Scottish Referendum - John Swinney interview

ruggedtoast

And here are the latest polls. 37% going to vote Yes.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/7fe506fa-f7a3-11e3-b2cf-00144feabdc0.html#axzz35VHMzuxs

It appears that this complete and utter bollox about the state of our country the SNP and their poisonous little campaign have been spewing isn't moving opinion at all.

Even with their fat lottery winners bankrolling almost their entire operation. Interesting that they couldnt find many people who actually have money acquired by their own efforts to fund this fiasco.

IveSeenTheLight

ruggedtoast wrote: »

And here are the latest polls. 37% going to vote Yes.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/7fe506fa-f7a3-11e3-b2cf-00144feabdc0.html#axzz35VHMzuxs

The article states that the gap is narrowing.
The other week there was a 12% difference (6% swing required) with 14% undecided.
Now its a 10% gap (5% swing) with 15% undecided

ruggedtoast

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

The article states that the gap is narrowing.
The other week there was a 12% difference (6% swing required) with 14% undecided.
Now its a 10% gap (5% swing) with 15% undecided

And the next one will be down a bit and then up a bit and then down a bit and then come September it'll be a big fat NO so put that in your pipe and smoke it.

IveSeenTheLight

ruggedtoast wrote: »

And the next one will be down a bit and then up a bit and then down a bit and then come September it'll be a big fat NO so put that in your pipe and smoke it.

Possibly and maybe even probably.
I don't believe in counting my chickens until they are hatched though

Generali

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

The article states that the gap is narrowing.
The other week there was a 12% difference (6% swing required) with 14% undecided.
Now its a 10% gap (5% swing) with 15% undecided

I've been messing about with the poll results and there is a narrowing of the gap by Yes, no doubt about it.

I maintain that the most likely thing is that it's too little too late. There is a tiny ray of light in the latest poll which shows a 5% deficit for Yes IIRC. That's an anomaly though as most of the polls show a 10%+ deficit for Yes. That's less than it was but simply not close enough at this point.

I maintain, as does the betting, that the only thing that can win this for Yes is some monumental fail by No. That's not impossible but they're starting to run out of days to do it in. Perhaps a World Cup win by England could have tipped the balance (I hope not) but that's not going to happen now.

The fact for the polls is that Yes maxes out support at 40%, No's minimum support is 40%. Polls aren't everything and there's only one that counts. I can't see the pollsters getting it this badly wrong unless something substantial changes.

The betting exchanges have a market view

http://sports.betfair.com/?ti=2378961&tmi=27033458&ex=1&origin=LHMA

It would be nice to get some actual analysis in response. I won't of course but it would be nice.

IveSeenTheLight

Generali wrote: »

I've been messing about with the poll results and there is a narrowing of the gap by Yes, no doubt about it.

That's nice to acknowledge

Generali wrote: »

I maintain that the most likely thing is that it's too little too late. There is a tiny ray of light in the latest poll which shows a 5% deficit for Yes IIRC. That's an anomaly though as most of the polls show a 10%+ deficit for Yes. That's less than it was but simply not close enough at this point.

That's your opinion and of course you are entitled to it.
The Yes campaign believe that the gap is achievable

Generali wrote: »

I maintain, as does the betting, that the only thing that can win this for Yes is some monumental fail by No. That's not impossible but they're starting to run out of days to do it in

The odds may be in "No's" favour but that does not mean that there cannot be a result that is against the odds.
You've said yourself it's not impossible

Generali wrote: »

Perhaps a World Cup win by England could have tipped the balance (I hope not) but that's not going to happen now.

Interesting that you cite the World cup, so in terms of the betting analogy, what odds was there for Spain to qualify out of the group stage. I don;t bet but would have thought they were odds on. Certainly it would have been long odds for them to be knocked out after two games. They are the only reigning champions to go out after the first two games.

In terms of sporting influence on the referendum, I wonder if the Commonwealth games will have more of an impact to the polls as opposed to an England win.

This is not about England, but about Scotland and it's people

Generali wrote: »

The fact for the polls is that Yes maxes out support at 40%, No's minimum support is 40%. Polls aren't everything and there's only one that counts. I can't see the pollsters getting it this badly wrong unless something substantial changes.

I agree, the Yes campaign are currently behind (although I would dispute your 40% maximum stat)
This link seems to show many instances where they have been greater than 40%
Should Scotland be an independent country?, although I get your point

Generali wrote: »

The betting exchanges have a market view

http://sports.betfair.com/?ti=2378961&tmi=27033458&ex=1&origin=LHMA

It would be nice to get some actual analysis in response. I won't of course but it would be nice.

As above comments on betting odds, betting markets reflect the perceived likely outcome.
They are however not 100% correct in their analysis.

I'm not sure what further form of analysis you are looking for

ruggedtoast

Strewth. Now the referendum has to go to a penalty shoot out does it?

IveSeenTheLight

ruggedtoast wrote: »

Strewth. Now the referendum has to go to a penalty shoot out does it?

LOL, that depends if the votes are equal.

Will the commonwealth late July / early August have more bearing on the September referendum?

BillJones

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

As above comments on betting odds, betting markets reflect the perceived likely outcome.
They are however not 100% correct in their analysis.

I'm not sure what further form of analysis you are looking for

Perceived by whom?

In general, odds should based on betting patterns, not on prior probabilities. If the bookmaker selects his odds such that he has a balanced book (same payout irrespective of outcome) then he expects to pay out the same (on average) as if he bases his odds on his beliefs, but with a lower variance.

IveSeenTheLight

BillJones wrote: »

Perceived by whom?

In general, odds should based on betting patterns, not on prior probabilities. If the bookmaker selects his odds such that he has a balanced book (same payout irrespective of outcome) then he expects to pay out the same (on average) as if he bases his odds on his beliefs, but with a lower variance.

I can understand there as an adjustment as bets are placed to balance risk of likely payouts.

Initially however, there is a balanced simulation of expected results.

Check this link which initially gave USA a 35% chance of progressing past the group stage before a ball was kicked.

After the first game they increased to 69%

Despite a draw, http://worldsoccertalk.com/2014/05/31/world-cup-2014-simulation-our-calculations-of-who-will-advance-past-the-group-stage/"]they are now 86%[/URL]

So these are all taken into account.

I repeat though, Spain's results are a good example of how betting odds are no guarantee of any outcome