Once again, a BetFair spin doctor misunderstands the prediction market approach.

Via Niall O’Connor, the Cyprus Mail (citing BetFair spin doctor Michael Robb):

Political markets are different to sports markets because the people betting have an interest in the subject such as academics, journalists, people who work at it in their day jobs. It’s different to sports betting such as horse racing or dog racing, which is more of a gamble. Here there’s a science to it, there’s more of an analytical thing to it. It’s people who know what they’re talking about, hence why they’re good at predicting the outcome.

Yes, there are better advanced indicators in politics (e.g., the scientific polls) than in sports —which can be more stochastic.

No, I don’t think that the political traders are made up mainly by “academics, journalists”, etc. Political traders are just like sports traders: they want to make money. They are no smarter than sports traders; they are just better informed, by essence. As for the “academics, journalists”, etc., who talk up the political prediction markets in the media or blogs, they don’t trade that much —Mike Smithson at PoliticalBetting.com may be the exception. BetFair spin doctor Michael Robb makes the common mistake to confuse political traders with the talking heads who publish about political prediction markets. In my experience of 5 years, they are two different species. You have the traders, and you have the “onlookers” —as Emile Servan-Schreiber of NewsFutures (one of the smartest prediction market veterans) tagged them.

Once again, we see that Ireland-based John Delaney of InTrade-TradeSports (or even Emile Servan-Schreiber of NewsFutures) has a better understanding of the prediction market approach than the UK-centric Britons at Hammersmith. That will change with time, though, and the BetFair people will compute it up, ultimately. They are slow to catch up, though. When will BetFair take the prediction markets seriously?