Post Howard announcement betting market check
There was a small (almost microscopic) movement in Howard’s favour following his announcement to stay on and contest the next election. The average of the four bookmakers suggested a 57.1 per cent probability of a Coalition government (up from 56.7 on Monday) following the 2007 Federal election.
- For a Coalition win Centrebet would pay $1.57 and for a Labor win it would pay $2.25. The implied probability of a Coalition win at the next election is 58.9 per cent (up from 57.9)
- For a Coalition win IASBet would pay $1.70 and for a Labor win it would pay $2.15. The implied probability of a Coalition win at the next election is 55.8 per cent (unchanged from Monday)
- SportingBet is paying $1.70 for a Coalition win and $2.10 for a Labor win. The implied probability of a Coalition win at the next election is 55.3 per cent (unchanged from Monday)
- SportsBet is paying $1.60 for a Coalition win and $2.25 for a Labor win. The implied probability of a Coalition win at the next election is 58.4 per cent (up from 57.9)
Changing the topic: I am intrigued that over the past 18 months, Centrebet’s odds (in red) have almost always favoured the Coalition in comparison with IASbet’s odds (in blue). More recently, its odds have typically favoured the Coalition over the rest of the market (with the possible exception of Sportsbet). In a competitive market, I would expect the biases to swap around randomly over time.
This morning’s observation left me wondering whether the Coalition was making strategic bets with the larger bookmaker (Centrebet) to bolster its image in the reporting of the betting market. If you have a less conspiratorial explanation, I would love to hear it. (For example, could the apparent bias be an artefact of the typically higher over round in Centrebet’s and Sportsbet’s odds?)
The usual graphs are here. You may need to hit the refresh or reload button on your browser to see the latest graphs.
