I have just done my regular laugharendum check with the experts. The ones who are non affiliated, the experts who cannot be accused of bias, not even by the rug chewing separatists who are becoming even more desperate as doomsday approaches. The man I spoke to smoked a large cigar, wore a fur coat and drove a jaguar, most of you will have guessed by now that this chap was a 'Turf Accountant' or 'bookie' as he is colloquially known.
A genial and prosperous chap, he was happy to offer me odds of 7/1 against a yes Victory and 1/9 on, on a No victory. He kindly volunteered the information that no one, not one f*****g punter as he delicately put it had placed a bet on a Yes victory despite the very generous odds, and very few had betted on a No victory because of the very ungenerous odds. He wondered aloud if the authorities would consider following the example of the "sport of Kings" and handicap the red hot favourite. He kindly suggested a system where a Yes vote counted twice while a No vote counted but once admitting that this would still see a convincing No triumph he thought that the more patriotic separatist might be encouraged to have a go. This he said would enable them to boast that they had in the face of great odds backed the cause of bonny wee Scotland the Brave.
When I report these findings I am immediately tackled by the cybernat crazies who remind me that the crazies won the Scottish election despite the opposition being favourites then as well. Very few though were brave enough then to try a wager so "win lose or draw" as the old song says they won't be effected in the pocket this time either. So we have a situation where some very large wagers have gone on the No campaign but not much by the way of the usual modest amounts normally seen changing hands in the local gambling den. I reckon it's down to a mixture of feartiness and the famous traditional Scottish reticence associated with opening the moth infected sporrans where the 'bawbees are tightly imprisoned. It's looking like Red Rum against the horse that pulls the milk cart.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
42 comments:
good analogy Mr Kelly like the union Red Rum is dead. also it's 2013 you go to the supermarket for milk now it isn't delivered by horse and cart,but then you like to live in the 1970's don't you.
Have you considered that yes voters don't see this debate as a means of making money, unlike labour politicians who see everything as a way to make money.
By the way what odds were given on ten more food banks in Glasgow by the end of the year.
Monday, November 18, 2013 9:24:00 am Monday, November 18, 2013 9:24:00 am Delete
I'll make sure any analogy I make in future is to the living, you clearly found that one too complicated.
There is about as much chance of the Yes vote winning the laugharendum as there is of a quivering cowardly piece of garbage like you identifying yourself, Scotland the Brave my Jim Royle.
Didn't you hear it's dangerous now to identify yourself to trade unionists, they turn up at your house mob handed, but as usual you don't bother to answer any points you just abuse, you are a disgrace to whoever voted for you, but then that was probably postal votes wink wink.
How much have you bet on a no vote then, and have a word with your bookie because you can get 1-7 on line which is better than the 1-9 he is offering, maybe he's a Labour bookie eh, and the wee bit extra gets pocketed.
What bookies Terry ? You can offer 5's on betfair all day long and take the 7's you were offered...
Nice little earner to celebrate a YES vote with no loss risk :O) What's not to like.
Nice bottle of Malt on YES vote, to take away the taste of soot plums. Paid for wholly by the bookies and punters or poke of chips and self satisfaction for NO....
You see I'm setting them up for you now....How is that for solidarity.
Anonymous said...Monday, November 18, 2013 10:59:00 am.
The snp as always are lined up alongside the Tories, the right wig press, the Murdoch empire etc. against the unions. This is the party which claims to be left wing.
And this anonymous oaf wants to defend the snp on a platform which says our opponents are not at 1/9 on they are only at 1/7. I have heard some bad defences being made but you anonymous take the biscuit, best not to identify yourself eh?.
Running Man said...Monday, November 18, 2013 5:32:00 pm.
So you are the kind of person who would bet on a 1/7 on shot, are you alex salmond by any chance?
You might say a bottle of malt would be nice but I know different. I worked for years in the whiskey industry and I learned enough about the product to know that while it might be just the thing for stripping paint it should not be ingested.
You're hilarious Terry, Paisley's answer to Wolfie Smith.
Are you a fictional character too?
You must be, as such as you can't exist in reality surely?
Keep up the pretence Terry, yer good furra laugh at least...................yer a comic genius
6I am sure your bookie pal would not mind you telling us the name and location of his shop so that we can take advantage of his generous odds then, Terry?
Otherwise people might think you were just making things up.
Anonymous said...Monday, November 18, 2013 9:53:00 pm
Not only am I funny and good entertainment I'm 100% right.
Anonymous said...Tuesday, November 19, 2013 1:04:00 am.
My Turf Accountant chum has asked me specifically not to disclose his business address. He has a horror of the snp blackshirts taking revenge on him. He is appalled at the thought of drunken swearing hairy weapon carrying hooligans wrecking his premises and beating up his staff and he reckons the snp males are even worse.
As one so committed to anonymity yourself I'm sure you will sympathise with his dilemma, exacerbated as it is by his London accent he just would not feel safe. .
Some more cynical than me would say you can't name the bookies as it does not exist.....
Did you work in Ireland in the drinks industry.....? There is no E in our whisky...
Are you sure its industrial experience that puts you off Malt Whisky or have you just been overcome with such a bad dose of the cringe that you cannot even taste anything local ?
"So you are the kind of person who would bet on a 1/7 on shot, are you alex salmond by any chance?"
Not sure you seem to have the basics of how the bookies works Terry...It was you who said that YES was 7-1. I told you that you could lay the YES vote at 5-1 on Betfair....
Here was me thinking you knew about these things...maybe your account has been hacked....
Running Man said...Thursday, November 21, 2013 2:06:00 pm.
I have never worked in an Irish whiskey distillery or indeed an American whiskey distillery and I can only hope for the sake of those who drink their whiskey that their standards are better than those of the Scottish whiskey distillery where I spent 6 years.
I know what I'm talking about when I talk about whiskey, it is an appalling product, much loved by Harry Lauder type Scotsmen who haven't a clue what they are drinking. Credit is due however to the people who market the stuff it is a massive con.
Why would anyone choose to bet at 5/1 when they can get 7/1 ?.
Terry ...You can Lay(offer odds to others) on betfair at 5's which means you can personally offer odds of 5-1 on betfair to 'mugs' while taking odds of 7's from your imaginary bookie...
Thus amazingly getting yourself a guaranteed no lose bet at 2-1 ...as much as you like...
Give 1K to bookie friend... when we vote YES you win 7K + 1K
Offer 1K up to punters on Betfair at 5's. Pay 5K out of your 7K winnings when we vote YES..thus making 2K...
If we vote NO(unlikely) then you win 1K from punters plus lose 1K to your bookie....all square but you keep your job.
Spelling and arithmetic not your sharpest subjects at skool....
Running Man said...Friday, November 22, 2013 1:20:00 pm
"Spelling and arithmetic not your sharpest subjects at skool"
I don't think this has anything to do with spelling or arithmetic, it has more to do with cheating and fraud and your familiarity with such matters does not surprise me. A Scottish nationalist to your fingertips aren't you.
Cheating and fraud ? Really ? So going to different bookies and taking odds etc is somehow fraud now. That suggests to me quite clearly that you know nothing around the subject of betting. Yet promote yourself as some expert.
The odds and the bookie do not exist that much seems clear based on your inability to back up your claim. Your inability to understand a very simple concept behind betting shows that your exposure to such matters is non existent.
You are based on the evidence and more specifically lack of evidence in relation to your claims clearly a liar and a fraud... A fantasist some may say.
Surprised you didn't go further in your party.
Running Man said...Saturday, November 23, 2013 10:32:00 am.
Well I thought it sounded a bit suspect and seeing as it was you I suspected fraud but I now see what you were getting at.
As far as betting is concerned perhaps my lack of knowledge is the reason that I regularly lose money betting. I assume from your bluster that you are one of the very very few people who makes a profit from betting, would that be right?. Do the bookies and casino owners fear you?. One does not have to be an expert to say that when one side is at 7/1 against and the other is at 1/9 on the latter is going to win, you don’t seem to agree yet you seem to be claiming some superior knowledge of gambling, does that add up?.
My exposure to these matters is a pretty normal one. Enjoying a bet I have bet on Horses, dogs, boxing, football, fruit machines, card games etc. and the most I have won is approx. £400 from a football bet and £350 from a horse racing double, so I think I am probably still managing to stay under the bookies radar. If I can find enough money to make it worth my while to bet on a No victory in the laugharendum I will certainly do so, you I suppose will be putting your worldly goods on a yes victory right?. So you were not lying or being fraudulent about those betting odds and how to manipulate them but you are still a liar and a fraud.
Kelly @ 7.06
'....cheat and a fraud...' Careful Terry, you could be talking to the Chairman of the Co-op Bank, here, or worse, a Unite convenor, in which case, expect a visit from the Re-education Squad.
Byeck said..Sunday, November 24, 2013 11:01:00 am.
I hear the Tories are demanding that the Co op guy hands back his severance deal of £31,000. What is wrong with you have you given up?.
Kelly @ 7.05
They're also demanding Ed Balls gives back his £50,000.
Ed hasn't given up, so why should I?
As I said what is wrong with you? Balls £50,000 the Co op guy £31,000 they are amateurs compared to the upper classes, the big bankers, the Royals etc.
Kelly @ 9.57
Maybe so, young Terry, but the Artisan Classes are catching up pretty smartish,,,weren't those MP's banged up for expense fiddling, all Labour?
Now you are just being silly, Lord Ashcroft, The Queen, The tax avoiders, the tax evaders, the gents and gamblers, the festering corrupt pile of dung that is the upper classes?.
Kelly @7.38
Jim Devine, McShane etc,they were banged up, but Ashcroft...H.M..? Never!
Do you reckon judges and juries were Tory?
And, Terry, the festering, corrupt upper classes haven't attempted to rig a ballot since the early 19th century, while Falkirk was only the other week.
Your world is crumbling son, turning into ordure as we speak, your leaders exposed for the weak,clueless,charlatans they are. Come on, be saved,join UKIP
Anonymous Byeck said...Thursday, November 28, 2013 8:38:00 pm.
OK have it your way what about Jonathan Aitken, Jeffrey Archer, Dame Shirley Porter, Ian Hamilton etc.
Nye Bevan described the Tories better than I ever could.
Kelly @ 18.00
Yes, yes, laddie, ratbags the lot of them, but none of them were canned for fiddling their expenses, were they? And that was the point of my original comment.
I rest my case.
We have already done this Tories are professional crooks and vermin.
"Nye Bevan described the Tories better than I ever could."
Dennis Skinner does not a bad job either.
Jim
"So you were not lying or being fraudulent about those betting odds and how to manipulate them but you are still a liar and a fraud. "
Terry just for clarity , can you explain this remark where you accuse me of fraud ?
Also please where am I lying in this particular dialogue ?
Are you trying to waste my time?.
You are trying to waste my time.
Just asking you to further explain your comment. Its easy to throw around defamatory remarks. Less easy to back them up. Seems to me when the argument is lost you resort to infantile name calling.
Seems not to be the first time either. Either withdraw the remark that I am a liar or back it up.
"Well I thought it sounded a bit suspect and seeing as it was you I suspected fraud but I now see what you were getting at. "
For clarity this is the remark around fraud that I would like explained. I have no criminal record and have never been accused of any fraudulent activity.
It seems to me that you are a complete time waster and an arrogant clown as well. Do you really believe that I give a toss about what you think. This covers your other post as well.
I'm arrogant...really you should see a doctor
In summary, you made up a bookmaker, faked the odds. When challenged you failed to back up either.
In the middle of this when I point out how your position is impossible given the odds elsewhere you call me a liar and a fraud... I'm sure the irony of this is lost on you of course.
When challenged again about baseless accusations about me you can't back up them up and accuse me of being arrogant.
You are a fine example of old school Labour. All bluster and no substance, falling back onto keyboard warrior mentality which just exposes you further as having the intellectual capability of a primary school kid.
We now clearly know why you never managed to get a real trade......perfect political fodder.
Running Man said..Thursday, December 12, 2013 10:56:00 am
I recognise the kind of arrogance that is apparent in zealots everywhere. It's a very strong trait among nationalists and fascists who are of course bedfellows.
Running Man said...Thursday, December 12, 2013 11:12:00 am.
How much longer are you going to go on about this? it seems you don't handle being treated with the contempt you deserve very well do you.
The latest odds are yes 7/1 against and No 1/9 on. and the polls are still steady in favour of a massive No victory, I'm not really surprised that you want to avoid the laugharendum.
http://www.betfair.com/exchange/politics/event?id=27033458&q=referendum
Betfair odds today at 4.3/1 So even shorter than when you posted this untrue article.
http://sports.williamhill.com/bet/en-gb/search/?ShowOcNames=0&sCriteria=referendum
3.5/1 on William Hill...
http://www.paddypower.com/bet/novelty-betting/other-politics/scottish-politics/Independence-Referendum-Result-4355118.html
Paddy Power at 4/1
Yet somehow Terry the man who knows nothing about betting by his own admission can in the dark smokey halls of Paisley political backrooms can get 7/1
www.bloomberg.com,
A month ago Bookmaker Ladbrokes Plc (LAD) said yesterday it revised its odds on a “No” vote to 1-8 from 1-7, Someone in the Edinburgh area placed a 200,000-pound bet against independence earlier this year, Ladbrokes spokesman Alex Donohue said.
Just prior to this I saw 1/9 on for No and 7/1 for yes. So the odds change but I have yet to see any odds quoted where the No vote is anything other than a stick on certainty and that is a fact.
Post a Comment