Brexit shows you can easily make money betting on politics

By:

Posted: June 24, 2016

Updated: October 6, 2017

It seems you can easily make money betting on politics, as despite polls being almost dead even, you could still find odds of 7.00 for Brexit, less than 12 hours before it was confirmed

According to UK gambling news, the UK referendum was the largest political betting market in history. Estimates expected over £100million to be wagered on the result, making it an absolute massive event for online sportsbooks in the UK.

With so many contributions, of varying size, one might expect the betting markets to have some predictive value. However, it seems that many of those betting clearly had no idea what the result was to me, and perhaps may have been led astray by the betting markets themselves, creating vicious cycle of inaccuracy. At Betfair, on Thursday evening, they predicted an 80% of a Remain victory. This was proved to be incorrect.

Why don’t more people easily make money betting on politics?

With the market so wrong, it shows just how easy it can be to earn money betting on politics. Unlike those who bet on sports, those who bet on politics can’t rely on statistics and form. At best they can consider polls, but these have often proved to be inaccurate. Clearly there was a growing sense of confidence in Remain on Thursday night, but it’s unclear where this arose from, aside from the betting markets themselves.

With so much of political betting based on confidence, one can easily make money betting on politics by approaching the issue rationally. With all evidence available it was clear last night that Leave, even if not certain to win, was had unjustifiably high odds. In situations like that, it should be an easy decision to make. Luckily, the ramifications of Brexit may include far-reaching consequences: there may soon be other referenda for you to bet on!

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x