10 Basic Horse Racing Betting Tips Handicapping Tips

General Election Polling Discussion Thread (August 30th, 2020)

Introduction

Welcome to the /politics polling discussion thread for the general election. As the election nears, polling of both the national presidential popular vote and important swing states is ramping up, and with both parties effectively deciding on nominees, pollsters can get in the field to start assessing the state of the presidential race. Please use this thread to discuss polling and the general state of the presidential or congressional election. Below, you'll find some of the most recent polls, but this is by no means exhaustive, as well as some links to prognosticators sharing election models.
As always though, polls don't vote, people do. Regardless of whether your candidate is doing well or poorly, democracy only works when people vote, and there are always at least a couple polling misses every cycle, some of which are pretty high profile. If you haven't yet done so, please take some time to register to vote or check your registration status.

Polls

Below is a collection of recent polling of the US Presidential election. This is likely incomplete and also omits the generic congressional ballot as well as Senate/House/Gubernatorial numbers that may accompany these polls. Please use the discussion space below to discuss any additional polls not covered. Additionally, not all polls are created equal. If this is your first time looking at polls, the FiveThirtyEight pollster ratings page is a helpful tool to assess historic partisan lean in certain pollsters, as well as their past performance.
Several polls are in the field, so we won't have a full picture of the field until next week when more are expected to be released. Until then, here are the polls since August 16th.
Poll Date Type Biden Trump
USC Dornsife 8-30 National 54 39
YouGov 8-29 National 47 41
Morning Consult 8-29 National 50 44
Morning Consult 8-29 National 52 42
USC Dornsife 8-29 National 52 40
Emerson College 8-28 Massachusetts 69 30
Trafalgar Group 8-28 Michigan 45 46
Redfield & Wilton Strategies 8-28 National 48 38
Franklin & Marshall College 8-27 Pennsylvania 49 42
Harris Insights & Analytics 8-26 National 47 38
Ipsos 8-26 National 44 37
Benenson Strategy Group 8-26 National 50 39
Rasmussen Reports 8-26 National 46 45
YouGov 8-26 National 50 41
Roanoke College 8-26 Virginia 53 39
Ipsos 8-26 National 47 40
Change Research 8-26 Wisconsin 49 44
Change Research 8-26 Arizona 49 47
Change Research 8-26 Michigan 50 44
Change Research 8-26 Florida 49 46
Change Research 8-26 National 51 43
Change Research 8-26 North Carolina 48 47
Change Research 8-26 Pennsylvania 49 46
Trafalgar Group 8-25 Wisconsin 45 46
Public Policy Polling 8-25 Delaware 58 37
Public Policy Polling 8-25 New York 63 32
Public Policy Polling 8-25 Florida 48 44
Morning Consult 8-24 National 51 43
Morning Consult 8-24 National 52 43
Morning Consult 8-24 National 52 42
Morning Consult 8-24 National 51 43
Morning Consult 8-24 National 51 43
Morning Consult 8-24 National 52 42
Léger 8-24 National 49 40
Morning Consult 8-24 National 52 42
Morning Consult 8-24 North Carolina 49 46
Public Policy Polling 8-24 Texas 48 47
Trafalgar Group 8-24 Louisiana 37 54
YouGov 8-24 National 50 39
TargetSmart 8-24 Ohio 47 46
YouGov 8-23 National 52 42
Morning Consult 8-22 National 52 43
Morning Consult 8-22 National 51 43
Redfield & Wilton Strategies 8-22 National 49 39
Redfield & Wilton Strategies 8-21 Pennsylvania 48 41
Redfield & Wilton Strategies 8-21 Florida 49 41
Redfield & Wilton Strategies 8-21 North Carolina 44 46
Redfield & Wilton Strategies 8-21 Michigan 50 38
Redfield & Wilton Strategies 8-21 Wisconsin 49 39
Redfield & Wilton Strategies 8-21 Arizona 47 38
Harris Insights & Analytics 8-21 National 46 38
Civiqs 8-21 Wisconsin 51 45
Civiqs 8-21 Pennsylvania 51 44
Civiqs 8-21 Michigan 49 46
Civiqs 8-21 Ohio 47 47
DKC Analytics 8-21 New Jersey 52 33
Saint Anselm College 8-20 New Hampshire 51 43
Muhlenberg College 8-20 Pennsylvania 49 45
Global Strategy Group 8-20 Texas 47 45
Echelon Insights 8-20 National 51 38
Echelon Insights 8-20 National 53 39
Data for Progress 8-20 National 50 41
Morning Consult 8-20 National 47 36
Morning Consult 8-20 National 49 39
Trafalgar Group 8-19 Minnesota 46 46
Ipsos 8-19 National 48 40
Ipsos 8-19 National 45 36
ALG Research 8-19 Louisiana 43 50
Rasmussen Reports 8-19 National 48 44
YouGov 8-19 National 50 40
Harris Insights & Analytics 8-18 National 45 39
OnMessage Inc. 8-18 Wisconsin 47 47
OnMessage Inc. 8-18 Florida 49 49
OnMessage Inc. 8-18 Pennsylvania 50 46
OnMessage Inc. 8-18 Arizona 48 51
GQR Research (GQRR) 8-18 Michigan 52 43
Léger 8-17 National 51 35
Morning Consult 8-17 National 50 43
Morning Consult 8-17 National 51 43
Morning Consult 8-17 National 51 43
Morning Consult 8-17 National 51 43
Morning Consult 8-17 National 51 43
Morning Consult 8-17 National 51 42
Morning Consult 8-17 National 51 42
Morning Consult 8-17 Wisconsin 49 43
Redfield & Wilton Strategies 8-17 National 48 40
Landmark Communications 8-17 Georgia 44 47
YouGov 8-17 National 49 38
YouGov 8-17 National 50 41
YouGov 8-17 Texas 40 47
ABC News 8-17 National 54 44
ABC News 8-17 National 53 41
ABC News 8-17 National 53 41
SSRS 8-16 National 50 46
YouGov 8-16 National 52 42
East Carolina University 8-16 North Carolina 46 46
NBC News 8-16 National 50 41

Election Predictions

Prognosticators

Prognosticators are folks who make projected electoral maps, often on the strength of educated guesses as well as inside information in some cases from campaigns sharing internals with the teams involved. Below are a few of these prognosticators and their assessment of the state of the race:

Polling Models

Polling models are similar to prognosticators (and often the model authors will act like pundits as well), but tend to be about making "educated guesses" on the state of the election. Generally, the models are structured to take in data such as polls and electoral fundamentals, and make a guess based on research on prior elections as to the state of the race in each state. Below are a few of the more prominent models that are online or expected to be online soon:

Prediction Markets

Prediction markets are betting markets where people put money on the line to estimate the likelihood of one party winning a seat or state. Most of these markets will also tend to move depending on polling and other socioeconomic factors in the same way that prognosticators and models will work. Predictit and Election Betting Odds are prominent in this space, although RealClearPolitics has an aggregate of other betting sites as well.
submitted by _mr0 to politics [link] [comments]

General Election Polling Discussion Thread (September 2nd, 2020)

Introduction

Welcome to the /politics polling discussion thread for the general election. As the election nears, polling of both the national presidential popular vote and important swing states is ramping up, and with both parties effectively deciding on nominees, pollsters can get in the field to start assessing the state of the presidential race. Please use this thread to discuss polling and the general state of the presidential or congressional election. Below, you'll find some of the most recent polls, but this is by no means exhaustive, as well as some links to prognosticators sharing election models.
As always though, polls don't vote, people do. Regardless of whether your candidate is doing well or poorly, democracy only works when people vote, and there are always at least a couple polling misses every cycle, some of which are pretty high profile. If you haven't yet done so, please take some time to register to vote or check your registration status.

Polls

Below is a collection of recent polling of the US Presidential election. This is likely incomplete and also omits the generic congressional ballot as well as Senate/House/Gubernatorial numbers that may accompany these polls. Please use the discussion space below to discuss any additional polls not covered. Additionally, not all polls are created equal. If this is your first time looking at polls, the FiveThirtyEight pollster ratings page is a helpful tool to assess historic partisan lean in certain pollsters, as well as their past performance.
With the conclusion of both major parties’ nominating conventions, pollsters scrambled into the field to conduct polls of swing states and the national race. The result has been a slew of high quality pollsters releasing their numbers on Wednesday as well as today, which paint a picture of the electorate right after the candidates are expected to have received a temporary convention bounce.
Poll Date Type Biden Trump
Quinnipiac University 9-3 Florida 48 45
Quinnipiac University 9-3 Pennsylvania 52 44
Monmouth University 9-3 North Carolina 48 46
Monmouth University 9-3 North Carolina 47 45
Monmouth University 9-3 North Carolina 48 46
Rasmussen Reports 9-3 Pennsylvania 47 48
Harper Polling 9-3 Minnesota 48 45
USC Dornsife 9-3 National 50 42
USC Dornsife 9-3 National 51 42
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 52 42
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 52 42
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 51 42
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 51 43
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 52 42
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 51 42
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 53 42
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 50 43
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 50 43
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 50 42
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 50 42
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 50 43
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 50 43
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 50 43
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 50 43
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 48 45
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 50 43
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 51 42
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 51 43
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 50 43
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 50 44
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 51 43
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 50 41
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 52 41
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 49 43
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 50 43
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 50 42
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 51 42
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 50 42
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 51 42
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 51 41
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 51 43
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 51 42
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 51 41
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 51 41
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 51 41
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 49 42
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 50 41
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 49 42
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 50 41
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 50 41
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 50 40
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 51 40
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 48 44
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 48 45
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 49 43
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 47 45
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 49 44
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 48 44
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 48 46
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 48 45
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 50 44
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 50 42
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 50 44
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 51 43
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 51 41
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 51 41
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 50 40
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 49 45
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 50 44
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 48 46
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 48 45
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 49 45
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 49 45
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 49 44
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 49 44
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 48 45
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 48 45
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 49 44
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 49 44
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 49 44
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 49 44
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 48 45
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 48 45
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 49 45
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 49 45
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 50 44
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 49 45
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 49 44
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 48 44
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 49 43
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 49 43
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 49 43
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 48 43
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 50 42
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 48 44
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 48 44
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 48 44
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 49 44
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 48 44
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 49 43
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 50 43
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 49 44
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 49 44
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 48 44
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 49 43
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 48 43
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 48 44
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 48 43
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 48 42
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 47 44
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 49 44
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 48 43
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 48 43
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 47 44
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 49 43
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 49 42
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 49 43
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 47 44
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 48 43
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 49 43
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 48 43
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 48 44
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 47 45
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 47 45
Morning Consult 9-2 Wisconsin 47 45
Fox News 9-2 Wisconsin 49 41
Fox News 9-2 North Carolina 49 45
Fox News 9-2 Wisconsin 50 42
Fox News 9-2 North Carolina 50 46
Fox News 9-2 Arizona 49 40
Fox News 9-2 Arizona 49 39
Ipsos 9-2 National 43 38
SSRS 9-2 National 51 43
Harris Insights & Analytics 9-2 National 46 40
Morning Consult 9-2 National 51 43
Morning Consult 9-2 National 51 43
Morning Consult 9-2 National 50 43
Morning Consult 9-2 National 51 44
Morning Consult 9-2 National 52 42
Morning Consult 9-2 National 51 43
Quinnipiac University 9-2 National 52 42
Qriously 9-2 National 46 41
Opinium 9-2 Florida 50 43
Opinium 9-2 Wisconsin 53 39
IBD 9-2 National 49 41
YouGov 9-2 National 51 40
Rasmussen Reports 9-2 National 48 45
Monmouth University 9-2 Pennsylvania 49 46
Monmouth University 9-2 Pennsylvania 49 45
Monmouth University 9-2 Pennsylvania 48 47
Suffolk University 9-2 National 46 41
Ipsos 9-2 National 47 40
USC Dornsife 9-2 National 51 42
USC Dornsife 9-2 National 51 41
Opinium 9-2 National 53 39
Suffolk University 9-2 National 49 43
Selzer & Co. 9-2 National 49 41
Redfield & Wilton Strategies 9-1 National 49 40
Landmark Communications 9-1 Georgia 40 47
East Carolina University 9-1 North Carolina 46 48
Public Policy Polling 9-1 Michigan 48 44
Expedition Strategies 9-1 Montana 44 48
University of Nevada, Las Vegas 9-1 Nevada 44 38
Morning Consult 9-1 National 52 43
Morning Consult 9-1 National 51 43
Morning Consult 9-1 Texas 47 48
Morning Consult 9-1 Florida 49 47
Morning Consult 9-1 Pennsylvania 49 45
Morning Consult 9-1 National 51 43
Morning Consult 9-1 North Carolina 49 47
Morning Consult 9-1 Ohio 45 50
Morning Consult 9-1 Minnesota 50 43
Morning Consult 9-1 Florida 50 45
Morning Consult 9-1 Georgia 49 46
Morning Consult 9-1 Michigan 50 44
Morning Consult 9-1 Georgia 46 47
Morning Consult 9-1 Colorado 51 41
Morning Consult 9-1 Wisconsin 52 43
Morning Consult 9-1 Michigan 52 42
Morning Consult 9-1 Arizona 52 42
Morning Consult 9-1 Colorado 51 41
Morning Consult 9-1 Texas 46 47
Morning Consult 9-1 Minnesota 50 42
Morning Consult 9-1 Ohio 45 49
Morning Consult 9-1 North Carolina 49 46
Morning Consult 9-1 Pennsylvania 50 44
Morning Consult 9-1 Arizona 45 47
USC Dornsife 9-1 National 51 41
USC Dornsife 9-1 National 51 41
Léger 9-1 National 49 42
AtlasIntel 9-1 National 49 46
Emerson College 8-31 National 51 48
RMG Research 8-31 National 48 44
Global Strategy Group 8-31 Pennsylvania 53 43
Global Strategy Group 8-31 Pennsylvania 50 42
Public Policy Polling 8-31 Georgia 47 46
Harris Insights & Analytics 8-31 National 47 38
GQR Research (GQRR) 8-31 Pennsylvania 52 43
Trafalgar Group 8-31 Missouri 41 51
USC Dornsife 8-31 National 53 40
USC Dornsife 8-31 National 52 40
John Zogby Strategies 8-30 National 45 42
John Zogby Strategies 8-30 National 48 42
USC Dornsife 8-30 National 54 39
USC Dornsife 8-30 National 53 39

Election Predictions

Prognosticators

Prognosticators are folks who make projected electoral maps, often on the strength of educated guesses as well as inside information in some cases from campaigns sharing internals with the teams involved. Below are a few of these prognosticators and their assessment of the state of the race:

Polling Models

Polling models are similar to prognosticators (and often the model authors will act like pundits as well), but tend to be about making "educated guesses" on the state of the election. Generally, the models are structured to take in data such as polls and electoral fundamentals, and make a guess based on research on prior elections as to the state of the race in each state. Below are a few of the more prominent models that are online or expected to be online soon:

Prediction Markets

Prediction markets are betting markets where people put money on the line to estimate the likelihood of one party winning a seat or state. Most of these markets will also tend to move depending on polling and other socioeconomic factors in the same way that prognosticators and models will work. Predictit and Election Betting Odds are prominent in this space, although RealClearPolitics has an aggregate of other betting sites as well.
submitted by TheUnknownStitcher to politics [link] [comments]

General Election Polling Discussion Thread (August 16, 2020)

Introduction

Welcome to the /politics polling discussion thread for the general election. As the election nears, polling of both the national presidential popular vote and important swing states is ramping up, and with both parties effectively deciding on nominees, pollsters can get in the field to start assessing the state of the presidential race. Please use this thread to discuss polling and the general state of the presidential or congressional election. Below, you'll find some of the most recent polls, but this is by no means exhaustive, as well as some links to prognosticators sharing election models.
As always though, polls don't vote, people do. Regardless of whether your candidate is doing well or poorly, democracy only works when people vote, and there are always at least a couple polling misses every cycle, some of which are pretty high profile. If you haven't yet done so, please take some time to register to vote or check your registration status.

Polls

Below is a collection of recent polling of the US Presidential election. This is likely incomplete and also omits the generic congressional ballot as well as Senate/House/Gubernatorial numbers that may accompany these polls. Please use the discussion space below to discuss any additional polls not covered. Additionally, not all polls are created equal. If this is your first time looking at polls, the FiveThirtyEight pollster ratings page is a helpful tool to assess historic partisan lean in certain pollsters, as well as their past performance.
This is likely to be one of the last clear snapshots of polling until at least mid-September. Historically speaking, the party conventions impart a statistically significant 'bump' in candidates' poll numbers. This convention bounce averages around 5 points for candidates (though some candidates have far surpassed this number), but the trend of high bounces has seen a decline in recent elections. With increased coverage of each party during their respective conventions (DNC: August 17-20, RNC: August 24-27), and this year's conventions taking place in a mostly-remote setting, it is hard to predict how large or any impact on the polls will be.
Poll Date Type Biden Trump
NBC News 8-16 National 50 41
SurveyUSA 8-15 Connecticut 52 32
Redfield & Wilton Strategies 8-14 California 61 25
Data for Progress 8-14 National 51 41
Data for Progress 8-14 National 52 39
YouGov 8-14 Massachusetts 61 28
Global Strategy Group 8-14 National 52 42
Marist College 8-14 National 53 42
Fox News 8-13 National 49 42
Léger 8-13 National 46 --
Léger 8-13 National 47 39
Pew Research Center 8-13 National 53 45
Morning Consult 8-13 National 51 42
Morning Consult 8-13 National 50 43
Morning Consult 8-13 National 50 43
Harper Polling 8-13 North Carolina 45 44
Morning Consult 8-13 National 51 43
Garin-Hart-Yang Research Group 8-13 Mississippi 43 53
SurveyUSA 8-13 California 56 28
Rasmussen Reports 8-13 Wisconsin 55 42
Harris Insights & Analytics 8-12 National 44 40
Ipsos 8-12 National 47 38
Ipsos 8-12 National 43 37
Ipsos 8-12 National 56 43
Ipsos 8-12 National 58 42
SurveyUSA 8-12 Kansas 41 48
YouGov Blue 8-12 National 51 45
Rasmussen Reports 8-12 National 49 43
Critical Insights 8-12 Maine 45 38
YouGov 8-12 National 49 39
Morning Consult 8-12 National 49 40
Change Research 8-12 National 50 44
Change Research 8-12 Wisconsin 47 43
Change Research 8-12 North Carolina 47 48
Change Research 8-12 Arizona 45 44
Change Research 8-12 Florida 50 44
Change Research 8-12 Michigan 48 43
Change Research 8-12 Pennsylvania 48 44
MassINC Polling Group 8-12 Massachusetts 63 27
Emerson College 8-11 Pennsylvania 53 46
Emerson College 8-11 North Carolina 49 50
Emerson College 8-11 Arizona 53 46
Critical Insights 8-11 Maine 44 36
Critical Insights 8-11 Maine CD-2 39 38
Critical Insights 8-11 Maine CD-1 49 33
Marquette University Law School 8-11 Wisconsin 50 45
Marquette University Law School 8-11 Wisconsin 50 46
Monmouth University 8-11 National 52 39
Monmouth University 8-11 National 51 41
Emerson College 8-11 Minnesota 51 49
SurveyUSA 8-11 Georgia 46 44
Public Policy Polling 8-10 North Carolina 49 46
Rasmussen Reports 8-10 North Carolina 47 48
HIT Strategies 8-10 North Carolina 47 37
HIT Strategies 8-10 Georgia 44 40
Trafalgar Group 8-10 Arizona 44 46
RMG Research 8-10 National 45 37
RMG Research 8-10 Maine 50 39
Georgetown University (Battleground) 8-10 National 53 39
OH Predictive Insights 8-10 Arizona 49 45
Strategies 360 8-10 Nebraska CD-1 46 48
YouGov 8-10 Wisconsin 49 43
YouGov 8-10 Michigan 47 43
YouGov 8-10 Pennsylvania 50 41

Election Predictions

Prognosticators

Prognosticators are folks who make projected electoral maps, often on the strength of educated guesses as well as inside information in some cases from campaigns sharing internals with the teams involved. Below are a few of these prognosticators and their assessment of the state of the race:

Polling Models

Polling models are similar to prognosticators (and often the model authors will act like pundits as well), but tend to be about making "educated guesses" on the state of the election. Generally, the models are structured to take in data such as polls and electoral fundamentals, and make a guess based on research on prior elections as to the state of the race in each state. Below are a few of the more prominent models that are online or expected to be online soon:

Prediction Markets

Prediction markets are betting markets where people put money on the line to estimate the likelihood of one party winning a seat or state. Most of these markets will also tend to move depending on polling and other socioeconomic factors in the same way that prognosticators and models will work. Predictit and Election Betting Odds are prominent in this space, although RealClearPolitics has an aggregate of other betting sites as well.
submitted by TheUnknownStitcher to politics [link] [comments]

[Internet Learning] Stock Jockeys

Hi guys, I went through my notes about trading from an old journal I used when I was starting out and found a cool story for you guys to check out about buying and holding stocks. [CAPEX Story Theory - Jockeys]
Here's the entry (website is already defunct):

"Jockeys... the life of the party!!!
Taken From: http://www.stockmarketpilipinas.com/thread-233.html
Here's a quote by StockJunkie:
"A Jockey is likened to a real horse jockey which rides horses on race tracks. A stock jockey has the ability to "ride" a stock and increase its price.
Lets begin by answering the question who needs jockeys?
Here is one scenario: If say, I owned a publicly listed company and I need cash for my expansion or what have you. I would go to a bank or a lending company and borrow money having my stock as collateral. To have the biggest bang for the buck, I would employ a Jockey to temporarily raise the stock price to say 100% of the current price. You can just imagine how much more cash I could raise by raising my stock price by 100%. I could pay for the expansion, pay for the services of a Jockey and have some cash left.
How does a Jockey raise the stock price?
Raising the stock price does not only involves cash in buying the stock up. The Jockey employs systematic "tips and tricks" to do this. The Jockey uses, among other things, rumors and public relation blitz to suck in the fundamentalist and the speculators, manipulation of the stock price trends to entice the technicians etc. Rumors are done in blogs and websites like our own SMP, PR blitz are done in traditional media like newspapers and TV etc., and stock price trend manipulation done in the market by, again among other things, forcefully closing the stock higher.
Why would people monitor and be interested in Jockeys and the stock they ride?
Simply because there is profit to be made. When a stock is jockeyed, the price would most probably rise meteorically. The pecking order would be like this. First, the Jockey and its cohorts would begin buying the stock. Stock players would notice and also begin buying the stock. The general public then would dove in hoards on a stock that is rising exponentially.
The fall and the chaos that results
After the debt deal between the stock owner and the lender has been struck and a fixed price of a stock has been agreed at, say 100% of the original price, The jockey gets paid then proceeds to stealthily sell the stock. It is at this time when the rumors and speculation would be on its peak and the bulk of the suckers get in.
So you see, even if we knew the process, we, including me, would sometimes bet on a jockeyed stock because we would never think of ourselves as suckers. We tend to think that we are the fast hands or the smart money. And if we're lucky, the profits would be handsome at the least."
Personal Note: Only works in growth stocks (small companies) where the capex plan is larger than their market cap.
--
Old Examples:
Sound's interesting right? Let's see how our stocks fared with that theory.
NOW Corp.
December 22, 2017 | Mulling to Issue 1B Worth Preferred Shares
Price: PHP 2.86 Peak Price: PHP 20.00
Up almost 600%
https://business.inquirer.net/242897/now-offer-p1b-worth-preferred-shares?fbclid=IwAR0D6H6ZghnhcqlFvEcHAlyugruzzMtj7rN8DiVGgaVcxRtkB2XOLNBdZSk
Double Dragon
November 15, 2015 | Planned to Issue 10B Worth Preferred Shares
Price: PHP 22.75 Peak Price: PHP 80.00
Up almost 250%
https://www.bworldonline.com/content.php?section=Corporate&title=doubledragon-plans-p10-b-fund-raising&id=118721&fbclid=IwAR1wL-k9a38_wSKDq5T4_u99i56mTq3Ba9YfM2RQC5E16p0eYhvCXoI1p0c

Arthaland Corp.
September 9, 2016 | To Raise Preferred 3B Worth Preferred Shares
Price: PHP 0.30 Peak Price: PHP 1.75
Up almost 500%
https://www.bworldonline.com/content.php?section=Corporate&title=arthaland-to-raise-p3b-from-preferred-shares&id=133207&fbclid=IwAR3ys3jhA4zk1F2fxMQ-V9C4H_kRYupXarqYblXuNUpj98qnv2dwtlsiGTE
--
The CAPEX story. A current example: NOW Telecom.
June 7, 2020
https://www.philstar.com/business/2020/06/07/2019078/now-telecom-bares-713-million-expansion-plan

Fast forward to October, it rocketed -- we don't know if its done or not already but if you have bought it at announcement in June. Your average is in the low 1.9 to 2.0....

Sounds interesting to me, the holding period could be long, short, or something in between but at least its a buy low sell high strategy.
submitted by kingdean97 to phinvest [link] [comments]

I Read It So You Don't Have To: Little Kids, Big City (by Alex McCord and Simon van Kempen)

Inspired by the overwhelmingly positive response to my previous 'book report' on Ramona Singer's Life on the Ramona Coaster (seriously, thank you all -- truly supporting other women 🙏🙏), I decided to try my hand at writing up yet another of the embarrassing number of Housewives books in my personal collection: Alex McCord and Simon van Kempen's Little Kids, Big City: Tales from a Real House in New York City with Lessons on Life and Love for Your Own Concrete Jungle.
After reading just the title of this book, I'm already exhausted. It's pretentiously long and awkwardly phrased while somehow still managing to be entirely devoid of meaning. In other words, a perfect encapsulation of Simon and Alex. The summary on the back cover describes the pair as the "breakout stars" of RHONY, an assessment that I would charitably call 'debatable,' before going on to inform me that I can look forward to "informative and often hair-raising stories of life in the urban jungle," and that "Alex and Simon use their own hard-won experience as a springboard to discuss a host of parenting topics." I anticipate that this content will be quite useful to me, the guardian of four cats that I spoil endlessly and treat like my actual children.
One of the pull-quotes on the back cover allegedly comes from our very own Bethenny Frankel. I say 'allegedly' because I refuse to believe that the following passage would ever come out of Bethenny's mouth (or keyboard or whatever):
Alex and Simon don't take themselves too seriously, which seems to be essential to parenting. Their fresh 'he said, she said' perspective on parenting is both humorous and insightful!
Please, take a moment and do your very best to picture mention-it-all, betting-on-horse-races-at-age-five Bethenny unironically using the phrase "fresh 'he said, she said' perspective." To describe Simon van Kempen and Alex McCord. Right, didn't think so.
My experience reading Little Kids, Big City started on an unexpected high note when I opened the front cover to find that my copy (purchased used through Better World Books for the low, low price of $5.31 with shipping) had been signed by Ms. you-are-in-high-school-while-I-am-in-Brooklyn herself, Alex McCord! Truly a gift I do not deserve. Samantha and Debbie (whoever and wherever you may be), thank you for your service. I am forever in your debt.
Unfortunately, as would soon become painfully clear to me, after starting off on such a promising note, I would have nowhere to go but down.
The book, which is written in alternating passages from Alex and Simon, begins its introduction with a chronicle of Alex's "fashionably nomadic" early adulthood. Ever the proto-edgelord, she recalls, "I did all those things our mothers warned us about and had fun doing them." We switch to Simon's perspective to hear the deeply embarrassing story of the couple meeting through a dating app while Simon was on a business trip in New York City. No, there is absolutely nothing embarrassing about meeting someone on a dating app. But there absolutely is something embarrassing about using the profile name "Yetisrule" to meet someone on a dating app. To clarify, this was apparently Alex's username, and I remain hopeful that we will get a more thorough explanation of her connection to the elusive Yeti as this book continues.
Alex tells us that, while she and Simon hadn't initially planned to have children, they eventually started to have "clucky feelings." I have never heard this phrase in my entire twenty-five years of life, but based on context clues and also a Google search, I learned that it means they wanted to have a baby. Don't worry, though! As Alex tells us, "You can be eight months pregnant and wear a leather miniskirt." Personally, this is life-changing news -- I had always believed that I couldn't have kids unless I was willing to compromise my 90s goth aesthetic! Maybe I'll rethink this child-free thing after all.
The next bit of advice seems like it actually could potentially be sort of helpful. "No one is a good parent all the time -- nor is anyone a bad parent all the time," they reassure the reader. "You can become a parent without losing yourself." Unfortunately, as soon as I catch myself nodding along, the modicum of goodwill I'd built up is promptly trashed by a gag-worthy line from Simon: "If you take nothing away but a wry smile after reading our little tome, then we've done our job." I immediately vow not to smile until I'm finished reading this book. Excuse me, this little tome.
The book starts in earnest with Chapter 1: "Does a German Shepherd Need a Birth Plan?" To be perfectly honest, I was not expecting a riddle at this juncture, but I am nevertheless excited to hear Simon and Alex tell us "why childbirth is not an intellectual activity." First, however, we get a passing reference to "Park Slope, home of the ParkSlopeParents.com message board made famous in 2007 with a so-ridiculous-it-got-headlines discussion on gender-specific baby hats and where feminism can be taken to extremes." And despite the lame alarmist allusion to ~*XTREME feminism*~, this line did manage to lead me down an interesting Internet rabbit hole, so thanks for that, I guess?
Jesus Christ, I am on PAGE 4 and I am already so done with Simon. Presented without comment:
With the Park Slope OB-GYN, we had the first sonogram and saw the little blip on the screen -- our child-to-be. They say seeing is believing and as nothing was happening inside me, seeing confirmation on the video monitor that indeed my spermatozoa had penetrated and infiltrated one of Alex's ova made me aware that my days as a footloose and fancy-free guy might be coming to an end.
Y'all, I am currently working on my PhD in Molecular Biology. Which, if you were not previously aware, gives me the authority to decree that Simon is never allowed to use the word "spermatozoa" ever again. And so it is.
I was about to say that Alex's passages are at least more tolerable, but it appears I spoke too soon.
The stats they quoted referenced a 40 percent cesarean section rate in the city, and I wonder how that can be acceptable? Are we heading toward Brave New World, where babies are scientifically created in petri dishes and gestated in artificial wombs? Oh wait, we're already there. Are we heading towards a Wall-E existence, where we ride around in carts everywhere and do nothing for ourselves so that our bodies break down and we're all fat, oozy blobs drinking protein from a straw? Somebody slap me, please!!
Truly, Alex, it would be my pleasure.
As a Type-A person, just reading the story of Alex's first pregnancy and delivery gave me anxiety. She says that she just never really "felt the need to establish a birth plan" and that she "gave in to any craving [she] felt." Don’t worry, though -- "If I had suddenly craved chalk, ecstasy or Elmer's Glue, I'd have thought twice." I feel like there is some symbolism here to unpack (Could the Elmer's Glue be a metaphor for the childlike spirit of connection and unity???). Simon describes himself as "a learn-on-the-job guy" and tells us that he and Alex "failed to attend the last couple of [birthing] classes as by then we both just wanted to let instinct take over when the time came." As someone who has never trusted my instincts even once in my entire life, I cannot relate.
Twelve days after his due date, baby François is born. Except it turns out that he actually was born right on time, but Alex "didn't keep regimented track of [her] periods" and miscalculated. What a bummer that modern medicine hasn't advanced to the point where doctors can guide you about that sort of thing.
I don't even know what to say about this next bit, but God help me, I still have 215 more pages of this book to go.
Although the final stages of labor were very, very painful, I [Alex] never used our code word (tin can) for "game over, give me drugs." I definitely recommend using a code word, because it was kind of fun to scream, "I want drugs, give me drugs" through a contraction and have the midwife, nurse and Simon all know I wasn't serious. Once he [François] was finally out of my body, I experienced a tsunami of endorphins that was almost orgasmic, and I understand completely the stories other women have written about ecstatic birth. Simon was sitting behind me at the point of birth, and later when we untangled ourselves he discovered he'd actually ejaculated though hadn't felt any of the normal lead-up to that. It may seem distasteful to some, and definitely neither of us was thinking of sex at the time, but with the rush of emotion and my lower nerve endings going crazy, it's not too far a stretch to say that it's a profound experience.
Johan is born two years later, although it's unclear from the text whether either parent reached orgasm during the event.
The chapter ends with a top-ten list entitled "10 Things We'll Remember That Happened During Pregnancy." These include useful tidbits like
  1. Best advice I heard: men's genitals grow and change shape regularly, then go back to the way they were before. Don't worry about your female delicate bits being able to retract.
Which is…a lovely sentiment. But one that is slightly undermined by phrasing the first part in the grossest way possible, as well as by the use of the phrase "female delicate bits." I do like the idea that they "retract," however, because I think it's very cool to imagine the vagina as an SUV sunroof. By the grace of God, Chapter 1 comes to a close.
In Chapter 2 (titled "No Sleep 'Til Brooklyn, What's My Name Again? and Who is This Alien?" -- seriously, were they padding their word count with chapter titles?), we get more questionable parenting advice from the McCord-van Kempens. They glibly dismiss concerns about co-sleeping ("Simon and I both slept with cats and dogs our whole lives without squishing them"), which I honestly would be more annoyed about if I hadn't immediately gone on to read Simon's account of "the midnight race to the 24-hour pharmacy to buy a breast pump as Alex's breasts were seemingly engorged with too much milk and she thought they were about to explode and fly off her chest." As it stands, I'm truly too defeated to care. Again, just to be perfectly clear: no shade to having issues breastfeeding, all shade to using the word 'engorged.’ And also for giving me the mental image of Alex's breasts desperately struggling to flee from her body (though to be fair, who could blame them?).
Proving that she does not inhabit the same world as the rest of us mortals, Alex tells us that she expected that her state of sleep-deprivation as she raised two young children would "spur [her] creativity with graphic design." For some reason, this does not seem to be the case. Alex is puzzled.
Finally, we've come to this chapter's top ten list ("Top 10 Memories of Random Things We Did While in the Post-Birth Haze"). While these lists have so far been utterly irredeemable, they also mean the chapter is coming to a close, so I can at least take some solace in that. This particular list ranges from the irritating…
  1. We subversively took sleeping babies to as many non-child-friendly places as possible to prove the point that children can be seen, not heard and not bothersome, such as dinner at the Ritz in London, the Sahara Desert, shopping on Madison Avenue, Underbar in Union Square and film festivals.
…to the truly unnecessary.
  1. While changing François' diaper on day one or two, we both stood mesmerized by the changing pad as meconium oozed out of him. It was really the most bizarre and fascinating thing I'd seen to date.
With the couple's general backstory and credentials now under our belts, Chapter 3 ("The Screaming Kid on the Plane is NOT Mine! (This Time)") focuses on advice for traveling with children, which Alex admits "can be a complete pain in the you-know-what." I cannot describe the rage I feel at the fact that she has -- in no fewer than 50 pages -- forced me to read about both her newborn son's excrement and her husband's ejaculate, but cannot bring herself to use the word "ass." Alex, we're really far beyond that at this point, don't you think?
Not to be outdone, Simon shares a conversation he had with François that is remarkable not for its content, but for the fact that one of Simon's nicknames for his son is apparently "F-Boy." Thanks, I hate it.
This chapter's list ("Alex's Top 10 Travel Memories") includes the entry:
  1. Both boys charging down Saline Beach in St. Barths like something out of Lord of the Flies.
So, like a horde of primal sadists? I'm wondering if Alex and Simon have inadvertently confused Lord of the Flies with the hit 2007 reality show Kid Nation. I really hope that's what's going on here.
Chapter 4 ("'Mommy, Johan is Gone!'") promises to teach us how to handle accidents. I'm not sure how comfortable I feel taking emergency advice from the authors of this particular book, but (in large part due to the fact that I have slept since reading the previous chapter, giving the pain a chance to dull somewhat), I am willing to at least hear them out.
After relaying a story of François needing emergency surgery after a foot injury, Alex tells us that at one point, she and Simon realized they had spent "nearly $5000 on Indian takeout" in the past year. For the mathematically averse, this works out to a monthly budget of roughly $100 worth of Indian food per week, making my quarantine Uber Eats habit seem downright quaint by comparison. The chapter-ending list walks us through the "Top 10 Things We Do in a Crisis," and fortunately, the tips seem pretty benign.
  1. Knowing what calms the children down, such as making silly faces or reciting Shel Silverstein poetry backwards.
Wait, hang on. What?
reciting Shel Silverstein poetry backwards
I'm sorry, please forgive me if I have missed some recent, paradigm-shifting development in the field of early childhood education, but what?? As in, "ends sidewalk the where?" "Sdne klawedis eht erehw?" I am truly befuddled.
Maybe the next chapter ("'Is Today a Work Day or a Home Day, Mommy?'") will have some applicable wisdom for me, as I will, in fact, be working from home every other week for the foreseeable future. And, I cannot stress this enough, I am a psychotically overinvested cat mom. Alas, we are instead treated to an unnecessarily detailed breakdown of how important it is to delegate, and specifically that Simon cleans up vomit and Alex cleans up "feces in the various forms that come out of children's bottoms at appropriate and sometimes inappropriate times such as the middle of Thanksgiving festivities." As if we needed another reason to consider Thanksgiving problematic.
The chapter takes a brief commercial break…
When an everyday product can do double duty such as Dawn Hand Renewal with Olay Beauty, a dish soap that seals in moisture while I'm tackling cleanup, sure, I'll buy it.
…before closing out with a list of the "Top 10 Things We Do Because We Were Here First." I am happy to confirm your worst suspicions and tell you that item number one is indeed "Have passionate sex."
In Chapter 6 ("I Saw Your Nanny…Being Normal?"), I find myself actually sympathizing with Alex for the first time in this book. Which is mostly just because the chapter starts by talking about all of the awful, catty parental competitions that seem endemic to a certain crew of white Manhattan moms, and it makes Alex come off at least slightly less irritating in comparison.
That is, at least until a few pages later, when she starts to complain about a previous au pair:
She was sullen, melodramatic and kept a blog about how she hated Americans, hated France, hated us and the children but loved New York. I think she must have thought we were idiots, and when she asked us to leave early we were only too happy to get her out of our home.
I would love to meet this woman. I think we could be great friends.
This chapter's list is even more difficult to parse than previous ones, because while it's titled "Top 10 Things Caregivers Have Inadvertently Done to Amuse, Annoy or Thrill Us," it's not at all clear which descriptors apply to which points. When a babysitter "accidentally used a household cleaning wipe when changing a diaper," were the McCord-Van Kempens amused? Annoyed? Thrilled? The world may never know.
In Chapter 7 ("'Putting To Death Is Not Nice,' a Duet for Two Boys and A Guitar"), Alex and Simon share some of their hard-earned childrearing wisdom with us. Which basically amounts to Alex telling us that, while normally misbehavior from the kids incurs a warning followed by a time-out, she has also developed an ingenious new strategy where she actually steps in to intervene when the stakes are higher. Let's listen in:
A third permutation is when there's a behavior that has to stop immediately, say if Johan has a big blue indelible marker and is running through a white hotel suite. I swoop in and grab the marker as to risk a three count [warning] would be to risk decoration of the sofa.
Take the marker from the toddler immediately instead of trying to reason with him? Groundbreaking.
Side Note: At this point in my reading, I am incredibly satisfied to report that I have discovered my first typo in the book, and in one of Simon's sections no less! ("These toads secret [sic] a poison…"). This is wildly pedantic of me and proof that I am a deeply sick person.
We run though a list of "Top 10 Things We Never Thought We Would Have To Explain" ("10. Why hot pizza stones do not like Legos.") before moving right along into Chapter 8, "Don't Listen to the Well-Meaning Morons." Strangely, I have a very vivid memory of Alex saying "I have a chapter in my book called, 'Don't Listen to the Well-Meaning Morons" in some distant RHONY episode or reunion. I guess she was telling the truth.
The chapter opens with a series of passages in which Alex and Simon respond to various comments that have been made about their parenting over the years. I think this device is supposed to be a bit of lighthearted snark on overbearing strangers, but instead just comes off as weirdly defensive and passive-aggressive. A few examples:
"My daughter is perfect. Her table manners are excellent, she never speaks unless spoken to and we've always had white sofas at home since she was a child, with no staining."
-A woman with one preteen daughter, no sons
Your daughter sounds boring. I wouldn't want my sons to date her..
Zing!
"Why are you outside?" - A bagel seller in Montreal, in February
I'm hungry and the stroller is well protected under the plastic cover. Johan is warm and cozy, the others are asleep in the hotel and I'm going stir-crazy. Is that enough, or should I buy my bagel from someone else?
Got 'em!
"Excuse me, your baby is crying." -- Someone said to Simon as they peered into the stroller to try and determine the cause of said noise.
You don't say! Do you think, you stupid idiot, that I don't hear that? Do you think I think it's just loud music? Do you think I don't want him to stop and that I like it???
Sorry, did I say 'passive-aggressive'? Let's change that to just 'aggressive.'
But despite bristling at being the recipient of unwanted advice, far be it from Alex to shy away from giving her opinions on the shortcomings of other parents.
There was a mom at another table who wore all black and told her hyperactive daughter that they had to have a family meeting to decide what to do next. The type of woman who might ask her daughter to "process her feelings" about which color to choose. The type of woman who wanted make [sic] a big huge hairy deal about including her daughter in the decision-making process and "negotiating" the next best step for the family to take in the pottery shop. Pardon me while I shoot myself.
I'm sorry, but I just cannot respect this take coming from a woman who calms her sons by reciting comedic children's poetry backwards.
We next learn that there are "many websites out in cyberspace," some of which offer child-rearing advice. Simon summarizes their useless "vitriol" as such:
They say that hell hath no fury like a woman scorned, whereas for the 21st century surely hell no longer hath fury, as it's all been hurled at the belittled and scorned Internet mom.
I'm honestly not entirely sure what this is supposed to mean, and my confusion continues all the way through this chapter's "Top 10 Ways We Make Ourselves Feel Better When It's All Getting To Be Too Much." We begin reasonably enough…
  1. Check to see whether the person offering advice has children. How old are they?
  2. Do they have a point? Are they right? It is entirely possible.
…before quickly losing all sense of self-awareness and flying completely off the rails.
  1. Will we ever see this person again? If not, can we get away with unleashing our fury on them? Note, if you're reading this and decide to try it for yourself, go big or go home.
The last few chapters have been a bit Alex-heavy, but never fear -- Simon pops back up in Chapter 9 ("If I Wouldn't Eat That, My Kid Won't Either") to tell us a charming story about how the family refers to his Bolognese sauce as "Dead Cow Sauce," and this is because his children are incredibly enlightened and understand the circle of life and where food comes from. Or something along those lines.
This chapter also provides a lot of really incontrovertible proof that, even though you may swear that your kids say the most hilarious things all the time, you are wrong. I love kids. I can play cool aunt with the best of them. But this "recipe" for "Johan's Concoction" tries so hard to be cute and funny ("whisk violently -- making sure to spill a little out of the top") that I could barely stifle my groans. For anyone who happens to frequent RebornDollCringe, I am strongly and inexplicably reminded of Britton.
A list of "Top 10 Things We Don't Like About Children's Restaurants" culminates with
  1. Where would you rather be? A bistro devoted to race-car driving, with 1950s toy cars on the walls, or T.G.I. Friday's?
Excuse me, ma'am, you must be unfamiliar with the concept of Endless Apps®.
The title of Chapter 10 is "You'll Give in Before I Do!" and although the subtitle lets me know this is referencing "the art and warfare of bedtime," it's hard not to take it as a personal taunt from the authors. Most of this chapter is just transcriptions of 'cute' things François and Johan have said to try to avoid going to bed, but we do get this gem:
Slaying the dragon is our family euphemism for using the toilet (drowning the dragons that live in the sewer) and is fun for the boys to talk about, though probably not forever.
Before giving us a chance to adequately process this revelation, Alex goes on to reflect:
Hmm, perhaps I should delete this -- I don’t want obnoxious classmates getting hold of this book in 10 years and asking the boys if they need to slay the dragon in the middle of geometry class.
Alex, I assure you, you truly have nothing to worry about. Any self-respecting bully will be far too focused on the fact that Simon ejaculated at the moment of his son's birth to pay this comparatively trivial factoid any attention.
The authors shake things up and end this chapter with lists of both "Top 20 Bedtime Stories" and "Top 10 Lullabies," both of which are thankfully inoffensive.
In Chapter 11 ("Children Like Shiny Objects"), we follow Alex and Simon as they purchase the townhouse we see them renovating on RHONY. Although other (read: lesser) parents might store breakables out of reach or limit children's toys to playrooms and bedrooms, Alex and Simon were blessed with two boys whose aesthetic sensibilities are already quite developed:
One kind of funny thing that I noticed recently is that the toys the boys tend to leave upstairs in our red and black living room often tend to be red and black as well. I'm not sure whether that's intentional, but it's funny that the room always seems to match regardless of its contents.
The list of "Top 10 Craziest Places We've Found Objects" is mercifully absent of any orifice-related discoveries.
After reading just the title of Chapter 12 ("Raising Baby Einsteins"), I'm bracing myself for the self-satisfied smugness to come. This preparation turns out to be duly warranted. Baby sign language is dismissed as "a scheme dreamed up by ASL experts who wanted to sell classes to easily influenced new parents," Mommy and Me classes are "not really for teaching anything," and we learn that Alex and Simon have instituted a bizarre family rule that "if a talking toy came into our house, it had to speak a foreign language or speak English in an accent other than American."
We learn that Simon apparently does not know what antonyms are (for the record, Simon, the word you're looking for is homophones) and that New York City is replete with "wailing, nocturnal, type-A obsessed harridans willing to sleep with persons not their spouse if they think it will help their child get into THE RIGHT SCHOOL." Uh, yikes. After a tediously long description of François' pre-school admissions process, Alex informs us:
As a former actor, I've always gotten into play-acting and dressing up with my children. Perhaps a little too much. But I've taken the opportunity to show off a few old monologues, complete with bounding around like a puppy. If you have knowledge, why not share it? If you happen to know Puck's speeches from a Midsummer Night's Dream by ear with tumbling and staged sword play, why the heck don’t you share that with your boisterous boys, who love it and run around shouting, "Thou speakest aright!"
I am suddenly compelled to call my mother and thank her profusely for never making me put up with anything like this. Maybe I'll also get her thoughts on one of the tips listed in "Top 10 Favorite 'Developmental' Things To Do": "if they want something that you want to delay giving them, make them ask in every language they can before giving in." To me, this seems like an effective way to encourage your children to learn how to say "Fuck you, mom" in French as early as possible.
In Chapter 13 ("Urban Wonderland"), Alex and Simon promise to share their unique perspective on "taking advantage of raising a child in the urban jungle." But mostly, we just get a rant about how everyone thinks their kids have weird names, and that makes Simon mad. This chapter's "Top 10 Reasons New York is the Center of the Universe to a Kid" list reminds us what truly matters: "there are more songs with NYC in their titles than any other city."
Immediately after telling us how great it is to live in a city (excuse me, urban jungle), Alex and Simon switch tack and spend Chapter 14 ("'Daddy, a Cow! And It's Not in a Zoo!") expounding on the importance of exposing kids to nature. Sounds great, I'm on board. Unfortunately, we almost immediately take a hard left turn into a story from Simon's childhood where he and his brother are "befriended by this old guy, Dick, who lived on the outskirts of town in a small tin shed." We hear that Dick "occasionally pulled out an early Playboy magazine back from the days when the lower regions were airbrushed out," and that "there had been pretty strong rumors of pedophilia," before promptly returning to the main narrative with no further explanation. I can only describe the transition as 'jarring.'
I can tell how exhausted I am at this point in the book by how hurriedly I skimmed the list of "Top 10 Differences We've Noticed Between City Kids and Country Kids." To be honest, I'm almost annoyed when a particularly bizarre quote manages to catch my attention, because that means I have to think about it for the full amount of time it takes me to transcribe from the page. I'm beginning to think that my initial hope that I could glean some useful cat-rearing advice from this experience may have been overzealous.
Chapter 15 ("You're Such a Great Parent, You Should Be on TV (LOL)") is the only chapter to directly address the family's time on RHONY. It starts with this (attempted) comedy bit in which Alex and Simon pretend to be hilariously self-aware and self-effacing (Alex: "Look up 'Mommylicious' in the dictionary and you will see a photo of me in a ball gown, breast-feeding an infant while making Osso Buco and directing carpenters to build a bookcase for my Dickens and Shakespeare."). This posture would be infinitely more believable if I hadn't spent the previous 205 pages watching these two take themselves deadly seriously.
But rather than share any juicy behind-the-scenes tidbits (or, indeed, convey anything of substance at all), Alex and Simon spend exactly 3.5 pages blustering about how it wasn't harmful for their children to be on TV before giving us a list of "Top 10 Hilarious Things The Boys Have Done While Filming or at Photo Shoots." Spoiler alert: none of them are 'hilarious.'
Chapter 16 is literally titled "The Light at the End of the Tunnel," which makes me feel like this whole experience may have just been Alex and Simon playing some sort of twisted game with me. Alex tells us this is "the chapter of hope," but given that she then tells us about a time when she "spent one full hour discussing why magic markers cannot be carried around with the caps off, particularly in a hotel suite with white couches and walls," I'm not sure exactly where this hope is coming from. Also it seems like this markers-in-a-hotel-room thing happens weirdly frequently. We are then treated to Alex and Simon's "Top 10 Moments of Getting It,'" which includes
  1. Apropos of nothing, Johan said, "You give us time-outs because you are teaching us to be good grown-ups."
This is a thing I'm sure Johan said completely organically and not in response to hearing his parents say "we're giving you a time-out so that you learn to be a good grown-up" approximately seven zillion times.
This brings us to the book's Epilogue (a mercifully short two pages) featuring the line "If you made it to the end of this book, we salute you." Honored to accept this hard-earned accolade, I can finally close the book and start figuring out a way to erase the memory of Simon busting a mid-childbirth nut from my aching brain. Wish me luck!
submitted by efa___ to BravoRealHousewives [link] [comments]

Ultimate Gambling Guide for GTA Online - odds, probabilities, and optimal strategies

This is not mine, the creator of this is u/enderpiet

Since the Diamond Casino update, I have seen a large number of 12-year-olds posting Blackjack memes on this sub. As a parent, this has me very worried.
On top of that, I have seen some of the most trustworthy GTA Youtubers giving flawed gambling advice, which can have damaging impact on their gullible audiences.
So that's why I decided to write this up, to educate everyone on the subject, so there will be no more misunderstandings.
(2020 Update down at the bottom.)
If you're one of those Youtubers that wants to use this information in a video, feel free to do so. The more people (especially kids) that become educated about gambling, the better.
But then also please go back and review your own work, and delete or edit the videos that are giving out the wrong advice, like where you're saying you have "a good strategy for making money with roulette", or some other nonsense that I've heard this week. Delete that please.
Before I get into the individual games, I need to discuss a few concepts first, that will make understanding the rest a lot easier.
Expected return and variance
A game like Roulette or Slots has a fixed expected return on your bets. This is a percentage that you have no way of influencing. Say you are flipping a coin against a friend, and you both put up $1. The winner gets the pot. Since the odds are even at 50%, in the long run, you will expect to break even. Your expected return is 100% of your bet.
But imagine if you would play this coin flipping game in a casino against the house. On the "house rules" listed at the table they would probably say that you would only get 95 cents back for every win, while you are forfeiting a dollar on every loss. Would you still play?
Sounds stupid to do so, but still, everybody does it. Every bet they place on Roulette, every coin they put into a Slot machine, is based on the same concept.
Those few cents they take on every bet are their profit margin, and has paid for all the Vegas lights, the Mirage volcanoes, and the Bellagio fountains. Make no mistake - casino gambling games are not designed to make you lose, because sure, you can get lucky on a single night, but they are designed to make them win. That's the beauty of it. They can both exist at the same time.
Too many people that don't see how this works, are just destined for disaster. Just because you went on a lucky streak and won 8 games out of 10, does not mean that flipping coins is a profitable game, or that choosing tails is a winning strategy. Always be aware of the house edge, your true chances of winning, and just realize that you got lucky. There is no such thing as a strategy in flipping a coin that will give you a higher expected return, so it's just pure gambling, just like Slots and Roulette.
Most casino games are made in such a way, that your expected return is a little under 100%. This means that from every dollar bet at the tables, the casino expects to keep a few cents. For individual players, results may vary. Some will win, most will lose. But for the house, it doesn't matter. They take millions of bets each day, so for them, the expected average works out a lot sooner. In short: the house always wins.
When looking at the house edge, we're talking about the expected long-term result, based on the game's house rules. But for a player, it can take literally tens of thousands of hands or spins before you also reach this average number. Until that time, you can experience huge upswings and downswings, that are the result of nothing but short-term luck, which is called variance.
Some games and some bets have a much higher variance than others, which means your actual results will differ enormously from what you're expected to be at.
Take for example betting on red/black at the Roulette table. This is a low-variance proposition, because it has a high percentage chance of occurring, and a low payout.
Contrast this with betting single numbers in Roulette, which only win once every 38 spins on average. This bet has a much higher variance, meaning you can easily hit a dry spell, and not hit anything for 200 bets in a row, or you can see a single number hit three times in five consecutive spins. This is not a freak occurrence in high-variance bets.
Even though the expected return in both these bets is exactly the same, there's a huge difference in variance, causing massive differences in short-term results, which can go both ways. You need to be aware of this, before you decide what types of bets you are comfortable with placing.
Gamblers' Fallacy
Another thing to realize, is that each individual game, hand, or spin, is completely independent from the one(s) before it, and after it.
Gamblers tend to believe, that the chance of a certain outcome is increased, based on previous results.
The most famous example comes from the Casino de Monte Carlo, where the Roulette wheel managed to land on black 26 times in a row. Gamblers lost many millions during that streak, all frantically betting on red, believing that the odds were in favor of the wheel coming out on red, after producing so many blacks. This is not true. Each round is completely independent, and the odds are exactly the same.
You will hear people say things like a Blackjack table being "hot" or "cold", which is completely superstitious, and should be ignored. The exception was when Blackjack was being dealt from a shoe. It made card counting possible. But with the introduction of shuffle machines, and continuous shuffling like is being used in GTA, this no longer exists.
This is also why "chasing your losses" is a very bad idea. After being on a losing streak for some time, many gamblers believe that now it's their turn to start winning. So they will often increase their bet size, believing that when their predicted winning streak comes around, they will win back their losses, and more.
The reality of it, more often than not, is that people will indeed start playing higher and higher limits, until they are completely broke. Nobody is ever "due for a win". There is never a guarantee that you're about to start winning. In fact, the opposite is more likely to be true. You are, after all, in a casino.
Betting systems
Some people like to think that they have a fool-proof betting system, like the Martingale system. Simply increase or even double your bet when you lose, and keep doing that until you win. In theory, this system will always win. So that's why table limits were introduced, and where the system fails.
If you start at the Roulette table, playing red/black, with a small 750 chip wager, and just double your bet every time you lose, you only have to lose 6 times in a row, before you will be betting the table limit of 48,000, just to get that 750 chip profit.
Sure, you can go on all evening without this happening, winning 750 chips each time, but this losing streak only has to happen once, and you're bust. Any betting system like this is ill-advised, because you are hugely increasing your so-called "risk of ruin", and that's what we were trying to avoid.
And even if your starting bet is only 100 chips, after only nine straight losses, and nine doubled bets, you are betting the table limit at 50,000 chips. If you lose that bet, you're 100,000 chips in the hole, with no way to recover that with your 100 chip base wager.
So don't believe anyone that says this is the perfect system to always win in the casino. Sooner or later they will understand why they were wrong, when they're asking you for a loan.
Set your limits BEFORE you start playing
One final point before we get into the games, a general tip for people that head out to play: money management.
Just like in real life, before you go to the casino, decide on a maximum amount that you are WILLING TO LOSE.
Bet small enough, so that amount can last you through the entire evening, and you will not be tempted to run to the ATM to continue playing.
Considering GTA money, some people will be comfortable losing 1% of their GTA bank balance, some people will be comfortable with gambling away 5% of their total GTA savings. It's up to you what you can handle. Decide for yourself where it will start to hurt, and don't cross that line.
But whatever number you decide on, as soon as you lost that amount, get up and walk away. Don't chase your losses, stick to your limits, and accept that this has not been your day. There is always another game tomorrow. Always agree with yourself on a simple stop-loss rule, how much you would want to lose at most, and simply stop playing when you get there.
Same goes for winning. You can decide on a number, how much profit you would like to take away from the casino. You can go on a hot streak and be up half a million in a short period of time, but if you would continue to play longer, looking for more, chances are that you're going to lose it all back.
Most people are happy with doubling their daily casino budget, for example. Others are looking for 10 bets profit in Blackjack. Whatever you choose, when you hit that number, you can stop playing and bank your profits, or you can continue playing if you're still enjoying the games, but then only just play minimum bet sizes. Then you're just playing for fun, not for money. You've already made your profit, so simply keep it in your pocket, and don't risk losing it again.
Either way, decide on what your money management strategy will be, and STICK TO IT.
Casino games in GTA Online
Now, I'm going to dive into the games that you can find at the Diamond casino, ordered from worst to best.
6) Slots
Generally the rule is this: the less strategy a game has, the worse it is for the player. And with slots, this is definitely the case.
The only influence you have, is choosing what type of machine you're going to play. Basically, there are two types of slot machines:
-high frequency, low payout slots
-low frequency, high payout slots
In the first type, there is no huge (progressive) jackpot on offer, just your average selection of prizes that don't go up to crazy amounts.
This will result in a player having many more spins resulting in a win. The amounts that you win on the bigger prizes, will be smaller, but they do come around more often. This type of slot machine has a lower variance, which means that your money should last you longer, winning many smaller prizes along the way to keep you going.
The second type of slot machine lures you in with the temptation of a huge jackpot prize. Even though the long-term expected return on these machines is the same as the previous type, the prize distribution is hugely different. The large jackpot prize weighs heavily on the scale of expected return, but the chance of it hitting is extremely small. This results in a much higher variance on this type of machine. Usually your money will go down very fast, because the smaller prizes are less rewarding than on the other type of machine.
At the Diamond, the info screen says the player return at slots is set at 98.7%. This means that, on average, for every maximum bet of 2,500 chips, you expect to lose 32.5 chips.
This might not seem like a lot, but the danger of slots is that the game is extremely fast. You can spin about once every 6 seconds, which would result in an expected LOSS of about 20,000 chips per hour of playing.
But again, in this long-term expected number, the large jackpot awards are also factored in, and as long as you don't hit those big prizes, you'll see your money go down a lot faster.
In any case, thank heavens the max bet is only set at 2,500, or else we would see more players go bankrupt at alarming rates.
Optimal strategy for slots:
There is none. Because after betting, you have no more influence over the outcome. The only choices you have, is what type of machine you want to play at, and how much money you are going to risk. And those are all personal preference. As long as you stick to your loss limits, as discussed above, there's no harm in having a go every once in a while, hoping to get a lucky hit. Just realize that you don't have a high chance of scoring a big win, so as soon as you do, get up and walk away.
5) Roulette
Roulette is also a game where you have no influence over the outcome. There is zero skill involved. You place your bet, and that's it.
In traditional French roulette, a table has only the single-zero, but of course, for American casinos that wasn't enough of a house edge, so they simply doubled their profits by adding a second zero. The house edge was increased from 1/37 to 1/19, which is huge.
This makes playing on a double-zero roulette table by definition a sucker's play.
The payouts scale evenly, which means that a bet on a single number, and a bet on half of the numbers, and everything in between, yields the same expected return. The only difference, again, being the variance that you are willing to subject yourself to.
The player return for double-zero Roulette for all bets is 94.74%.
Except for the 5-number bet, which can only be made by placing a bet on the two top rows that contain 0, 00, 1, 2 and 3. The expected return on this bet is lower: 92.1%. This is because it only pays out 6-1. Why? Well, the number 36 isn't divisible by 5, so the greedy people that came up with double-zero Roulette had to round it off someway, and as expected, it wasn't going to be in the players' favor.Just remember that that 5-number bet is the worst bet at the table, and should be avoided. All other possible bets have the same expected return.
So it really doesn't matter how you spread your bets, if you bet only one chip, or if you litter the entire table with a bucketload of chips. Each chip you put out there, has the same expected return, so there is no strategy that will improve your long-term results.
Assuming that you're betting the maximum table amount of 50,000 chips, you will be looking at an expected loss of about 2,630 chips per spin. Considering that a round takes about 45 seconds to complete, your expected LOSS at the GTA Roulette tables will be around 200,000 chips per hour of playing.
Optimal strategy for double-zero roulette:
Stay away. Stay far away.
4) Three Card Poker
With Three Card Poker, we come across the first game where there is actually some strategy involved. You get to look at your cards, and then decide if you want to fold, and surrender your ante, or double your bet.
Additionally, you can choose to place a side bet on "Pair Plus", which offers progressive payouts.
There are some websites out there that ran all the numbers with computer simulations, and even though I would like to quote the source here, these websites are understandably littered to the max with online casino ads, so that's why I have decided against doing that.
Optimal strategy for Three Card Poker:
For this game you only have to remember one strategy rule: Always bet on any high card queen-six-four or better, and fold any high card queen-six-three or lower. That's it. Just don't forget to double check if you're not folding a straight or a flush, and you'll be fine.
This strategy will result in an expected return of 96.63%.
The Pair Plus sidebet, with the payout table that is used at the Diamond casino, gives you an expected return of 97.68%, which is actually a bit better than the main ante bet.
So by playing both wagers, you're reducing your expected losses per bet, but since you're betting more, you're also increasing your expected loss per hour.
My advice would obviously be to not play this game at all, but if you do, put as much of your bet as possible on the Pair Plus, while making our Ante bet as small as you can.
To be able to compare it to the other games at the Diamond, let's stay on that 50,000 maximum wager, meaning making your ante bet 35,000, and your pair plus bet 15,000, if the table would allow it.
This results in an expected loss of about 1,525 chips per hand, and with a round taking about 45 seconds, this adds up to an expected LOSS of around 120,000 chips per hour of playing. In comparison, if you would only play the ante bet for 50,000 per hand, you expect to lose 1,685 chips per hand, which means an expected LOSS of about 135,000 chips per hour. So the more out of that 50,000 wager you can put on the "Pair Plus" sidebet, the better.
Even though it may be fun to try out this game for a bit, since there's only one simple strategy rule to follow, you'll soon find yourself robotically grinding down your bankroll until it has vaporized. You're not missing out on anything if you skip these tables, there is no real challenge.
Just like with Roulette and Slots, if you want to try it out nonetheless, you can just bet the minimum amounts and only play for fun, so it won't matter if you win or lose.
3) Blackjack
Blackjack is the most complicated game by far. Simply because the player has to make a series of decisions, which will largely decide the outcome. Luckily, there is such a thing as an optimal strategy, which will be outlined below.
However, the strategy is also dependent on the house rules. These not only affect your expected return, but in some places also your decisions.
Here are the house rules at the Diamond casino:
-The game uses 4 standard decks, and a continuous shuffle.
-Blackjack pays 3 to 2, dealer checks for early blackjack.
-No insurance offered, no surrender.
-Dealer stands on soft 17.
-Double down on any two cards.
-Player can split only once, but doubling after split is allowed.
-Seven-Card Charlie.
Under these rules, and following the "basic strategy" chart, your expected return at Blackjack is a shade under 99.6%, which is extremely good for a casino game, that's why Blackjack should be your table game of choice.
But it comes at a price: you are going to have to memorize the relatively complicated strategy chart, or at least stick it to your monitor until you have it in your head. But in case you ever stumble into a real-life casino, you won't regret having this table memorized, so I would definitely advise you to work on that.
The strategy chart might look complicated at first, but you will be able to notice certain patterns. Your decisions are mainly based on the dealer's upcard, which is basically divided into a weak card (2 to 6), and a strong card (7 to ace).
When a dealer shows a strong card, you will be hitting more often with the risk of going bust, but when a dealer shows a weak card, you're not taking that risk, and you will be standing more, but also doubling and splitting more. You want to increase your bets when the odds are in your favor, and get out cheap when they're not.
But it also helps to take some time to think about why a certain advice is given. For example, why does it say that you always have to split two eights, even against an ace. Well, that's because two eights equals 16, which is the worst total you can have. It's better to split them up, and give yourself a chance of finding a 17, 18 or 19 with the next card. Once you see the logic in that, you'll have one less thing to memorize.
The playing advice in the basic strategy chart is a result of computer simulations that ran all possible outcomes against each other, and produced the most profitable decision for each situation. So you can't go wrong following it.
Optimal strategy for Blackjack with Seven-Card Charlie
The added house rule of Seven-Card Charlie, adds a small advantage for the player, and it does influence a few strategy decisions. For example, you might have a 14 with 6 cards, against the dealer's 5 upcard.
Normally this would be an automatic stand, but if you're only one card away from the Seven-Card Charlie, meaning an instant win for the player, regardless of the dealer's hand, it turns it into a hit.
Here's the most optimal strategy chart to follow for the Diamond Casino house rules:https://prnt.sc/olct6g
You'll see that two fives are missing from the chart, and that's because you never split them. You treat them as a regular 10. You also never split tens. Just stand on 20.
If you follow this strategy religiously, even with a maximum wager of 50,000 chips, you only expect to lose about 215 chips per hand, and with rounds taking about 30 seconds, that amounts to an expected LOSS of 26,000 chips per hour, which is only half a bet. A small price to pay for an hour of entertainment.
But since the expected return is so extremely close to 100%, you will see more positive short-term results than with other games. But obviously it can also swing the other way. Again, this is supposed to be the game where your money lasts you the longest, but always set your loss and win limits before you sit down. That rule simply always applies.
Still, even with optimal strategies applied, all these games are expected to lose you money in the long run. So betting any kind of large amounts is not advised. If you simply want to enjoy playing these games, there's nothing wrong with betting a minimal amount. Playing these games for a longer period of time will already cost you money anyway, since your daily property fees will still be charged while you're playing in the GTA casino. As long as you can play for fun, there's nothing wrong, but when you see yourself betting insane chunks of your entire bank balance to try to recoup some unfortunate losses, you're doing it wrong.
As the commercials in Britain all correctly say: when the fun stops, stop.
2) Virtual Horse Racing
Now onto the good stuff. I ran some numbers, and I believe Rockstar has made a mistake with the horse racing game. Because as it stands, and if I read the numbers correctly, this game is actually profitable for the player. You can actually make money with this, at least, until Rockstar figures out their mistake and patches it.
If anyone wants to jump into the math and double check this to make sure, please do so. I will add any corrections to this post. This is one of those "to good to be true" things, so I keep thinking that I might have overlooked something. So please verify it if you can.
The setup is this. There is a pool of 100 horses, each with their own attached payout. These are divided into 3 groups, ranked by their odds. From each group, 2 horses are randomly selected to provide a pool of six runners for you to bet on.
Now it's not an actual race you're looking at. You are looking at a raffle. This is important to realize.
Each horse gets awarded a certain number of raffle tickets. The favorites get awarded more tickets than the underdogs, and therefore, have a higher chance of winning.
If this distribution works like it does in the real-life casinos, then the raffle tickets are awarded according to the betting odds.
Example 1: imagine a race with 3 runners, all have 2/1 odds, representing a 33.3% chance of winning. (Because 2/1 means 2 AGAINST 1, so 3 total.) In this case, each horse gets one third of the raffle tickets, giving them an equal chance to win.
Example 2: imagine a race with 3 runners, one has 1/1 odds (or EVENS), representing a 50% chance of winning, and the other two horses are marked up as 3/1, with a 25% chance of winning. The favorite gets half the tickets, the other two get a quarter of the tickets each.
A ticket is drawn, and you'll have a winner.
It doesn't matter in this game which horse you bet on, because the expected return is always the same: 100% or break-even, for the above examples.
Now, what happens if the percentages don't exactly add up to 100%?
They must add up to 100%, because there will always be a winner. And only one winner.
So when this is the case, the actual winning chances of the horses are adjusted to meet the 100% requirement, using their payout odds to determine the scale.
So, if the represented percentages add up to more than 100%, the actual winning chances of the runners will be DECREASED, resulting in all bets becoming losing propositions for the players.
Example: In a 6-horse race, all runners are listed at 4/1, representing a 20% chance. Only with six runners that amounts to 120%. So all chances are scaled down by 1/6th, to end up at 100%.
This means your horse's chances are reduced from 20% to 16.67%, turning it into a losing bet: 5 times you will lose your bet, and 1 time you will win, but only get 4 bets back in this instance, instead of 5. A losing bet in the long run.
This is the type of odds that you find in regular casinos, with fields as large as 15 runners to bet on, where the assumed winning chances always add up to more than 100%, therefore are decreased for all runners, resulting in a house edge.
But in GTA Online's Inside Track, there are other scenarios, because of the small field, and the way that they are put together.
In some cases, the represented percentages when added up, are LESS than 100%, meaning that the actual winning chances of all runners, are INCREASED.
This creates profitable bets for the players, because in the long run, you're expecting to win more money than you lose. This is a gambler's dream, pure and simple.
So, according to the in-game information, the three groups of horses are divided as follows:
-Favorites: EVENS to 5-1
-Outsiders: 6-1 to 15-1
-Underdogs: 16-1 to 30-1
Let's take the two most extreme examples to show what's happening.
The worst possible field to bet on: two runners at EVENS, two runners at 6-1, and two runners at 16-1.
EVENS represents a 50% chance, 6-1 is 14.29%, and 16-1 is 5.88%. Add those up and you land on a total of 140.34%.
This means that the actual winning chances of the horses are decreased by 28.75% (to get that 140% down to 100%), which makes betting on this field extremely unwise.
A horse at EVENS will only come in as a winner 35.63% of the time, instead of 50%,
a horse at 6-1 will only win 10.18% of the time,
and an underdog at 16-1 will only win 4.19% of the time.
The expected return on a bet on any of the horses in this field is only 71.26%, so a maximum bet of 10,000 chips on any of these horses holds an expected LOSS of 2,875 chips.
These returns are the same, because the winning chances are scaled equally, according to the payout numbers. So it really doesn't matter which horse you bet on, in the long run, you expect the same results.
But as explained before, it does influence variance, and therefore your short-term result, which can swing both ways.
But now, the best possible field to bet on: two runners at 5-1, two runners at 15-1, and two runners at 30-1.
Odds at 5-1 represents a winning chance of 16.67%, 15-1 odds means 6.25% chance, and 30-1 odds means a 3.23% chance of winning. Add these six horses together, and you only get 52.285%.
This means that, to get from 52% to 100%, the actual winning chances of these horses will be almost doubled! Multiplied by 1.91 to be exact.
So the 5-1 favorites will now win 31.88% of the time, instead of 16.67%,
the 15-1 runners will win 11.95% of the time,
and the underdogs at 30-1 odds will still win 6.17% of the time.
When betting on this field, the expected return on your bet is 191.25%!
This means that a max bet of 10,000 chips will result in an expected PROFIT of 9,125 chips.
This is printing money, if there ever was such a thing.
Optimal strategy for Virtual Horse racing
So all you have to do, is only bet high on the games where you have an expected positive return, and bet the absolute minimum on the games where your expected return is negative. Or back out of the racing game to refresh the field.
If you don't have a way to quickly add up all the percentages, and until somebody shows up here with a neatly formatted table, just use a few general rules of thumb:
-Always bet the maximum on a race with favorites at 2/1 and 3/1 or higher in it.
-Simply skip all races with two favorites at EVENS in it, and at EVENS and 2/1. Or bet the minimum, if you can't skip or refresh the field.
-To decide if you should play races with other favorite combinations EVENS and 3/1, EVENS and 4/1, EVENS and 5/1, or two favorites at 2/1, the payouts on the other four runners determine whether or not it's profitable to play them. The results of betting on these fields vary from an expected 1,330 chip loss (worst-case) to an expected 1,680 chip win (best-case), with a max bet of 10,000 chips.
But if you're not looking for another strategy chart, you might just want to skip these borderline cases, and just cherry pick the best ones, which are easy to recognize, and with which you can never go wrong.
It's difficult to put a number on an expected win-rate, because it all depends on which fields you get presented with, but it's not unreasonable to state that you can maintain a steady win-rate of around 200,000 chips per hour, with about 50 seconds per race.
Remember, you're not trying to win every race. You're trying to win the most money per hour. So don't sweat it when you bet on a 4/1 favorite, and lose a couple of races in a row. It will still be more profitable in the long run. You have the math on your side.
To reduce negative variance, always bet on the favorite, when betting on profitable fields. We're not gambling anymore, we're grinding out a steady profit. We want to keep the swings to a minimum.
I contacted Rockstar support to verify if this is indeed how it works, but the only reply I got after 6 weeks is that they were "looking into it".
User u/Garsant made a useful Excel-worksheet, available for you to download, where you can quickly type in the payouts on the horses, to see if it produces a profitable bet or not. You can find it in his post here: https://www.reddit.com/gtaonline/comments/ekp8na/gta_online_inside_track_odd_calculato
1) Wheel of Fortune
The number one profitable casino game in GTA Online is obviously the Wheel of Fortune, because it costs you nothing to play.
Unfortunately, you only get one free spin per day, but it holds great value, so make sure you do it.
With a chance to win a super car, vehicle discounts, expensive mystery prizes (which also can be vehicles), and a lot of cash and chips, the expected return on a single spin is around $100,000 in value.
So don't forget your daily spin, it's definitely worth your time.
2020 Update:
As of the Diamond Casino Heist update, the Inside Track horse racing is confirmed to still be as profitable as outlined above.The only thing that seems to be changed, is that you can't refresh the field anymore by backing out of the screen. This does affect your hourly rate in a negative way, but does not change the fact that this game has a huge positive expected return, and should be your go-to when you're trying to take money from the house, without having Lester's nagging voice in your ear. That should also be worth something.
And with that, I conclude my 5,000 word essay on gambling in GTA. Questions, comments, feel free to add your input to this guide.
Cliffs:
-Gambling games should only be played for fun, not for big money. You should expect to lose in the long run. The house always wins.
-A casino game doesn't have a memory, and betting systems don't work.
-Set your limits before you start, how much you are willing to lose or win, and then walk away when you get there.
-Don't play slots, roulette, or three card poker.
-Only play blackjack following a basic strategy chart (https://prnt.sc/olct6g).
-Inside Track betting can be played profitably, if you only bet on fields WITHOUT a heavy favorite.
-Wheel of Fortune is always your best bet, because it's a free bet.
submitted by sircore to gtaonline [link] [comments]

Horse racing tips  Betting on favourites - YouTube FREE TIPS for India horse racing BANGALORE & KOLKATA 15 FEB 2020 Top 5 Horse Racing Tips That Make You a Winner - YouTube FREE TIPS for India horse racing INVITATION CUP 2020 DAY 1 ... FREE TIPS for India horse racing DAY 2 INVITATION CUP 2020 MYSORE 01 MAR 2020

Football, baseball, and basketball get all of the attention it seems, but there remains a healthy group of horse racing fans looking to place a wager, and demand is definitely up. Top Horse Racing Betting Sites in 2020 . It is of the utmost importance to be sure you are using the best racebook site available to wager on horse racing. The following are some tips for choosing the best horse racing betting website. ... Consider checking a few reviews or reg ister only on the websites ... The above tips should help you choose the ... However, if a horse has always ran with Bute and didn't do well, the horse may run a big race the first time running without Bute. Jockey/Trainer Change Many racing enthusiasts make the mistake of betting a particular jockey. Betting Online on Horse Races; Horse Racing Betting Sites FAQs; Betting Online on Horse Races. The rise of online racebooks began evolving in the 1980s. Before that, bettors had to travel to the betting parlor or race track to place bets. With the proliferation of the internet, online horse racing betting books have grown in popularity. Betting sites for Horse Racing. As a punter, you have a few sites to look over. The incredible enthusiasm for horse racing betting has brought about that each horse racing betting sites online offers a broad range of explicit bets. Today you can wager on races from everywhere throughout the world and bet on a few distinct markets.

[index] [21138] [8030] [63368] [46110] [38868] [53705] [44016] [19071] [44617] [53312]

Horse racing tips Betting on favourites - YouTube

Get your betting tips for the Marsh Novices’ Chase at the Cheltenham Festival 2021. Horse racing betting tips from our tipster Will Smith include a 33/1 ante... CLICK SUBSCRIBE BUTTON NOW FOR FUTURE TIPS. DISCLAIMER - All videos are my personal opinion. USEFUL LINKS: www.tips1973.com = ONLINE BETTING ON INDIAN HORSE RACING www.racebets.in = FREE TOOLS FOR ... I've always been fascinated why favourites get so much attention in horse racing. Whenever people are betting or look at some sort of a betting strategy it n... CLICK SUBSCRIBE BUTTON NOW FOR FUTURE TIPS. DISCLAIMER - All videos are my personal opinion. USEFUL LINKS: www.tips1973.com = ONLINE BETTING ON INDIAN HORSE RACING www.racebets.in = FREE TOOLS FOR ... Horse racing free tips UK horse racing, http://www.horseracingfreetips.com for more selections.

http://forex-korea.skyminingmachines.pw