Bookies Beat Pollsters in Scottish Referendum

The Scottish referendum: Bookies had been predicting an 80 percent chance of a ‘no’ vote, even though the polls were contradictory and inaccurate.

Did bookies understand the results of the referendum that is scottish advance, while polls were way off the mark? It sure looks that way.

Scotland has voted in which to stay the UK, with 55.3 % of voters determining against dissolving the 300-year union of nations and going it alone. Many were surprised that the margin between winning and votes that are losing since wide as ten percent; a number of polls had predicted that the result was too close to phone and that the ‘Yes’ and ‘No’ promotions had been split straight down the middle.

The stark reality is, polls were all over the accepted place: contradictory and fluctuating wildly. They ranged from the six-point lead for the ‘yes’ vote up to a seven point lead for the ‘no’ vote within the weeks leading up to the referendum. And they considerably underestimated the margin of the ‘No’ victory although they were correctly predicting a ‘no’ vote on the eve of the big day.

Margins of Error

Not the bookies, though. That they had it all figured out ages ago. Even though the pollsters’ predictions were see-sawing, online activities gambling outfit Betfair had already decided to pay out bettors who had their money on a’no’ vote several times before the referendum even occurred. Even though there was a whiff of a PR stunt about this announcement, it was made from a place of supreme confidence, because the wagering markets were rating the likelihood of a ‘no’ vote at around 80 percent at the very least a week before the vote occurred. It had been a forecast that, unlike compared to the heavily swinging results of the pollsters, remained stable in the lead as much as the referendum.

But why, then, are polls so unreliable when compared with the wagering markets, and just why is the news in such thrall with their wildly results that are unreliable? The polling organizations openly acknowledge that their studies are inaccurate, frequently advising that we ought to permit a margin of error, commonly around five percent. This means that in a closely fought race, such as the Scottish referendum, their information is utterly useless. In a race where one party, in line with the polls, is leading by, say, 52 percent, the presence of a 5 percent margin of error renders that survey useless.

The questions that are wrong

There are many factors which make polls unreliable, too many, in reality, to record here. Sometimes the sample size of respondents is simply too low, or it’s unrepresentative of the people. Sometimes they ask leading questions, or those that conduct them are dishonest or sloppy about recording information. However the ultimate, prevailing explanation why polls fail is they usually ask the wrong question. Instead of asking people whom they’ll vote for, they should really be asking the relevant question that the bookies always ask: ‘Who you think will win?’

Research conducted by Professor Justin Wolfers suggests that this question yields better forecasts, because, to quote Wolfers, it ‘leads them to also reflect on the opinions of those because it may yield more truthful answers. around them, as well as perhaps also’

Dishonest Answers

Those interviewed by pollsters are far more likely to express their support for change, while suppressing their concerns about the possible negative consequences in a case such as the Scottish referendum, where there is a large and popular movement for change. When asked about a problem on the location, it’s easier to express the perceived popular view. For the Scots, a ‘yes’ vote might express the attractive idea of severing ties with a remote and unpopular government in Westminster, but it means uncertainty and feasible economic chaos.

As Wolfers states, ‘There is really a tendency that is historical polling to overstate the chance of success of referendums, possibly because we’re more willing to tell pollsters we will vote for change than to actually do so. Such biases are less likely to distort polls that ask people who they think will win. Indeed, in giving their expectations, some respondents may even mirror on whether or otherwise not they believe present polling.

A significant number of Scots apparently lied in short, when asked whether they would vote for an independent Scotland. Gamblers, having said that, were brutally honest.

Suffolk Downs to Close Wynn Everett License that is following Pick

Suffolk Downs in happier times: Horseracing attendance has fallen by 40 per cent in modern times. Now the choice of Wynn Everett for the East Massachusetts casino permit has sealed the racetrack’s fate.(Image:

Suffolk Downs, the historic horseracing that is thoroughbred in East Boston, is to close, officials have established. Meanwhile, Wynn Resorts celebrates securing the single East Massachusetts casino license due to their Wynn Everett project, which will see the construction of a $1.2 billion casino resort in Everett, barring an unlikely casino repeal vote in November.

Suffolk Downs is be the first casualty of the week’s selection procedure. In favoring the Wynn bid over that of the Mohegan Sun’s, the Massachusetts Gaming Commission has hammered the final nail into the coffin of thoroughbred horseracing in the state. Suffolk is one of just two horseracing tracks in Massachusetts, and the only one exclusively for thoroughbreds.

Mohegan Sun’s proposed resort would be to have been built on land owned by Suffolk Downs in Revere, and the racetrack had pledged to continue horseracing there for at the very least 15 years should Mohegan Sun win the bid. However, the Commission, which voted 3:1 against Mohegan Sun, decided that the Wynn proposal offered better potential to produce jobs and start up new avenues of revenue for hawaii. Suffolk Downs COO Chip Tuttle made the announcement that the track would not have the ability to continue soon after the Gaming Commission’s decision ended up being made general public.

End associated with Track

‘we have been extraordinarily disappointed as this action is likely to cost the Commonwealth a large number of jobs, small business and family farms,’ Tuttle said. ‘ We are going to be fulfilling with workers and horsemen over the next several times to mention how exactly we wind down racing operations, as a legacy that is 79-year of rushing in Massachusetts will be coming to a conclusion, ensuing in unemployment and doubt for many hardworking people.’

The industry has been hit with a 40 percent lowering of modern times and Suffolk’s closure will probably impact hundreds of thoroughbred breeders, owners, farriers and others whom make their living in Massachusetts horseracing industry. The need to safeguard Suffolk Downs had been one of many primary motivations for the 2011 Gambling Act, which expanded casino gaming in Massachusetts and created the Massachusetts that is east casino, and the decision to go with Wynn has angered people.

‘Today’s decision to award the license to Everett effectively put several hundred of my constituents away from work,’ stated Representative RoseLee Vincent, a Revere Democrat. ‘It is disturbing that the commission could reduce the jobs of 800 hardworking people.’

Rich History

Many industry workers feel betrayed by politicians and also the Gaming Commission. ‘What’s depressing is we worked so very hard to have that gaming bill passed with the idea that it was going to save your self the farms and save racing in Massachusetts,’ said George F. Brown, the owner and supervisor of the farm that is breeding who added that the ruling would ‘probably just about … placed every one of the farms like mine out of company.’

Suffolk Downs started in 1935, right after parimutuel betting had been legalized in the state. In 1937, Seabiscuit won the Massachusetts Handicap right here, breaking the background along the way. The race was attended by 40,000 people. The track has hosted races featuring legendary racehorses like Whirlaway, Funny Cide, and Cigar over the years. In 1966, the Beatles played a concert right here in the track’s infield in front of 24,000 fans that are screaming.

Ultimately, however, a history that is richn’t enough to save Suffolk Downs, and, ironically and poignantly, the bill which was designed to rescue this famous old racetrack seemingly have killed it.

Donald Trump Poised to Just Take Back Trump Atlantic City Casinos

Is Donald Trump seriously interested in saving Atlantic City or is he just interested in publicity? (Image: AP)

Can Donald Trump save Atlantic City? And can he?

The word from The Donald is which he can, and what’s more, he says he’s just what AC has been lacking all these years. This week and its non-Donald-related owner Trump Entertainment prepared to file for bankruptcy, the billionaire real estate mogul announced that he is ‘looking into’ mounting a rescue attempt as the Trump Plaza shuttered its doors.

Asked by the Press of Atlantic City whether he would part of to truly save The Trump Plaza and its at-risk sister property, the Trump Taj Mahal, the Donald said, ‘We’ll see what goes on. It. if I can help the people of Atlantic City I’ll do’

Later, on Twitter, and clearly warming to his theme, Trump stated: ‘I left Atlantic City years ago, good timing. Now we might buy back in, at lower expense, to save Plaza & Taj. They were run defectively by funds!’

Trump happens to be hugely critical of his former business Trump Entertainment in recent months, and has sought to distance himself from its stricken casino properties. In July, perhaps getting wind of impending bankruptcy, he launched appropriate proceedings to have his name removed through the casinos so that they can protect their brand, of which he could be hugely protective.

Sentimental Side?

‘Since Mr. Trump left Atlantic City many years ago,’ states the lawsuit, ‘the license entities have allowed the casino properties to fall into an utter state of disrepair and have otherwise unsuccessful to use and manage the casino properties in accordance with the high requirements of quality and luxury required under the license agreement.’

Trump left the nj-new jersey casino industry in ’09, and Trump Entertainment was bought out by a group of hedge fund managers and business bondholders, have been allowed to retain the brand name in return for a 10 percent ownership stake for Trump in the reorganized business. He has received nothing to do with the casinos’ day-to-day operations since that time.

‘Does anyone notice that Atlantic City lost its magic when I left years ago,’ Trump tweeted. ‘It is indeed unfortunate to see just what has occurred to Atlantic City. So numerous bad decisions by the pols over time: airport, convention center, etc.’

Within the very early ’80s, Trump embarked on a joint project with getaway Inn and Harrahs to build the Holiday Inn Casino Hotel. It was completed in 1984, in which he promptly bought out his business partners and renamed the property the Trump Plaza. It was the first casino he ever owned, and this week it closed. Would it be that the notoriously cold-blooded home developer has a sentimental side? Or is it, just, as many folks think, that he can’t resist some publicity that is good?

Publicity Stunt a Possibility

Senator Jim Whelan (D-Atlantic) thinks in the latter explanation.

‘Donald is a guy who likes to see his title within the paper,’ he stated. ‘He’s never been shy about searching for publicity or publicity that is obtaining. The question is whether this is more publicity for Donald or whether he is intent on coming back to Atlantic City in a genuine means. We’ll see down the road. Is Donald Trump seeking to get some publicity, or perhaps is he serious? And if he’s serious, come on in and compose some checks.’

‘I’m able to see Donald’s ego wanting him to return as a savior,’ agreed gaming consultant Steve Norton. ‘ I do not think Donald’s name would assist the casinos that much,’ he stated. ‘Our issue is, other casinos have exposed up and take off traffic from Philadelphia and New York.’

Intriguingly, so when if to spite the naysayers, the Trump’s helicopter was seen arriving on the top associated with Taj on Tuesday. Could it be that Trump is really prepared to put his money where his mouth is?