
The Scottish referendum: Bookies were predicting an 80 percent potential for a ‘no’ vote, although the polls were contradictory and inaccurate.
Did bookies know 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 per cent of voters deciding against dissolving the union that is 300-year of and going it alone. Many were surprised that the margin between winning and losing votes was since wide as 10 percent; lots 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 simple truth is, polls were throughout the accepted spot: contradictory and fluctuating wildly. They ranged from the lead that is six-point the ‘yes’ vote to a seven point lead for the ‘no’ vote within the weeks leading up to the referendum. And although these were correctly predicting a ‘no’ vote on the eve of the big day, they considerably underestimated the margin of the ‘No’ victory.
Margins of Error
Perhaps Not the bookies, though. It was had by them all figured out ages ago. Even though the pollsters’ predictions had been see-sawing, online sports outfit that is betting had already determined to spend bettors who had their funds on a’no’ vote a few times before the referendum even occurred. And even though there was clearly a whiff of a PR stunt about that announcement, it was made from the position of supreme confidence, because the markets that are betting rating the likelihood of a ‘no’ vote at around 80 percent at least a week before the vote took place. It absolutely was a forecast that, unlike compared to 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 with the betting areas, and why is the media in such thrall to their wildly unreliable results? The polling companies freely acknowledge that their studies are inaccurate, frequently advising that we should allow for a margin of mistake, commonly around five percent. This means in a closely fought race, such as the Scottish referendum, their info is utterly useless. 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
There are many factors that make polls unreliable, too many, in fact, to list here. Sometimes the test size of respondents is simply too low, or it’s unrepresentative of the population. Sometimes they ask leading questions, or those that conduct them are sloppy or dishonest about recording information. However the ultimate, prevailing explanation why polls fail is they usually ask the wrong question. Instead of asking people who they are going to vote for, they is asking the relevant question that the bookies constantly ask: ‘Who do you consider will win?’
Research conducted by Professor Justin Wolfers suggests that this question yields better forecasts, because, to quote Wolfers, it ‘leads them to also think about the opinions of these around them, and possibly also because it may yield more honest responses.’
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 an issue on the location, it’s easier to express the perceived popular view. For the Scots, a ‘yes’ vote might represent the appealing idea of severing ties with a remote and unpopular government in Westminster, but it also means uncertainty and feasible chaos that is economic.
As Wolfers states, ‘There is really a tendency that is historical polling to overstate the chance of success of referendums, perhaps because we’re more prepared 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 giving their expectations, some respondents may even reflect on whether or not they believe current polling.
A significant number of Scots apparently lied in short, when asked whether they would vote for an independent Scotland. Gamblers, on the other hand, were brutally honest.
Suffolk Downs to Close Wynn Everett License that is following Pick
Suffolk Downs in happier times: Horseracing attendance has dropped 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 horseracing that is thoroughbred in East Boston, is to close, officials have established. Meanwhile, Wynn Resorts celebrates securing the sole East Massachusetts casino permit for 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 compared to the Mohegan Sun’s, the Massachusetts Gaming Commission has hammered the final nail into the coffin of thoroughbred horseracing in their state. Suffolk is certainly one of just two horseracing tracks in Massachusetts, together with only one exclusively for thoroughbreds.
Mohegan Sun’s proposed resort was 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 start up brand new avenues of revenue for the state. Suffolk Downs COO Chip Tuttle made the statement that the track wouldn’t normally be able to carry on soon after the Gaming Commission’s decision had been made general public.
End associated with the Track
‘we have been extraordinarily disappointed as this action is likely to cost the Commonwealth tens of thousands of jobs, small company and family farms,’ Tuttle said. ‘ We are going to be meeting with employees and horsemen over the next several times to discuss exactly how we wind down racing operations, as a 79-year legacy of Thoroughbred racing in Massachusetts will be coming to a conclusion, resulting in unemployment and doubt for many hardworking individuals.’
The industry has been hit with a 40 percent reduction in modern times and Suffolk’s closure probably will affect hundreds of thoroughbred breeders, owners, farriers and others who make their living in Massachusetts horseracing industry. The need to safeguard Suffolk Downs had been among the primary motivations for the 2011 Gambling Act, which expanded casino gaming in Massachusetts and created the Massachusetts that is east casino, and the choice to go with Wynn has angered people.
‘Today’s decision to honor the license to Everett effectively put several hundred of my constituents away from work,’ said Representative RoseLee Vincent, a Revere Democrat. ‘It is disturbing that the commission could reduce the working jobs of 800 hardworking people.’
Deep History
Numerous industry workers feel betrayed by politicians therefore the Gaming Commission. ‘What’s depressing is we worked so hard to have that gaming bill passed using the indisputable fact that it would definitely save the farms and save racing in Massachusetts,’ said George F. Brown, the owner and supervisor of the breeding farm, who added that the ruling would ‘probably literally … put all of the farms like mine out of company.’
Suffolk Downs started in 1935, right after parimutuel betting was legalized into the state. In 1937, Seabiscuit won the Massachusetts Handicap slots of vegas casino login right here, breaking the track record along the way. The race ended up being attended by 40,000 individuals. 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 on the track’s infield in front of 24,000 fans that are screaming.
Fundamentally, though, a history that is richn’t sufficient to save yourself Suffolk Downs, and, ironically and poignantly, the bill that was made to rescue this famous old racetrack seems to have killed it.
Donald Trump Poised to Take Back Trump Atlantic City Casinos
Is Donald Trump serious about saving Atlantic City or is he just interested in publicity? (Image: AP)
Can Donald Trump save Atlantic City? And certainly 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. As the Trump Plaza shuttered its doors this week and its non-Donald-related owner Trump Entertainment prepared to register for bankruptcy, the billionaire genuine property mogul announced that he’s ‘looking into’ mounting a rescue attempt.
Asked by the Press of Atlantic City whether he would step up to truly save The Trump Plaza and its at-risk sister home, the Trump Taj Mahal, the Donald said, ‘We’ll see what happens. It. if I can help the people of Atlantic City I’ll do’
Later, on Twitter, and clearly warming to his theme, Trump said: ‘we left Atlantic City years ago, good timing. Now we might purchase back in, at much lower cost, to save Plaza & Taj. They were run badly by funds!’
Trump is hugely critical of his former company 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 legal proceedings to have his name removed through the casinos so that they can protect his brand, of which he’s hugely protective.
Sentimental Side?
‘Since Mr. Trump left Atlantic City numerous years ago,’ states the lawsuit, ‘the license entities have allowed the casino properties to fall into an utter state of disrepair and have otherwise failed to use and manage the casino properties in accordance with the high standards of quality and luxury required under the license agreement.’
Trump left the New Jersey casino industry during 2009, and Trump Entertainment was bought out by a small grouping of hedge fund managers and corporate bondholders, who have been permitted to retain the brand name in return for a 10 percent ownership stake for Trump in the reorganized company. He has received nothing regarding the casinos’ day-to-day operations since then.
‘Does anybody notice that Atlantic City lost its miracle after I left years ago,’ Trump tweeted. ‘It can be so unfortunate to see what has occurred to Atlantic City. So many decisions that are bad the pols over the years: airport, convention center, etc.’
Into 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 immediately 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. Can it be that the notoriously cold-blooded home developer features a side that is sentimental? Or is it, just, as many people think, that he can’t resist some good promotion?
Publicity Stunt a Possibility
Senator Jim Whelan (D-Atlantic) believes in the latter explanation.
‘Donald is really a guy who likes to see his name in the paper,’ he said. ‘He’s never ever been shy about searching for publicity or obtaining publicity. The question is whether this is more publicity for Donald or whether he’s serious about coming back to Atlantic City in a way that is real. We will see down the line. Is Donald Trump looking 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 come back as a savior,’ agreed consultant that is gaming Norton. ‘ I don’t think Donald’s title would assist the casinos that much,’ he stated. ‘Our issue is, other casinos have exposed up and cut off traffic from Philadelphia and New York.’
Intriguingly, and as if to spite the naysayers, the Trump’s helicopter was seen arriving on the top associated with the Taj on Tuesday. Could it be that Trump is really prepared to place his cash where his mouth is?