How Offshore Oddsmakers Made a Killing Off Trump Supporters | Hacker News Reader

How Offshore Oddsmakers Made a Killing Off Trump Supporters

slate.com

17 pointsBenlights12 comments

My jaw has been frequently misplaced recently by the amount of lies that people seem to believe. But I think it became permanently detached when finding out at the very end that people _actually_ believed them.

> Only after the election did bookmakers reach the “taking candy from a baby” portion of the proceedings. Mason tweeted the day after the election, when Trump’s odds at BetOnline were +525 and 80 percent of the bets were still coming in on Trump, “Our massive liability continues to grow.”

They still do. These betting sites are now part of the conspiracy against Donald Trump.

Title is “ How Offshore Oddsmakers Made a Killing off Gullible Trump Supporters”

The part that was left out explains why the oddsmakers were able to make a killing and is therefore necessary.

When people make these bets, they are betting against the oddsmakers. So all of the Trump supporters betting that he would win, especially _after_ the election and it was clear he lost, were basically giving the house their money.

Wonder what the odds are shifting to after the DOD suspended National Security Briefings to the Biden team last night.

The odds of Biden being President in 2021? About 100%, unless either the current President attempts to stage a coup or the GOP in Congress attempts to flex their power and we end up with President Pelosi.

The odds of a terrorist attack succeeding on home soil or one of our foreign bases in 2021 because the current President is a petty fool and looks to be repeating the mistakes of the 2000 to 2001 power transition? Sightly higher than they were.

Attacks are not kinetic anymore. We've been under constant cyberwarfare for years now.

Oh, they can definitely be kinetic. Benghazi wasn't a cyber attack.

What keeps them non-kinetic, in general, is CIA / NSA vigilance and executive authorization to intervene. Which they can't get if the executive isn't fully briefed.

> Which they can't get if the executive isn't fully briefed.

He's getting all the briefings.

BTW, Benghazi was two presidential terms ago.

“a successful $775 bet would return $100 in profit. It implied an 89 percent chance that Trump would win.“

Doesn’t imply anything of the sort. Get your shit straight Slate, this is junior high school level of statistics.

It's been a while since I've done any stats but I'm coming up with roughly the same number they are (~88.5). I'm trying to find the percentage chance for which the expected value of such a bet is 0. Or are you taking issue with the wording of "chance that Trump would win"?

The wording.

Basically you need to take into consideration the bookkeepers profits. See GAMBLING odds vs probabilities here:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Odds#Gambling_odds_versus_pr...

If you want to deep dive you can look into shin probabilities for one model of how to do the calculations.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com