Gambling odds overlooked in Presidential race

Search

RX veteran
Joined
Sep 21, 2000
Messages
744
Tokens
While most major media polls show a back-and-forth U.S. Presidential race with swings coming on the release of news events, primary results and now the conventions, it has to be considered that the results of those polls are skewed since online gambling sites show Barack Obama to be -200 favorite over John McCain.
The vigorish is often large in this type of wager, so McCain is not likely a 2-1 underdog, but certainly no less than a 1.5-1 to 1.65-1 choice to win the election in November, according to bookmakers. Those odds are a far cry from the margins given in media polls. In fact, the Democrats have been favored for quite awhile now, even before the primary season began.
Given that the late August polls ranged just a 4-5 percentage point spread, with some polls even showing McCain ahead, this would have to be considered a huge overlay if the polls were accurate. After the DNC meeting, Obama has surged in all polls, but history shows that the margin should again close after the RNC convention this week.
Gambling odds are not likely to get the respect from the mainstream media due to their controversial nature in the United States, but it should not be overlooked that the odds to win the office are a true gambling market and should actually be more accurate than any poll taken by any organization.
Given the current odds on the Presidential race and the fact that elections are not a sporting events where luck, such as turnovers or blown officials calls, can occur, it would seem a certainty that Barack Obama will be elected president.
 

And if the Road Warrior says it, it must be true..
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
15,481
Tokens
I dont see it happening...JMO

I think McCain get the vote
 

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
14,280
Tokens
-200 isn't quite right. It's been +/- 150 to -160 on Obama for awhile.
 

RX veteran
Joined
Sep 21, 2000
Messages
744
Tokens
WSEX -174
Matchbook -194
Intertops -200
Bodog -200
Sportsbetting -200
Sporting Bet -223

What books currently show Obama at -150?
 

Member
Handicapper
Joined
Jan 20, 2002
Messages
6,932
Tokens
NO. If you have studied odds on prior elections you would see that the public is wrong just as often as when they bet on sports. Vegas was built on people loading the favorites.
 

New member
Joined
Apr 28, 2006
Messages
2,398
Tokens
After watching this joke of a Republican convention, I am confident Barack Obama will be the next President of the USA.
 

Member
Handicapper
Joined
Jan 20, 2002
Messages
6,932
Tokens
Joke of a convention?

Where is Jessie Jackson? I want to be aligned with his people.
 

RX veteran
Joined
Sep 21, 2000
Messages
744
Tokens
I have not studied odds on previous elections, so I tried to review them per the recommendation.

It would seem that the 1916 elections may have been the biggest upset (Wilson over Hughes) except for Truman over Dewey.

The main research I found on this internet thingy shows that betting markets on U.S. Presidential races have been around, or only to have enough information to be researched back to 1868.

What are the other elections where the betting public has been wrong enough that the race would be considered an upset?
 

Rx God
Joined
Nov 1, 2002
Messages
39,226
Tokens
I have not studied odds on previous elections, so I tried to review them per the recommendation.

It would seem that the 1916 elections may have been the biggest upset (Wilson over Hughes) except for Truman over Dewey.

The main research I found on this internet thingy shows that betting markets on U.S. Presidential races have been around, or only to have enough information to be researched back to 1868.

What are the other elections where the betting public has been wrong enough that the race would be considered an upset?

You could have got Big +money on Bush over Gore, on election night.
 

RX veteran
Joined
Sep 21, 2000
Messages
744
Tokens
What were the odds on Bush vs. Gore...

This article says...


Who Won? Bookies Don't Care
Joanna Glasner 11.10.00

An ocean away from this most chaotic spectacle that is the U.S. presidential election, operators of a prominent British political betting house are enjoying the show.

"To be brutally honest, we don't really mind. We make money regardless of which of them wins," said Graham Sharpe, spokesman for William Hill International, a Yorkshire bookmaker that takes wagers on electoral races and sporting events.

For the dead-heat presidential race of 2000, the bookmaker collected $750,000 in bets over a period of more than two years. On the eve of Election Day, the final tally placed Texas Gov. George W. Bush as the favorite.

The way the spread worked at the close of betting, a $2 bet placed on Bush would pay back just $3 if he won, while the same amount bet on Gore would pay back $5. Whatever the outcome, the bookmaker gets a small cut of the overall proceeds.

Of course, the only problem with that scenario thus far is there hasn't been an outcome.

Officials at William Hill -- which collected nearly a third of its wagers from online bettors, mostly based in the U.S. -- are still about as clueless as a Florida election supervisor about when it will actually make a payout.

Sharpe says he's hoping election officials will declare a winner next week, at which time the bookmaker expects to pay the winning betters. He said the bookmaker almost certainly won't wait for a pending Democratic Party lawsuit over a controversial ballot to wind its way through the court system.

In the meantime, the betting house has received numerous complaints from bettors impatiently waiting to collect their winnings.

"We told people to please address your complaints to the White House and not to us," Sharpe said. Despite the nefarious qualities routinely attributed to bookmakers, he said: "This time even we can't be blamed for having manipulated the outcome of the U.S. election."

While presidential-election betting is over, submissions are on the rise for some other long-term political wagers. The odds for a long-shot bet on whether First Lady Hillary Rodham Clinton will eventually become president have narrowed from 50 to 1 to 5 to 1 in the months leading up to her election as New York senator.

Meanwhile, Sharpe said he believes the turmoil of Election 2000 -- while not a great image-booster for the U.S. democratic process -- certainly makes for exciting betting.

"People are just looking at the spectacle of something so completely unexpected," he said. "Here's the most powerful democracy in the world, and it could all hinge on a few votes someone may have left behind a door or something."
 

Rx God
Joined
Nov 1, 2002
Messages
39,226
Tokens
Bush was the fav, Pinny had live betting as the results were being reported, Gore became the Fav, Bush was something like +500 late.
 

New member
Joined
Jul 21, 2006
Messages
12,563
Tokens
Americas not ready for Obama...Say McCain wins

america isnt ready or are you not ready? i dont think obama would have made it this far if america wasnt ready. plus look who he's going up against. basically another democrat.
 

Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2007
Messages
31,656
Tokens
Given the current odds on the Presidential race and the fact that elections are not a sporting events where luck, such as turnovers or blown officials calls, can occur, it would seem a certainty that Barack Obama will be elected president.[/quote]


Wow, I didn't know -160 is a "certainty" cause tehre are no turnovers or blown official calls....
 

Forum statistics

Threads
1,119,947
Messages
13,575,520
Members
100,888
Latest member
bj88gameslife
The RX is the sports betting industry's leading information portal for bonuses, picks, and sportsbook reviews. Find the best deals offered by a sportsbook in your state and browse our free picks section.FacebookTwitterInstagramContact Usforum@therx.com