The Olympic Games

[Casino]

anyway, i reckon i'm older than his mum

[no balls]

anyway, i reckon i'm older than his mum

 

Daley's? Garp's? Marsh's? Didle's?

[Garrp]

I am saying those opinions often turn out to be incorrect, and are sometimes clearly misplaced in advance.

 

Id say thats exactly what you did say.

 

I mocked betfair because the opinions it aggregates are often wrong, if you care to read again.

 

Ignoring that though, can you please expain the following. You can use any example you like.

 

I am saying those opinions often turn out to be incorrect, and are sometimes clearly misplaced in advance.

[Casino]

Daley's? Garp's? Marsh's? Didle's?

 

daleys

[Alf Hartigan]

daleys

 

Thompson?

[Casino]

peter

david

chris rip

steve

alan

[maaarsh]

Id say thats exactly what you did say.

 

Ignoring that though, can you please expain the following. You can use any example you like.

 

Women's omnium.

 

With 1 event to go Trott was 2 points behind Hammer.

 

On the form book, Trott was expected to come first and Hammer 4th in the final event. In the event of a tie (i.e. Trott 2 places ahead in the final event) Trott needed to be 0.7 seconds quicker to win the combined time tie breaker. Trott's PB was 35.1 vs 36.0 for Hammer.

 

Based on that Trott needed 1 rider between herself and Hammer to win, if it went to form.

Trott had home advantage and had been generally improving in other disciplines. Given their relative age, Trott was clearly more likely to outperform, although Hammer was obviously motivated too.

 

Trott was 2.5 2nd favouite.

 

Half way through the event, some of the lower ranked riders had already ridden and Clara Sanchez had done a 35.4 lap. That is a lap Trott could comfortably match and Hammer had absolutely no hope of beating.

 

Trott's odds did not even move in reaction to this new information which made her victory much more likely. The market was highly liquid and trading actively, but did not move.

 

The event then ran to form, both riders improved PBs by 0.1 seconds and Trott won.

 

It was a straightforward case of a disfunctional market being moved by people without access to all the available information.

 

I presume the point you are trying to make is not that people's opinions are always right, but rather when they are obviously wrong it will attract money in to correct the mispricing. As with all markets, this is true when the assumption of perfect information holds. In practice this is not always the case.

Edited August 12, 2012 by maaarsh

[Ani]

 

 

Women's omnium.

 

With 1 event to go Trott was 2 points behind Hammer.

 

On the form book, Trott was expected to come first and Hammer 4th in the final event. In the event of a tie (i.e. Trott 2 places ahead in the final event) Trott needed to be 0.7 seconds quicker to win the combined time tie breaker. Trott's PB was 35.1 vs 36.0 for Hammer.

 

Based on that Trott needed 1 rider between herself and Hammer to win, if it went to form.

Trott had home advantage and had been generally improving in other disciplines. Given their relative age, Trott was clearly more likely to outperform, although Hammer was obviously motivated too.

 

Trott was 2.5 2nd favouite.

 

Half way through the event, some of the lower ranked riders had already ridden and Clara Sanchez had done a 35.4 lap. That is a lap Trott could comfortably match and Hammer had absolutely no hope of beating.

 

Trott's odds did not even move in reaction to this new information which made her victory much more likely. The market was highly liquid and trading actively, but did not move.

 

The event then ran to form, both riders improved PBs by 0.1 seconds and Trott won.

 

It was a straightforward case of a disfunctional market being moved by people without access to all the available information.

 

I presume the point you are trying to make is not that people's opinions are always right, but rather when they are obviously wrong it will attract money in to correct the mispricing. As with all markets, this is true when the assumption of perfect information holds. In practice this is not always the case.

how much did you win?

[Garrp]

No thats not the point im making whatsoever.

 

Trott was 2.5 favourite

 

So what price was Hammer?

[Garrp]

Trott 2.5 2nd fav*

[jules_darby]

Kin'ell interesting posts

 

Marshy lad

 

Were you on the columbian dandruff last night?

[maaarsh]

how much did you win?

 

I don't gamble.

[maaarsh]

No thats not the point im making whatsoever.

 

Trott was 2.5 favourite

 

So what price was Hammer?

 

 

No, Trott was 2.5 2nd favourite in a 2 horse race.

[Garrp]

And Hammer?

 

No one else could mathematically win it?

[maaarsh]

Trott 2.5 2nd fav*

 

 

Don't recall specifics on her price other than that it was odds on - there wasn't a massive overround so you can work it out give or take if you wish.

[maaarsh]

And Hammer?

 

No one else could mathematically win it?

 

http://www.london2012.com/cycling-track/event/women-omnium/phase=ctw010200/index.html

 

In theory the top 5 after 5 events had a mathematical chance, but it was a 2 horse race, with Hammer odds on and Trott odds against.

[Garrp]

I didnt think youd remember the most important bit:)

 

Anyway, so the market gave Trott a 40% chance of winning. How exactly was that wrong?

[maaarsh]

I didnt think youd remember the most important bit:)

 

Anyway, so the market gave Trott a 40% chance of winning. How exactly was that wrong?

 

How convenient. Out of interest what number did you want me to say so you could reveal your brilliance.

 

As explained above, Trott had a well above 50% chance before the event started. The event then developed in ways which made her victory event more likely, and the market did not respond to this new information (and yes, I refreshed, the depth moved but the market price was essentially stable).

 

Either make your point or stop wasting my time.

[no balls]

And they say women are bitchy.

[Big_Sharps]

Is limpics finished now?

[maaarsh]

Bits and bobs left; from a British perspective, 2 boxing finals this afternoon and the women's modern pentathlon on now.

[Garrp]

Brilliance? I make no claims to be brilliant. Im not well educated, i left college after 2 days, im as thick as they come. As iv said previously iv seen you make yourself out to be a judge and a knowitall on every subject from politics to finance, sports nutrition, EVERY sporting event at the olympics. I naively believed everything you said was true and it was quite impressive.

 

I had my suspicions when you started posting the same things I was reading on twitter, some of which was true and some if which was utter bollocks.

 

I had it confirmed when you suddenly became a judge on betfair. As I said, im as thick as they come but the one thing I know about more than most in this world is betfair and what you have posted about it on this thread is complete and utter bollocks.

 

Anyway, the simple point I was making was that the betfair market gave Trott a 40% chance of winning. The fact that Trott won has absolutely no bearing whether that price was right or wrong. None whatsoever. You have no idea how the markets are compiled and for someone who doesnt gamble to claim he knows more than people who were market making shows what a gusser you are.

[maaarsh]

Ok, so you haven't responded to the point at all - you just don't like me, which is fine, but please try to be rational with it.

 

Trott just needed it to go to form for her to win. Hammer needed something unexpected, Yet Hammer was odds on and Trott was odds against.

 

You're welcome to think betfair is always right - in 99% of cases someone with information will buy up a market inefficiency and correct the situation, but it does not always happen.

[desperado]

What fantastic couple of weeks. I have been fortunate enough to see some events live at the beginning and end of the games, nothing more special than seeing a gold won yesterday morning by Ed McEever on Eton Dorney followed by the celebrations on Hyde park seeing Mo win his 2nd gold. So proud to be British and to have been part of something so amazing and special.

 

Have done the golf and Olympics live this summer, now bring on Burnley!

[Garrp]

Just needed to go to form?

 

And what happens if she didnt?

 

What happens if one of the others came out the pack?

 

What if she was disqualified?

 

All of these details and more are taken into the

Price.

 

To say she just has to go to form, therefor she has a 50% or whatever chance of winning is idiotic and the reason you dont bet and give it the bigun on a message board instead.