Cliffs, Citations And Backward Results

The recent increase in hits on this blog (343 a day over the past fortnight) may or may not be related to its temporary interest in politics and political betting, (if Betfair can include Politics under Sports, then surely so can I – although Blood Sports might be more accurate), but it appears the esteemed Professor Leighton Vaughan Williams (Economics Professor and editor of my imminent summer holiday reading Information Efficiency in Financial and Betting Markets) may be a visitor.

My reference to jumping off a cliff in yesterday’s post has been picked up, although no credit was given. I’ll get over it, or it could always be a coincidence, or possibly a case of great minds thinking alike. It's a great mind to be thinking alike with, so I've read:

He Is The Messiah!

He's Not The Messiah - He's A Very Naughty Boy

Having explained my thinking in that earlier post regarding whether or not Brexit will ever happen, and having put my money where my mouth and betting that Article 50 will neither be triggered in 2016 nor before July 2017, I really was hoping that I would hear opposing views as to how, and specifically under what circumstances, others can envisage this event happening, and taking it one step further, if Article 50 is not invoked by the end of 2016, when and how might this momentous event happen?

"Not triggered before July 2017" is currently trading at ~2.22. Is this a value bet?

As I rather suspected, I didn't get any straight answers to my question, but Liberace fan James did stop by to kindly suggest that I may be having a mid-life crisis. The number of times I have been asked that question! Sadly, mid-life, and it’s many accompanying crises, was many years ago for me now, but anyway he writes:

I wonder which is exploring the depths faster, Sterling or the rabid left that appears to have hacked into this former sports betting blog?

Gold is up against all currencies. Surely that can't be true if only the UK is to be punished for its folly.

Still, with my bullion holding, as Liberace once said, "I cried all the way to the bank."

If the original author of this blog is still around then I wish him well whilst he passes through his mid-life crisis.

Green All Over has turned into Red Faced All Over with the standard of research and biased use of quotes in recent weeks.

It is now very hard to keep a straight face whilst reading this blog. Stick to 'Musings on Backing, Laying, Trading, Punting, In-Running and more on the Betting Exchanges (Betfair, BETDAQ) and related items of interest in the wide world of sports investing since 2008. This is NOT a P&L blog. "' and all will return to normal.

And finally, thanks for sending all your bored readers over to my website. My viewer stats have gone through the roof!

Comments are always welcome, so long as they are polite, but as wordy as it was, I’m not seeing any evidence or even ideas presented to contradict any of my facts or how my standard of research is lacking. If publications such as the Financial Times, The Independent, The Guardian, The Economist, Business Insider, HM Revenue and Customs, New Economics Foundation, Professor Leighton V Williams, David Rodin, Robert Peston et al are considered ‘lacking’, then we have a conspiracy theorist in our midst, and I’m really not sure what sources would be acceptable. Bob the Builder, Postman Pat, or perhaps The Sun or Daily Mail?

Hmmm - perhaps not. Admittedly, using Deadspin as a source last week might be borderline, but that wasn't on quite such a serious topic, although an important one for naïve bettors to read. As for sterling's plunge as mentioned by James, perhaps I should stick to sources cited by respected bloggers:

Screenshots showing the decline of sterling or the standing of various indices post-the non-legally binding referendum results are facts / reporting, not opinions / scaremongering, and facts are just that, regardless of one’s political leanings. 

Believing something is true because you’d like it to be true has no bearing whatsoever on whether it’s actually true.

James’ reference to the non-legally binding referendum’s result as ”folly” (definition : lack of good sense; foolishness) is interesting though - a slip revealing that he really is just being mischievous and playing devil’s advocate to attract more visitors to his blog. Apparently it’s working, which is to the benefit of all us sports (which includes politics) investing bloggers. Blog hits are not a zero sum game, and incidentally, the rise in the value of gold is because of the political and economic uncertainty. The UK is not being "punished for its folly" - it's market forces reacting.

The mention that "It is now very hard to keep a straight face whilst reading this blog", is particularly appreciated. I sometimes think some of my more subtle jokes and references get completely missed, but apparently not always, and it's good to know that the extra effort made in recent posts to maintain my sense of humour has not been wasted.   

Continuing on a lighter note, and I couldn’t believe how long it took me at work to explain to one of my team that Roger Federer is not the oldest player to reach a Wimbledon semi-final, as he rather loudly claimed. I told him that Ken Rosewall was older, and after some research, he came back to tell me “… but Rosewall reached the Final, not the semi-final”. What an unforced error! Hard to reach the final without going through the semi-final (at least since 1922 anyway), and harder than I thought it would be to get that point across. With mid-year reviews upon us, it’ll be hard to prevent that exchange from influencing my assessment.

And while we are on the topic of tennis, is it only me who finds it very annoying when a result is given backwards?

The first Tweet from Sky News Newsdesk is correct. The second Tweet from sibling Sky Sports News HQ annoyingly has it wrong in the text, but correct in the image below it. 

Andy Murray did not win 6-7, 1-6, 6-3, 6-4, 1-6. It's like saying Portugal beat Wales 0-2.