Yes......it's totally different than betting the majority of the roulette numbers, as that is totally random.
Is it as likely to you that obama runs the board and gets every single electoral vote as he does not??
Almost regardless of obama electoral vote count (within reason) I can beat the current offered price on obama?
No one is telling you to bet both sides anyway.....
First off I am not betting both sides... I got obama wins at -113 when the price was right... This is your bet we are talking about...
I am not going to hedge it either... like I said, hedge talk usually starts at odds like +800... The fact that you were talking hedge on a +150 bet and a "partial hedge" at that didnt sit right with me as a gambler... that is why I asked you to talk about the actual math behind your numbers...
taking your "Obama wins with 329 or less electoral votes for +150". and doing a partial hedge with the liability of losing it all and dropping your odds to -274 just seems beyond watered down and from conventional gambler wisdom seems like a poor bet...
I mean in with vig/juice like -274, people would call you a square by trying to play it safe, but there is nothing safe about your bet when there is the loophole of losing it all if Obama wins with 330 or more electoral votes...
so to say regardless of vote count is just not true... vote count makes a huge difference in your "partial hedge"...
and as I said earlier, I am sure that your "Obama wins with 329 or less electoral votes for +150" will get better odds then Obama wins because once again it is like playing majority of the roulette numbers...
You are correct that the comparison is not exactly the same as the each number has the same chance to hit and therefore each outcome pays the same...
But what happens in your bet is that outcomes of less probability have higher payouts and then outcomes of higher probability have lower payouts... and then with how you structure the math behind the allocation of units, each outcome pays relatively the same...
so although the probability of each out come is not the same as in roulette, the fact that you make the choice to structure the allocation of your units to pay out relatively the same is very similar to roulette... So what you chose to do mirrors the roulette table outcome...
Perhaps with the 3 possible outcomes the metaphor of betting on soccer would make more sense to you... You "partial hedge bet" is like betting on two of the three out comes in terms of win, lose and tie...
and then making the choice to allocate units so that both of your picks pay out the same and you leave yourself open for the outcome you did not bet on...
I talked about the large amount of money needed to profit on -274 for a "partial hedge" on your "Obama wins with 329 or less electoral votes for +150" as needing a large amount of units and the risk of that is concerning...
But as a gambler, tying up a large number of units on a -274 for a "partial hedge" with the possible risk of losing it all seems like a poor investment of resources that could be used on NBA/NHL/MLB/NFL and whatever you want to bet on before november...
It seems like my "gambler gut feelings" in my original statements make more and more sense when we break down the math and number on your "partial hedge" on your "Obama wins with 329 or less electoral votes" bet...
Wouldnt you agree or am I wrong.... as I said earlier, I do not mind being wrong...