6 ms·

The University of East Anglia have a live blog as well that updates their predictions based on statistical model [0] by Dr Chris Hanretty. Predictions are based

• cperciva 10y ago
  In case those links continue to have database problems, you can also read Chris Hanretty's updates via twitter: https://twitter.com/chrishanretty https://twitter.com/chrishanretty
• wanda 10y ago
  Financial Times: http://blogs.ft.com/westminster/liveblogs/2016-06-22/ http://blogs.ft.com/westminster/liveblogs/2016-06-22/
• excalibur 10y ago
  That last update took the chances of leaving from 68% to 97%. Looks like a mistake to me.
  • danieltillett 10y ago
    Why? Of course the model might be making a wrong prediction, but if I had a betting account betting on leave looks very tempting.
    • ubernostrum 10y ago
      Maybe be glad you don't have a betting account. I wouldn't trust anyone who thinks they can model this to the point of literally attaching "p=1.0", this early on.
      • danieltillett 10y ago
        I am not much of a gambler, but with a spread like this it looks very tempting. The currency market boys seem to think out has won. Anyway using my imaginary betting account I will bet a million pounds - I will enjoy the cup of imaginary coffee I will be able to buy with my winnings :)
        • eru 10y ago
          You expect a lot of imaginary GBP inflation?
          • danieltillett 10y ago
            No I live in Australia so I have to covert my imaginary winnings pounds into imaginary Australian dollars to be able to buy my imaginary coffee ;) More seriously the model was right and the bookies wrong - it is relatively rare that you get an opportunity like this handed to you to make money with almost no risk.
            • ubernostrum 10y ago
              make money with almost no risk I still think p=1.0 was not possibly achievable via any model at that point in the counting, which means betting based on it would have been an enormous risk. The fact that the bet would have paid off makes no difference; especially given how close the vote seems to have gone, a coin flip would have gotten it right half the time, and I doubt you'd say that a coin flipper who just declares 100% confidence has a good model.
              • danieltillett 10y ago
                The model was almost exactly spot on, while the bookies were still offering 6/4 on for remain at the time I originally posted. The betting market really was not adjusting to the changing data and was way off on the real odds - this is quite rare. I certainly hope that the people who made money off Chris’ model follow his suggestion and donate to the Jo Cox fund.
  • deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
• jboydyhacker 10y ago
  His latest update seems crazy- p at .03 based on that data seems like an unlikely jump based on the changes in votes and % reporting from each update. Seems bogus.
  • dbcooper 10y ago
    Yup! He did qualify his prediction though: https://medium.com/@chrishanretty/eu-referendum-rolling-forecasts-1a625014af55#.rm6qzo819 https://medium.com/@chrishanretty/eu-referendum-rolling-fore... >This is a big update, and I'm conscious that I may have made a terrible mistake somewhere in estimating differential turnout, but here goes:
  • cperciva 10y ago
    That was P = 0.03, or 3%. Not 0.03%.
  • tomp 10y ago
    That update might be a bit dated... Glasgow just reported, heavily in favor of Bremain, tipping the scale of the current vote count.
    • redwood 10y ago
      The totals will go back and forth, but it's all about turnout proportionally in in- vs out- regions versus original projections. Glasgow was expected to be massively pro-remain but did Glasgow turn out in higher/lower numbers than anticipated? and did Glasgow go more or less pro-remain than anticipated? I would be very very worried if I were a British citizen in the remain camp right now.
    • cdash 10y ago
      Depends on how Glasgow was predicted to vote in their model. If it matches their prediction then the impact would be limited.
  • jonas21 10y ago
    Why does the drop from p=0.32 to p=0.03 seem crazy/bogus? Isn't that what you'd expect as the probability distribution both narrows (with more evidence) and moves toward the 'leave' side?
• joosters 10y ago
  Live betting from Betfair's betting exchange / prediction market: https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/#/politics/market/1.118739911 https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/#/politics/market/1.11... Interesting because the odds react far quicker than any live blog I've found, so a sudden swing means that there's just been a surprising result announced.
  • bbcbasic 10y ago
    Given that there will be a number of swings maybe a good strategy is to bet on the one with longer odds, wait till the next swing, sell and buy the other, rinse and repeat. Profit!
    • joosters 10y ago
      Odds on 'remain' have already oscillated in the last few hours from 1/16 to 2/1 (94% to 33% implied probability)
      • bbcbasic 10y ago
        I saw that reverse for a few minutes on Betfair. It's a fairly illiquid market looking at the depths.
        • joosters 10y ago
          About £100 million has the traded on that market, that's far from illiquid.
  • jsprogrammer 10y ago
    Or, someone made a large transaction.
    • jessaustin 10y ago
      More likely that many people made bets, which they'll do when, as parent had it, "there's just been a surprising result announced."
• excalibur 10y ago
  He's called it. According to this model there's a 100% cance of leaving.