Posted on 11/10/2016 3:55:20 AM PST by Trump20162020
A mystery gambler appears to be pretty confident that Hillary Clinton will be the next US President - after placing a staggering £183,000 ($223,000) bet on her to win.
The 44-year-old woman - who had never placed a bet before - staked the bet, on the Democratic candidate at a William Hill shop in Northumberland on Thursday, Chronicle Live reports.
And it appears the whopping stake wasn’t enough for this optimistic punter.
The following day she returned to the branch to place an additional £13,200 on Mrs Clinton to succeed Barack Obama at odds of 1/8.
The woman now stands to receive a £205,916 payout - winnings of £22,716 - if the former Secretary of State defeats the controversial businessman Donald Trump on November 8.
(Excerpt) Read more at mirror.co.uk ...
How did that work out for her?
Never understood folks betting odds on like this. The risk is the same, the payout to risk ratio miniscule.
Heh, a fool and their money are soon parted.
Wanker
If the Price Is Right tuba was ever appropriate, it would be here.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ytCEuuW2_A
Stupid is as stupid does.
Great point about risk/return. I was able to get good odds on predictit.com (bot Trump at .21 cents And his shares are now worth $1). Small potatos compared with this lady’s bet but the point is don’t bet unless the risk return is worth it.
Where’s the “She choose ... poorly” guy from Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade?
Since this is a UK betting story, I thought I’d mention that last year Leicester won the English Premiere League (soccer) title at 5000:1 odds, and some took that bet.
What’s incredible is that they ever got together in the first place.
L
Even if she won, those are crappy odds to earn 1 dollar for every 8 dollars bet. Now she lost it all. Of course with today's MSM, one never knows if these sorts of stories are total fabrications as the woman is not identified. This story has odds of 1/8 of being factual.
I tried to make $100 dollar bets with the local HRC supporters, but they refused to put their money where the big mouths were! That moron had more guts than brains...
I do not understand this, since I am not a gambler.
Does this mean that the gambling house estimated that there was a 1/8 chance that Hillary would win the election? That the chance that Trump would win was 87.5%? Or do I have that completely backwards?
If that gambling house was placing the likelihood of a Trump presidency at 87.5%, it was doing a far better job of estimating the likelihood than most of our pollsters. I wonder what data they had.
And this is what you get for believing Princeton, HuffPo, etc that there was a 99% chance of HRC to win.
A fool, and some cash...
Let’s see what will happen. Anyone have a stopwatch handy?
I believe she bet the money, what I don’t believe is that she never bet before. No one who is not a gambler places that kind of money on their first bet. No matter how confident they are, unless of course they are filthy rich in which case it didn’t hurt her in the least.
“Does this mean that the gambling house estimated that there was a 1/8 chance that Hillary would win the election? That the chance that Trump would win was 87.5%? Or do I have that completely backwards?”
Nope, pretty sure the way it works is that for every eight dollars she bet, she would would get nine dollars back for a Canckles win. So essentially she bet eight to win one dollar.
Tosser
LoL, well played. :)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.