weight. His models work better when there's a lot of polling, averages don't mean much when there are just a handful of data points.

[randys1]

28. I am calling on all Hillary fans, supporters, to prepare themselves for the very real possibility

of Bernie being the nominee.

What is important here is how YOU will have to regroup (same if Hillary gets it for the other folks) and be prepared to embrace his policies and agenda.

The reality is there is not a single reason why any non really rich person would oppose him.

The only reason really rich people would is if they are greedy, sorry, but that is true.

The greed must end, period.

Now, I do NOT include POC in any of this, they have, rich or poor, their own reasons to or not to vote for someone that I would never pretend to be in a position to criticize.

[firebrand80]

30. No preparation needed

I'm voting for the Democratic nominee, period.

I don't even have to fully embrace his policies and agenda, I just have to be convinced that he's better than the other candidate.

[LexVegas]

5. ....

[SheenaR]

7. Another substantive response from you n/t

Gee Lex, tell me how it really works in Vegas... And then I'll tell you everything you need to know.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

17. I like Lex but I hate emoticons...

I can make my point without laughing at somebody.

[CajunBlazer]

9. You do know how Casino odds are set - right?

The line is always set so gamblers will bet evenly on either side cancelling each other out so that the house always make money on the "sugar". So Vegas odds are always based on widely held perceptions, not statistics.

If I were a Sanders fan I wouldn't like the Las Vegas odds of his changes of winning the nomination or the general election.

[SheenaR]

11. 3 to 1 for nom, 6 to 1 for Presidency

Not a ton of value there on Sanders..

And I am well aware of the methodology of setting a line. Vegas also often puts out lines that they know the public will hammer, even though they know (or are fairly certain of the outcome). See the Super Bowl for instance. They left themselves open for a huge loss at tons of Carolina money came in so early. Rather than try to get a 50/50 split they left it in the 5 range and the house won big..

This is the curse of a young girl growing up in a gambling household.. You learn a lot lol

[CajunBlazer]

12. So who ar you predicting will win Nevada?

[SheenaR]

13. Gut says Clinton

in a finish like we saw in Iowa (not.0.2% but 51-49, 52-48). But the odds gave me pause that they were trying to get some Clinton money which gave me a little hope, not going to lie

[HERVEPA]

29. I believe you may need to repeat this a thousand times before the election.

And people will still ignore it.

[tiredtoo]

32. you are correct in how the odds are set

knowing that the odds reflect the actual betting. If Sanders was getting no support they would increase his odds drawing more money to even the bets. And the more common term is "Juice". Or maybe "Vig"

[angrychair]

14. All that being said

So far, in Iowa and New Hampshire, Sanders has leaned to "over-perform" in the final numbers and in important demographics. Caucus results are always squishy. Nevada is exceptionally squishy. If models continue to tighten, than it is anyone's guess but given trend lines and past results it is strongly in Sanders favor to eek out a "win" but, as always, everyone walks away with delegates.

A "win" in Nevada and even closing the gap to less than 5 pts in South Carolina will be a major victory and send shock waves that may result in major shifts and Super Delegates will start smelling blood in the water and could start flipping to Sanders (already has in Georgia )

[kenfrequed]

15. Indeed

If Hillary doesn't win by 20 points in S. Carolina then she may as well have lost.

For it to be a real victory she will have to take it by 30 points.

[Blue_In_AK]

20. I don't believe in odds or polls

and predictions can sometimes be way, way off, making the predictor look kind of ridiculous in retrospect, so I await results.

[liberal_at_heart]

23. You make a good point. We won't know until we see the results. It is just exciting to see

Bernie doing so much better than people claimed he would do. People have underestimated not only Bernie but we the American people. And Bernie is just the beginning. Whether he wins or loses the people are finally letting their voice be heard and are getting involved again. People are pissed and are no longer apathetic. They are letting the government know they are pissed.

[Blue_In_AK]

24. As a Bernie supporter, I totally agree.

[bettyellen]

22. I think the odds are so close because no one knows. Not sure why everyone says NV is difficult to

poll, but there it is.

[Bluenorthwest]

25. I'm not from Nevada but I do know their first caucus was 2008, formerly they did primaries

It sort of follows that a new and more complicated process taking root would be harder to predict when compared to years of the old process in terms of participation levels.....my guess of the day.

[bettyellen]

27. Interesting. I was wondering about it being Las Vegas heavy- if there are population shifts that

are hard to keep up with. It seems like everyone I have ever known that lived there only did for a few years, but maybe that is a false impression.

[MohRokTah]

31. Bookmaking odds are based solely upon bets placed, not any true analysis of likelihood. eom