The referendum that is scottish Bookies were predicting an 80 percent possibility of a ‘no’ vote, as the polls were contradictory and inaccurate.
Did bookies understand the results of the Scottish referendum in advance, while polls were way off the mark? It sure looks that way.
Scotland has voted to stay in the UK, with 55.3 % of voters deciding 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 because wide as ten percent; a number of polls had predicted that the result was too close to call and that the ‘Yes’ and ‘No’ campaigns were split straight down the middle.
The fact is, polls were all around the spot: contradictory and fluctuating wildly. They ranged from the lead that is six-point the ‘yes’ vote up to a seven point lead for the ‘no’ vote within the weeks leading up to the referendum. And although they were properly predicting a ‘no’ vote on the eve of the special day, they considerably underestimated the margin of the ‘No’ triumph.
Margins of mistake
Maybe Not the bookies, though. It was had by them all figured down ages ago. Even though the pollsters’ predictions were see-sawing, online sports outfit that is betting had already determined to spend bettors who had their money on a’no’ vote a few days ahead of the referendum even occurred. And 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 least a week before the vote took place. It had been a forecast that, unlike that of the heavily swinging results of the pollsters, remained stable in the lead up to the referendum.
But why, then, are polls so unreliable in comparison to the betting markets, and just why is the news in such thrall for their wildly unreliable results? The polling companies freely acknowledge that their studies are inaccurate, often advising that we ought to permit a margin of mistake, commonly around five percent. Which means in a closely fought race, such as the Scottish referendum, their info is utterly worthless. The existence of a 5 percent margin of error renders that survey useless in a race where one party, according to the polls, is leading by, say, 52 percent.
The questions that are wrong
You will find 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 is unrepresentative of the population. Often they ask leading questions, or those that conduct them are dishonest or sloppy about recording information. However the ultimate, prevailing reason why polls fail is they usually ask the question that is wrong. Instead of asking people whom they’ll vote for, they is asking the question that the bookies always ask: ‘Who do you think will win?’
Research conducted by Professor Justin Wolfers shows that this question yields better forecasts, because, to quote Wolfers, it ‘leads them to also think on the opinions of those because it may yield more truthful answers. around them, and perhaps also’
In a instance for instance the Scottish referendum, where there’s a big and popular movement for change, those interviewed by pollsters are more likely to express their support for change, while suppressing their concerns about the possible negative consequences. When expected about an issue on the spot, it’s easier to express the perceived view that is popular. For the Scots, a ‘yes’ vote might express the attractive idea of severing ties with a remote and unpopular federal government in Westminster, but it also means uncertainty and possible economic chaos.
As Wolfers claims, ‘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 inclined to distort polls that ask those who they think will win. Indeed, in providing their objectives, some respondents may even mirror on whether or perhaps not they believe polling that is recent.
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 Following Wynn Everett License Choose
Suffolk Downs in happier times: Horseracing attendance has fallen by 40 percent in the past few years. Now the choice of Wynn Everett for the East Massachusetts casino permit has sealed the racetrack’s fate.(Image: bloodhorse.com)
Suffolk Downs, the historic thoroughbred horseracing track in East Boston, is to close, officials have actually announced. Meanwhile, Wynn Resorts celebrates securing the sole East Massachusetts casino license because of their Wynn Everett project, that may see the construction of a $1.2 billion casino resort in Everett, barring a casino that is unlikely vote in November.
Suffolk Downs is be the casualty that is first of 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 hawaii. Suffolk is certainly one of only two horseracing tracks in Massachusetts, together with 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 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 create jobs and open up new avenues of revenue for hawaii. Suffolk Downs COO Chip Tuttle made the statement that the track wouldn’t normally manage to carry on immediately after the Gaming Commission’s decision was made public.
End of this Track
‘Our company is extraordinarily disappointed as this action is likely to cost the Commonwealth a huge number of jobs, small company and family farms,’ Tuttle said. ‘ We shall be meeting with workers and horsemen over the next several days to discuss exactly how we wind down racing operations, being a legacy that is 79-year of racing in Massachusetts will be coming to a conclusion, resulting in unemployment and uncertainty for many hardworking people.’
The industry has been hit by a 40 per cent lowering of modern times and Suffolk’s closure probably will impact hundreds of thoroughbred breeders, owners, farriers and others who make their living in Massachusetts horseracing industry. The requirement to safeguard Suffolk Downs ended up being one of many primary motivations for the 2011 Gambling Act, which expanded casino gaming in Massachusetts and created the east Massachusetts casino license, and the decision to go with Wynn has angered lots of 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 minmise the working jobs of 800 hardworking people.’
Numerous industry workers feel betrayed by politicians plus the Gaming Commission. ‘What’s depressing is we worked so very hard to obtain that gaming bill passed with all the proven fact that it would definitely conserve the farms and save racing in Massachusetts,’ said George F. Brown, the owner and manager of the breeding farm, who added that the ruling would ‘probably virtually … put every one of the farms like mine out of company.’
Suffolk Downs opened in 1935, right after parimutuel betting was legalized into the state. In 1937, Seabiscuit won the Massachusetts Handicap here, breaking the history in the process. The race ended up being attended by 40,000 people. Over the years, the track has hosted events featuring legendary racehorses like Whirlaway, Funny Cide, and Cigar. In 1966, the Beatles played a concert right here regarding the track’s infield in front side of 24,000 screaming fans.
Ultimately, though, a history that is richn’t enough to save yourself Suffolk Downs, and, ironically and poignantly, the bill that has been designed to rescue this famous old racetrack appears to have killed it.
Donald Trump Poised to Just Take Back Trump Atlantic City Casinos
Is Donald Trump intent on saving Atlantic City or is he just interested in publicity? (Image: AP)
Can Donald Trump save Atlantic City? And will he?
The word from The Donald is he says he’s exactly what AC has been missing all these years that he can, and what’s more. 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 step up to save The Trump Plaza and its own at-risk sister home, the Trump Taj Mahal, the Donald said, ‘We’ll see what happens. If I can assist the folks of Atlantic City I’ll do it.’
Later, on Twitter, and clearly warming to his theme, Trump said: ‘we left Atlantic City years ago, good timing. Now I may buy back, at much lower expense, to save Plaza & Taj. They had been run poorly by funds!’
Trump has been hugely critical of his company that is former Trump in recent months, and has sought to distance himself from its stricken casino properties. In July, possibly catching wind of impending bankruptcy, he launched legal proceedings to have his name eliminated through the casinos so as to protect his brand, of which he could be hugely protective.
‘Since Mr. Trump left Atlantic City numerous years ago,’ states the lawsuit, ‘the license entities have allowed the casino properties to fall into a state that is utter of and have otherwise failed to operate and manage the casino properties in accordance with the high requirements of quality and luxury needed under the license agreement.’
Trump left the New Jersey casino industry in ’09, and Trump Entertainment was bought out by a group of hedge fund managers and corporate bondholders, who 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 regarding the casinos’ day-to-day operations since that time.
‘Does anyone notice that Atlantic City lost its magic once I left years ago,’ Trump tweeted. ‘It is indeed unfortunate to see just what has happened to Atlantic City. Therefore many bad decisions by the pols over the years: airport, convention center, etc.’
Into the early ’80s, Trump embarked for a project that best of vegas casino slots is joint Holiday Inn and Harrahs to build the vacation Inn Casino resort. It had been completed in 1984, and he immediately bought out his company partners and renamed the property the Trump Plaza. It was the casino that is first ever owned, and this week it closed. Would it be that the notoriously cold-blooded property developer has a side that is sentimental? Or is it, just, as many people think, that he can’t resist some good publicity?
Promotion Stunt a Possibility
Senator Jim Whelan (D-Atlantic) believes in the explanation that is latter.
‘Donald is really a guy who likes to see his title in the paper,’ he stated. ‘He’s never been shy about seeking publicity or publicity that is obtaining. The question is whether this is more publicity for Donald or whether he could be seriously interested in coming back to Atlantic City in a real way. We’ll see down the line. Is Donald Trump wanting to get some promotion, or is he serious? And if he’s serious, come on in and compose some checks.’
‘I can see Donald’s ego wanting him to return as a savior,’ consented consultant that is gaming Norton. ‘ I do not think Donald’s name would help the casinos that much,’ he stated. ‘Our issue is, other casinos have exposed up and cut off traffic from Philadelphia and New York.’
Intriguingly, so when if to spite the naysayers, the Trump’s helicopter was seen arriving on the roof regarding the Taj on Tuesday. Could it be that Trump is really prepared to place his cash where their mouth is?