Mr Bairn Posted July 14, 2014 Share Posted July 14, 2014 ICM, Panelbase, Survation and TNS all weight by recalled 2011 vote (on top of weighting by age group, male and female) Yougov weight by 2011, but don't ask for a recalled vote but rather by inforation YG held over from immediately after that election. Lately they've also gone to the effort of splitting down that SNP vote into SNP 2010 SNP 2011 and Labour 2010 SNP 2011. Ispos-Mori wieght by some other demographic profile that I'm uncertain of. Remember also, that how the pollsters collect the data must affect their performance. Online pollsters may well end up asking the same people over and over (or at least there is a risk of that), face to face (or even phonebank) polling is less anonymous and may lead to false answers from those being polled being uncomfortable in airing their views. Landline phone banking may lead to oversampling one demographic to the expense of others, meaning that you'd radically upweight the other demographics, introducing error from small sample sizes. I think the "red-nats" is quite a good idea. It's clear that many many people voted SNP for the first time in 2011, and this is just a theory of mine but I think that group might be one of the most split down the middle. I know that most of my family are in that group, and are no voters, but many first time SNP voters would have implicitly became yes supporters at that point. I feel like the "red-nats" are a very important swing group in this referendum. Now I'm not saying that yougov polling is necessarily right, but making concessions for "red-nats" is a sound principle imo. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
renton Posted July 14, 2014 Share Posted July 14, 2014 I think the "red-nats" is quite a good idea. It's clear that many many people voted SNP for the first time in 2011, and this is just a theory of mine but I think that group might be one of the most split down the middle. I know that most of my family are in that group, and are no voters, but many first time SNP voters would have implicitly became yes supporters at that point. I feel like the "red-nats" are a very important swing group in this referendum. Now I'm not saying that yougov polling is necessarily right, but making concessions for "red-nats" is a sound principle imo. I'm not so sure, It involves breaking it down into smaller subsamples and weighting them to meet a chosen composition. It can't help but introduce a greater uncertainty in the final numbers. The other pollsters all show around 15-17% SNP voters wanting to vote no, so it's not like the others are sampling nothing but rabid nats, so why was the 'correction' necessary - what made YG feel that it was a necessary correction to make? Certainly Kellner laid out his theory on the YG blog and equally Survation responded robustly to that. As you say, they may be right, they may be wrong - but I'm struggling with the logic of introducing a greater uncertainty into your numbers. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Confidemus Posted July 14, 2014 Share Posted July 14, 2014 I see Confidemus' ignoring of HB went well. I'm in your top 5 worst posters, I don't know why you're bothered.. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Confidemus Posted July 14, 2014 Share Posted July 14, 2014 Know what's pretty tragic? Confi is always accusing H_B of dedicating his life to this place. Well H_B averages 14 posts per day, Confi averages 9. Hardly a huge differential. At his current rate of posting confi will have 32000 posts by the time he's been here a decade. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Bairn Posted July 14, 2014 Share Posted July 14, 2014 ??? A dog with a microphone? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Confidemus Posted July 14, 2014 Share Posted July 14, 2014 ??? A dog with a microphone? Investigative Scrappy Doo. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Bairn Posted July 14, 2014 Share Posted July 14, 2014 Investigative Scrappy Doo. What? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blaven Posted July 14, 2014 Share Posted July 14, 2014 Haha. Id forgot what he looked like. Your too kind by the way. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Confidemus Posted July 14, 2014 Share Posted July 14, 2014 What? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Bairn Posted July 14, 2014 Share Posted July 14, 2014 Eh? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Confidemus Posted July 14, 2014 Share Posted July 14, 2014 Eh? You, my friend are Scrappy Doo. An irritating little tit, full of bravado, apeing the big boys. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUFC90 Posted July 14, 2014 Share Posted July 14, 2014 He's still none the wiser What a tit. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P45 Posted July 14, 2014 Share Posted July 14, 2014 I don't know if this has been posted but Oddschecker has the percentage of bets placed on the referendum at 58% on Yes and 42% on No. The fact that No still is the massive favourite means that fewer people are betting big cash on No. Maybe to make the odds look favourable towards No. That or lots of people are putting small bets on Yes. Either way more people are betting Yes than No. It would be interesting to see only Scottish bets. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_B Posted July 14, 2014 Share Posted July 14, 2014 (edited) It's the opposite. No has attracted the big hitters. The amount of cash bet on No will dwarf that on Yes, though the volume likely won't. Very few people will put £5 on No at 1/7 but may well be happy to chuck away a fiver on Yes at their odds. I'd expect the amount of money on each outcome to be around 80/20 or higher No v Yes based on the huge sums bookmakers have publicly stated they've taken from No betting big hitters Edited July 14, 2014 by H_B 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeeTillEhDeh Posted July 14, 2014 Share Posted July 14, 2014 I don't know if this has been posted but Oddschecker has the percentage of bets placed on the referendum at 58% on Yes and 42% on No. The fact that No still is the massive favourite means that fewer people are betting big cash on No. Maybe to make the odds look favourable towards No. That or lots of people are putting small bets on Yes. Either way more people are betting Yes than No. It would be interesting to see only Scottish bets. It's probably self-deluded Nats who believe the hype about their chances. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ecto Posted July 14, 2014 Share Posted July 14, 2014 Ladbrokes took a 10k bet on a Yes win at 9/2, that was on Saturday, No still 1/7 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P45 Posted July 14, 2014 Share Posted July 14, 2014 It's the opposite. No has attracted the big hitters. The amount of cash bet on No will dwarf that on Yes, though the volume likely won't. Very few people will put £5 on No at 1/7 but may well be happy to chuck away a fiver on Yes at their odds. I'd expect the amount of money on each outcome to be around 80/20 or higher No v Yes based on the huge sums bookmakers have publicly stated they've taken from No betting big hitters That is what I was saying. The No bet is getting big cash from a fewer number of people to weight the odds to make it look like No is clear favourite, when in reality the bookies are taking less bets on it. The odds don't give a clear picture of the way people will vote. That is assuming people will bet the way they will vote. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_B Posted July 14, 2014 Share Posted July 14, 2014 I'm not sure you understand betting. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P45 Posted July 14, 2014 Share Posted July 14, 2014 I'm not sure you understand betting. Well as I am agreeing with you about it then you don't either. Have you ever made a point on here that hasn't been shot down as total bullshit? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_B Posted July 14, 2014 Share Posted July 14, 2014 Well as I am agreeing with you about it then you don't either. Have you ever made a point on here that hasn't been shot down as total bullshit? You aren't agreeing with me, you are just too dumb to realise it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.