Tag Archives: Betting

InTrade floats Dominique Strauss-Kahns life. – [PREDICTION MARKET]

Posted on by
Reply

InTrade:

New Prediction Market: Dominique Strauss-Kahn
Tuesday, May 17, 2011

On May 16th 2011 Dominique Strauss-Kahn appeared in New York City Criminal Court and was charged with two counts of a criminal sexual act in the first degree , first-degree attempted rape, first-degree sexual abuse, second-degree unlawful imprisonment, forcible touching, and third-degree sexual abuse. These seven charges are detailed in the criminal court complaint found HERE.

Intrade has opened a market for Dominique Strauss-Kahn to be found guilty of, or plead guilty to, at least one of the charges laid against him. This market can be found under Legal &gt- D. Strauss Kahn.

Market Rules:

This contract will settle (expire) at 100 ($10.00) if:

– Dominique Strauss-Kahn is found guilty of at least one of the seven counts in a trial by jury or judge
&#8211- Dominique Strauss-Kahn pleads guilty to at least one of the seven counts

The contract will settle (expire) at 0 ($0.00) if (including, but not limited to):

– Dominique Strauss-Kahn is found not guilty of all seven counts in a trial by jury or judge
– All counts are dropped
– The case is dismissed
– A mistrial is declared (for all counts)
– Dominique Strauss-Kahn pleads guilty to lesser charges only as part of a plea agreement (please note that if Strauss-Kahn pleads guilty to any of the original charges as part of plea agreement the contract will expire at 100)

This market covers only the charges covered in the complaint. Any other criminal or civil cases will not be considered when expiring this market.

The contracts will be paused if possible when a verdict is about to be announced and will be expired as soon as that decision is made public.

The end date on the contract is for indication purposes only. This date may be extended if necessary.

Any changes to the result after the contract has expired will not be taken into account &#8211- Contract Rule 1.4

Due to the nature of this prediction market contract you are obligated to read Contract Rule 1.7 (Unforeseen Circumstances) and Contract Rule 1.8 (Time Protection). Intrade may invoke these rules in its absolute discretion if deemed appropriate.

Please contact the exchange by emailing [email protected] if you have any questions regarding this contract or interpretation of these contract specific rules, related exchange news articles or exchange rules before you place an order to trade.

–

TITLE

–

Video link.


Tristane Banon et AgoraVox: retour sur une&#8230- par AgoraVox

Cold Fusion Prediction Markets – [HISTORY]

Posted on by
Reply

In April 1989, Robin Hanson created this prediction market:

By 1/1/91 a &lt-1 liter device will have generated over 1 watt of power output more than input from room-T fusion, including amortized power to create/separate components.

I suppose that InTrade will be willing to float E-cat contracts. We&#8217-ll see.

A somehwat simplistic, but nonetheless interesting, article in which the predictive quality of the BetFair market is slagged off, because it upsets their traditional form book study methods (by implication, of course, if they are right, then everybody could/should/would just follow the late money an

Posted on by
Reply

Niall O&#8217-Connor offers you this link for free.

It is now legal in the UK to lay down your own horses. – [Industry Jurisprudence]

Posted on by
Reply

– In the Harry Finlay case, the BHA appeal panel says that in its view, &#8220-a clear distinction needs to be drawn between a lay bet placed as part of a corrupt practice or even conspiracy and a betting strategy which has not interfered in any way with the integrity of the race and in particular the running of the horse in question.&#8221-

– More.

– Mark Davies&#8217-s take.

All links thru Niall O&#8217-Connor, who also alerts us about the future BetFair flotation.

Europe-based bettors would do better without the gambling monopolies.

Posted on by
Reply

Right To Bet:

RIGHT2BET has exclusively revealed that throughout the World Cup European state betting monopolies offered their customers, on average, 32% worse odds than those available with private betting companies.

Monopoly customers wishing to back their home nation in South Africa were subjected to 35% worse odds than those being offered by the EU-licensed private sector operators that their governments do not allow them to use.

The startling figures have been revealed in the Right2bet World Cup Report which analysed the odds offered on every World Cup match by seven of Europe&#8217-s biggest betting monopolies, before comparing them to the equivalent prices being offered by other licensed European operators.

The aim of the report was to investigate whether or not Europe&#8217-s betting monopolies were short-changing their customers via the help of legislation which protects their existence and market dominance.

Right2bet is campaigning for the right of all European consumers to be able to bet with the licensed operator of their choice, regardless of the Member State in which they are based.

Right2bet spokesman Ari Last said: &#8220-The figures emanating from this report are quite shocking. Millions of EU consumers who wanted to bet during the World Cup were subjected to hugely inferior prices by the monopolies that their governments strive so hard to protect.&#8221-

&#8220-The protectionist behaviour of certain Member States when it comes to online gambling is a situation that does not conform to the ethos of the single-market, and we hope that the findings of this report will highlight what is undoubtedly an unjust reality.&#8221-

Right2bet World Cup Report key points:

• Monopolies offered their customers 32% worse odds than licensed private operators
• The &#8216-Perfect Bettor&#8217- forced to bet with a monopoly would have made €629 less than they would have done if they were allowed to bet with other EU-licensed operators in the private sector
• On average, a monopoly customer choosing to back the &#8216-favourite&#8217- throughout every one of the 64 tournament matches would have received 38% less value, while one who chose to back the &#8216-outsider&#8217- throughout each game of the tournament would have received 35% less value
• Monopolies offered customers wishing to back their home nation 35% worse odds than private operators
• It is clear from the results published in this report that consumers using online gambling services in the EU are receiving significantly lower value when forced to use a state monopoly provider

Country breakdowns:

• Germany: 48% worse off
• Sweden: 40% worse off
• The Netherlands: 35% worse off
• France: 31.5% worse off
• Greece: 31% worse off
• Denmark: 14.4% worse off