New Tradesports rankings

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

ooooh, Mitty's going to be mad. there has been transactions on Dodd dropping out too.

[Mr. Morden]

It's unclear why they decided to include the particular candidates that they have in that market.  I can understand leaving off 3rd tier folks like Gilmore and Tancredo, but why include Dodd, but not Biden?

[Mr. Morden]

Winning individual odds:

Clinton 28.5
Obama 20.0
Thompson 20.0
Giuliani 18.0
Romney 10.0
Gore 6.8
Bloomberg 5.1
McCain 3.6
Edwards 2.8

Yes, Bloomberg is ahead of both McCain and Edwards (as is Gore, but that's been the case for a while).

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Now that most of the Q2 numbers have been released:

Clinton down.

Giuliani and Thompson both up.  Romney and McCain down. McCain is only barely above Paul now.  Minor Republicans tend to fall.

For possibly the first time ever, there are as many Democrats as Republicans over 0.5.


Democrats
Clinton 45.7
Obama 34.6
Gore 9.2
Edwards 5.4
Richardson 2.3
Clark 0.7
Biden 0.6
Dodd 0.3
Kerry 0.2


Republicans
Giuliani 36.0
Thompson 35.5
Romney 18.6
McCain 4.6
Paul 3.3
Gingrich 2.4
Huckabee 0.8
J. Bush 0.5
Bloomberg 0.5
Hagel 0.4
Cheney 0.4
Brownback 0.3
Rice 0.2
Tancredo 0.2
T. Thompson 0.2
Powell 0.1
Hunter 0.1

[Boris]

Why the hell is Ron Paul so high? Does he even register in public opinion polls?

[YRABNNRM]

Why the hell is Ron Paul so high? Does he even register in public opinion polls?

I assume since he's the only anti-war GOP candidate some think that he may hit a stride with the anti-war primary voters, however unlikely that is.

[Eraserhead]

Why the hell is Ron Paul so high?

Ron Paul owns the internets.

[SPC]

Why the hell is Ron Paul so high?

Ron Paul owns the internets.

Yeah, I think that's why he'd doing so well on Intrade.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

The play money version has him at 6.5. I think that can be summed up to his internet fan boys.

[Mr. Morden]

Probability of dropping out by Dec. 31st:

Huckabee 50.0
Dodd 40.0
McCain 37.5
Edwards 30.0
Richardson 20.0
Clinton 5.0
Giuliani 5.0
Obama 5.0
Romney 5.0

Leading contenders for the early primary states:

IA
Clinton 35
Obama 30.5
Edwards 30

Romney 40.5
Thompson 37.3

NV
Clinton 75
Obama 15

Thompson 60
Giuliani 20

NH
Clinton 55.5
Obama 26.5

Romney 40.5
Thompson 25
Giuliani 24

SC
Obama 50
Clinton 35

Thompson 60
Giuliani 25

FL
Clinton 75
Obama 15

Thompson 40
Giuliani 40

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Now for a different site:
Iowa Electronic Markets

Democrats:
Clinton 47.3
Obama 31.5
Edwards 7.6
Other 12.5


Republicans:
Thompson 36.4
Giuliani 28.6
Romney 21.0
McCain 8.1
Other 5.0

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Wow, those basically mirror Tradesports. This probably is an accurate scientific model.

[© tweed]

Obama is at an all-time high of 35.8 and Clinton is at her lowest (42.1) since around October '06.  personally I think the market is really overreacting.  Obama has yet to get any traction in the early states with the exception of SC.

[Verily]

Perhaps the market is assuming Obama will be as effective as Romney was with his money. Obama is at an all-time high and Clinton at a 2007 low. Romney continues to drop slightly; Giuliani has regained the lead. McCain has doubled the gap between himself and Paul, who has subsided somewhat.

Clinton 42.1
Obama 35.8
Gore 9.0
Edwards 5.1
Richardson 2.0
Others <1

Giuliani 35.5
Thompson 34.1
Romney 18.4
McCain 4.6
Paul 2.8
Gingrich 2.2
Others <1

[Aizen]

Wow, Obama is pretty close to Clinton now.

[Jaggerjack]

Wow, Obama is pretty close to Clinton now.

And he'd better overtake her.

[Small Business Owner of Any Repute]

I've been so focused on the more interesting GOP side that I never noticed the Democratic side: my call there is that Hillary is a huge bargain at anything under 50%, and Edwards is probably a "buy" at 5.  I'd expect him to be selling around 10.

Interesting market disparity: couldn't someone theoretically make a large chunk of change by buying Giuliani contracts on Iowa and then selling them on Tradesports?

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

[quote author=Mr. Moderate link=topic=50282.msg1229865#msg1229865 date=1183594381
Interesting market disparity: couldn't someone theoretically make a large chunk of change by buying Giuliani contracts on Iowa and then selling them on Tradesports?
[/quote]

If that were possible, but you can only trade Iowa shares on that site and only trade TS share on TradeSports.

Anyone who wants to gamble on Tradesports but can't now thanks to the former fascist Senator from Tennessee though can just use the Iowa market, I'm assuming it's allowed to function in the US because it's non-profit and academic.

[Mr. Morden]

If that were possible, but you can only trade Iowa shares on that site and only trade TS share on TradeSports.

True, but one could simply bet on one candidate on Intrade and bet against that same candidate in the IEM (or vice versa).  If there's a price disparity between the two markets, you could guarantee that you'd make $.  However, I guess there's some kind of extra transaction cost that they charge you, which makes betting in the hopes of cashing in on such minor differences between the markets less attractive?

[Small Business Owner of Any Repute]

If that were possible, but you can only trade Iowa shares on that site and only trade TS share on TradeSports.

True, but one could simply bet on one candidate on Intrade and bet against that same candidate in the IEM (or vice versa).  If there's a price disparity between the two markets, you could guarantee that you'd make $.  However, I guess there's some kind of extra transaction cost that they charge you, which makes betting in the hopes of cashing in on such minor differences between the markets less attractive?

That was my point, yes: you can buy and sell on both markets, and the commodity is essentially identical.

There is a minor transaction cost on Tradesports, but it'd be significantly less than the gigantic spread between the candidates.  It's easily made up on volume.  I may try it.

[© tweed]

Obama is within .1 of Clinton at the moment (38.0 to 37.9). 


seems insane to me.  buy Clinton/sell Obama hard.

[© tweed]

tied at 38.0

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

AWESOME!

Paul's over-inflated numbers are starting to drop too. I suspect people who bought Paul stock were just expecting it to increase in value, not for him to win of course, and figured he got as high as he'll ever get (which is probably true)

McCain still dropping regardless.

[© tweed]

Obama leads Clinton on last transaction 38.4 to 38.0.

[Mr. Morden]

Obama is closing the gap on the winning individual odds as well:

Clinton 23.5
Obama 23.0
Giuliani 18.5
Thompson 18.5
Romney 8.7
Gore 6.8
Bloomberg 4.3