Re: Why doesn\'t Ron Paul speak the truth re: the bias against him
[ QUOTE ]
That's the point, though. It doesn't matter that the actual odds are higher than 7:1 (or whatever) against; the point is that these odds are being continually adjusted downwards, because the 200:1, and then 100:1 odds against Paul previously were clearly bad lines.
Furthermore, there is upward market pressure exerted on lines like these. The lines have to be low enough to be +EV for the bookmaker, but high enough to entice bettors into betting. Bookmakers competing against each other for bets also raise the lines.
So, while the bookmakers hope to make money because the lines are longer than 7:1 (or whatever) against, the actual odds (ideally) aren't too far off from that. Certainly the same order of magnitude.
[/ QUOTE ]
It wouldn't surprise me if someone was manipulating those lines just to increase the perception of viability of the Paul campaign.
How much total betting volume do they think they have on fringe candidates in their political markets? I have a feeling that some very light wagering could significantly move the lines, and supporters of Paul are much more likely to understand this than supporters of any other candidate.
|