5 ms·
I'm sorry but you can't cite online gambling as an authoritative source. Remember that the goal of these markets is to make money, not some fancy meta-analysis
by mike_d 5y ago
I'm sorry but you can't cite online gambling as an authoritative source. Remember that the goal of these markets is to make money, not some fancy meta-analysis engine. It will always be data seen through an emotional and financial lens - not facts.
- mewpmewp2 5y agoWell if you know better you can always make money there. Anyway this same technique is used in military, for example to measure distance from point A to point B somewhere far. People will take guesses and average will be used. It is effective and pragmatic. Obviously you should take it with a grain of salt. No one is claiming it is some sort of end all authority.
- mike_d 5y agoMy point was nobody knows better, there is no data at all. If you gather a group of people and the majority of them bet the Superbowl will be won by 14 points, that does not make that outcome any more likely. The commentor I replied to shouldn't be making statements that the new variant is less severe just because a bunch of people placed bets that it was.
- mewpmewp2 5y ago> If you gather a group of people and the majority of them bet the Superbowl will be won by 14 points, that does not make that outcome any more likely. Actually that would mean it's likely that this is one of the most likeliest outcomes. Assuming betting payout is 1:1 with any point score - which technically would go to infinite, most people would probably vote for the result that was historically most frequent and no-one would vote for something like 1000 point margin for instance.