Next Prime Minister

SlimChance said:
You couldn't be more wrong. Can you show me the data that says 25% of horses don't get to Chektenham please?
Click to expand...

Do it yourself, it's not difficult. Look at any market ante post and count up the number of horses quoted (including those with multiple entries) then look back at the historic results and see how many line up. The fall out rate of 25% is easy to see. You only need to look at how many fancied ones have fallen by the wayside since October (same thing happens every year) and then you get another shake out in February as little niggles that affect prepaprations stop horses too close to the festival. These are just the horses that are reported of course. There has to be loads of handicappers who never even hit the news who develop injuries that prevent them from taking part

Politicians might be accident prone, but on nothing like the scale that national hunt horses

a) get injured
b) lose form
c) re route to another race
d) miss the festival
 
Last edited:
SlimChance said:
It's a bit rich you calling Cheltenham ante post "long range" when you are betting on a market that is open ended. March is less than four months away and most front end horses are arbs on Betfair for a reason.
Click to expand...

I suppose I ought to clarify. Show me where I described Cheltenham as long range. You haven't read it properly.

What I've clearly said is

"Had a mildly amusing conversation with Paddy Power though who hadn't heard of George Osborne but 20/1 is now in the long range ante post portfolio, better than some of these daft bets on horses for March of which about 25% won't ever get to post."

I'm afraid you've extrapolated the fact that I've called Cheltenham long range. I've acknowledged that the political bet is long range, and haven't passed a temporal timescale on the Cheltenham bet, only that about 25% of them won't get to post
 
EC1 said:
I am going for Theresa May..currently 13.5 on betfair..for small money
Click to expand...

I can't see that she has a natural power block.

The economy is going to be goodish news all the way to polling day. I think the country has taken a veiw now about Miliband in the last 6 weeks. That points to a Tory win.

If Theresa May then goes up against Osborne, she's putting up her record on immigration, against his on the economy (remember who the voting constituency is). She's going to have to somehow demonstrate that she's more inclusive manager. There are other things in the background. The current Chief Whip is a known enemy, I wouldn't be surprised if he's in possession of ammunition to damage her chances (or comes into possession of it). He won't be without his own supporters and they'll vote against her. Osborne has also cut his teeth as a campaigner, (he managed Camerons leadership campaign and the AV vote of course) she hasn't done so to the same degree, albeit she is a former party chairman (not a particularly effective one). I'm not that scared of Theresa May, but would regard Boris as a threat as the Tories allow the membership to vote now, and he's going to be very popular there

My bigger fear for Osborne being offered a lucrative job outside of politics, or some kind of catastrophic event which momentarily propels the deputy prime Minister into the post
 
I just don't him as leader..just from a personal point of view admittedly..he's smarmy and i don't see him being appealing as vote winner for them...image is big deal with this..same with Boris..he comes across as the party jester..is popular though.

To be fair..if Ed is out of the picture you could back two of em anyway and still get a bit of value.
 
If you think Ed Miliband will lose the next election than why not just bet against him in the election? I still fail to see why you mention Cheltenham ante post in the thread as a comparison. An equally researched bet on Cheltenham has less downside than this bet due to the timescale involved. I'm all for long term bets but anything over 12-18 months is a waste of time.
 
why is it a waste of time?

it just keeps interest going a bit longer..a bit of fun really isn't it?

i don't think anyone is thinking of locking thousands up here really for possibly two years..i think you taking this thread a bit too serious tbh Slim
 
I think the field is really

Osborne
Boris
Unnamed Labour leader
May or Hammond (just about a runner)

I reckon it's easier to pick the next PM at the moment than it is to work out who the next Labour leader would be, yet alone pitch them into a hypothetical election scenario
 
clivex said:
i think teresa may is a good bet. i dont find her stupid at all
Click to expand...

I know someone (well) who has spent quite a bit of time in a room with her and she is the only Tory he rubbishes in an extremely strong way, her understanding of information, situations and how to manage a room.
 
SlimChance said:
If you think Ed Miliband will lose the next election than why not just bet against him in the election? I still fail to see why you mention Cheltenham ante post in the thread as a comparison.
Click to expand...

Price.

That's easily explained. For near on 20 years, I've been doing money ante post on Cheltenham. Sure we'll see no shortage of people surfacing in early March bigging up their ante post prices, (we've all done it when we're proud of one that gets through). What we're less happy for folk to know though is how many never lined up. Well I know my ante post book is normally about 25% to 33% losing bets by post time, if starting it around October. Am I unique? I doubt it. I've had enough conversations with people over the years to know there are plenty of ante post bets struck that the bettor humanely suffocates in the name of embarrassment or convenience, and would raher not admit to.

Last year Tom Segal ran his latest ante post Pricewise selections, I think he takes in 10 races. Five of his selections didn't line up (Alderwood, Royal Boy, Annie Power, Al Ferof & First Mohichan). This is someone who has some access to stables too and is in a better position to elicit running plans (not that it helped his Annie selection). The season before I think he lost 3 out of 10, and lets not forget he starts this series in mid January. He doesn't expose himself to the ones we've already seen miss out

That being so, I'd rather take 20/1 long term about an event that only has 3 or 4 realistic runners on known form (OK there's some potential springers) than taking 20/1 about an event that you can expect to suffer a 25% drop out on, and still encounter greater depth of opposition on the day. The drop out rate is actually nearer to about 70% but I'd accept that a lot of horses in the ante post books aren't realistic runners, but then have you seen the PM book? Jeremy Clarkson, Tony Blair and Sebastian Coe all appear variously. Like I said, if Farage is eleventh in the betting, and you can probably discount 50% of the field ahead of him because there can only be one leader of the opposition.

A successful chancellor (which is what Osborne is shaping up to be) is at a terrific advantage when it comes to inheriting. The last two times we had a Prime Minister change from within the ruling party it was the Chancellor that won the leadership
 
Last edited:
Hamm said:
I know someone (well) who has spent quite a bit of time in a room with her and she is the only Tory he rubbishes in an extremely strong way, her understanding of information, situations and how to manage a room.
Click to expand...

I've heard second and third hand accounts that I'm asked to believe originate in Whitehall that would suggest her civil servants had to endure a period of adjustment when briefing her. There is a reason I chose the word stupid, but I'm led to believe she struggles with complexity
 
SlimChance said:
I don't think there is anything smart about betting on this market.
Click to expand...

I don't see anyone trying to be smart really..lighten up..its a bit of interest away from the usual 4 legged stuff

I get plenty of "smart" when i'm watching something come in i've spent a lot of time on..this is just an aside to that.

Now get back to your twig hopping threads before i post that picture i took of you in bed this morning:)
 
Hamm said:
I know someone (well) who has spent quite a bit of time in a room with her and she is the only Tory he rubbishes in an extremely strong way, her understanding of information, situations and how to manage a room.
Click to expand...

Thinking about it, Norman Baker (who does have a reputation for being intelligent/ academic - and mad!) recently resigned on her didn't he suggesting that working for her was like walking in mud. Mud being stodgy and thick.

One thing you can be sure of, if she is regarded as being stupid, there is no way the academic snobs that populate the parliamentary party will let her get into the last two!
 
Last edited:
Evs Miliband is essentially Evs Labour winning the next election; and I'd want around 6/4 that outcome, as things stand at present

Osborne at 20/1 is terrific value and 14/1 sound enough too

May at 12/1 is tempting and I personally have a good bit of time for her; however my concern is her long-term health having quite recently been diagnosed with Type-1 diabetes, and I just wonder whether, in the event of a leadership contest, she would even stand. Home Secretary is by no means a 'soft' job-at-the-top but it does at least not involve flying hither and yon around the world on a regular basis: a practice that places stiff demands on the strongest constitution
 
Have to agree. The longer hes around in the number 2 job the closer he gets to number one. Its no bad thing that he hasnt made the ambition obvious (maybe it really isnt there) unlike nutter Brown. He is very in control of his current role and longer hes around the more respect he will have.

Its a bloody good bet

Talking of Brown, hes off now and in truth i wish him well. One of the strangest politicians ever but there was a lot to respect about him.


Im baffled by slims comments i must admit. :ninja:
 
I'm just waiting for him to say "I have no ambition to be leader" (the sure fire politicians coded way of saying, "I very much want to be leader") :lol:. The other thing to bear in mind is respective ages. If Cameron follows a similar trajectory to Blair, Theresa May will be nudging mid 60's when the succession is in the offing. I'm honestly thinking she's not in play, and the fact that she's made little secret of her ambition needn't help her cause. As Clive says, those who openly covet the position a bit too much, tend not to be rewarded. Those who diligently get on with their jobs (like Phillip Hammond - or John Major if you like) tend to be acknowledged in the long run. Boris would be a worry at the final run off, but he's gaff prone, and they'll be picking a leader to hold the country together not just one section of it

As regards Labour, one would like to think they'll have a leader, but right now it's difficult to see who. Chukka would be my guess, but I'd be happier trying to predict the next PM than I would the next Labour leader
 
Last edited:
I know through my contacts in the legal/finance world a couple that know Chukka.

Not complimentary.......

Sometimes these things can be professional jealousy but might be that he (like D Milliband) is not much liked within party.
 
If we take the view that Miliband is a dead duck and that 11/10 is ridiculously short, then what is left for the next wave of Labour

Cooper 16/1
Burnham 16/1
Chukka 33/1
Johnson 33/1

It seems unlikely to me that Ed can win an outright, which means he's going to require Clegg to work with him. Don't see it. The only way that happens is if UKIP take seats and push the Libs into Labours arms. That only happens though if the Tories are doing a deal with UKIP, and they only do that if they need to in order to form a government. In other words, even if the Libs do join a rainbow coalition with the SNP and Plaid, it won't be enough

So if Miliband can only become PM with an outright majority (I'm not totally convinced that need be the case incidentally but bear with it for now) he'll be out the book, which means the Labour leadership candidates then shorten up as he resigns.

It wouldn't be bad to have one of them running for you, but only at a price

I just don't think that Mrs Balls will win a party election. Alan Johnson would be 69 at the time of the next election. Surely he's a red-herring

It's Burnham or Chukka in my mind. At the price I'd back Chukka, as I also feel he'll out perform Burnham in any debate that leads into the vote. Burnham however is going to popular within the college, but in the wake of Ed Miliband, might the Labour party be concentrating again on picking someone they think is best equipped to win (aka Blair) rather than someone who best represents their values? Sooner or later pragmatism will prevail over principle.

There is a bit of me wondering whether a cover bet on Chukka seals the deal!!! Circa 2017 you could have the only opposition candidate running for you, as well as the most likely replacement ahead of an election should Cameron decide to step down. The only fly in the ointment is bloody Boris the spider.

Mind you, I'm taking a massive jump in thinking Chukka wins, and in truth, I think Andy Burnham is probably more likely to win a leadership battle on the current rules. It all depends on the scale of Labours defeat and where the blame gets laid.
 
Last edited:
In my opinion a more interesting market is the Republican candidate for the 2016 US presidential election.
 
Most frightning you mean!

I wonder if they'd call a market on America to drop a nuclear bomb on an unnamed country a related contingency. Oh hell, at least when we had politicians genuinely schooled in the politics of the cold war there was no real sense that anyone was gagging at the bit to do it. That list just undelrines what a psychotic lurch to the right America has undergone in the GOP's increasingly worrying deal with God.

Hillary - it's not just the Uncle Sam who needs you, it's planet earth
 
Quoting what I put on another thread a couple of weeks ago:
'Latest bookies odds for expected seats after the next election show Labour and Conservative low to middle 280s, LibDem and SNP about 25 each, UKIP about 8, others about 25 with only about 10 Tory sympathetic. I suppose Labour, LibDem and SNP might do a deal but it looks heavy odds on a minority government at this stage. The LibDems are 1/2 to get 21-40 seats and must be about 1/10 in a match bet with UKIP.
Still 6 months to go though and who knows what scandals the press might invent.'

As far as I know, from convention, the monarch will invite the person judged most likely to be successful in the task to form the next government. Where there's an absolute majority, no problem. If there's no absolute majority I believe that advisors take soundings on coalition options but if there's no coalition with a majority then the party leader with the most seats will get the call.
From these two markets:
http://www.oddschecker.com/politics/british-politics/next-uk-general-election/prime-minister-after-general-election
http://www.oddschecker.com/politics/british-politics/next-uk-general-election/next-government
it seems to me that, while no-one seems to see Miliband as a natural choice for PM, it's foolish to base a complete betting strategy for 5 months time on assuming he's a non-runner. A Labour led coalition or a minority Labour government is probably about 4/5 in the book at the moment and, if that comes to pass it will be Miliband who is PM even if only for a few months, the most likely scenario for me. I wouldn't knock Warbler's 20/1 for Gideon but, so far out, you wouldn't want lower odds on any eventuality.
 
Back
Top