IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolet/v109y2010i2p82-84.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Systematic and varying biases in parallel state contingent gambling markets

Author

Listed:
  • Johnson, J.E.V.
  • Peel, D.
  • Peirson, J.

Abstract

Pari-mutuel odds for longshots in UK horseraces exceed those offered by bookmakers. This effect is less for winning compared to losing horses and is explained by informed gamblers betting disproportionately with the pari-mutuel on winning horses.

Suggested Citation

  • Johnson, J.E.V. & Peel, D. & Peirson, J., 2010. "Systematic and varying biases in parallel state contingent gambling markets," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 109(2), pages 82-84, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolet:v:109:y:2010:i:2:p:82-84
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165-1765(10)00279-X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Harry Markowitz, 1952. "The Utility of Wealth," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 60(2), pages 151-151.
    2. Vaughan Williams, Leighton, 1999. "Information Efficiency in Betting Markets: A Survey," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(1), pages 1-30, January.
    3. Shin, Hyun Song, 1991. "Optimal Betting Odds against Insider Traders," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 101(408), pages 1179-1185, September.
    4. Gabriel, Paul E & Marsden, James R, 1990. "An Examination of Market Efficiency in British Racetrack Betting," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(4), pages 874-885, August.
    5. Gabriel, Paul E & Marsden, James R, 1991. "An Examination of Efficiency in British Racetrack Betting: Errata and Corrections," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 99(3), pages 657-659, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jaiho Chung & Joon Ho Hwang, 2010. "An Empirical Examination of the Parimutuel Sports Lottery Market versus the Bookmaker Market," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 76(4), pages 884-905, April.
    2. David Paton & Leighton Vaughan Williams, 2001. "Monopoly Rents and Price Fixing in Betting Markets," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 19(3), pages 265-278, November.
    3. Tai, Chung-Ching & Lin, Hung-Wen & Chie, Bin-Tzong & Tung, Chen-Yuan, 2019. "Predicting the failures of prediction markets: A procedure of decision making using classification models," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 297-312.
    4. M. Sung & J. E. V. Johnson, 2010. "Revealing Weak‐Form Inefficiency in a Market for State Contingent Claims: The Importance of Market Ecology, Modelling Procedures and Investment Strategies," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 77(305), pages 128-147, January.
    5. Zhang, Chi & Thijssen, Jacco, 2022. "On sticky bookmaking as a learning device in horse-racing betting markets," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    6. Bruce, Alistair C. & Johnson, Johnnie E.V., 2005. "Market ecology and decision behaviour in state-contingent claims markets," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 56(2), pages 199-217, February.
    7. Martin Kukuk & Stefan Winter, 2008. "An Alternative Explanation of the Favorite-Longshot Bias," Journal of Gambling Business and Economics, University of Buckingham Press, vol. 2(2), pages 79-96, September.
    8. Kai Fischer & Justus Haucap, 2022. "Home advantage in professional soccer and betting market efficiency: The role of spectator crowds," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 75(2), pages 294-316, May.
    9. Babatunde Buraimo & David Peel & Rob Simmons, 2013. "Systematic Positive Expected Returns in the UK Fixed Odds Betting Market: An Analysis of the Fink Tank Predictions," IJFS, MDPI, vol. 1(4), pages 1-15, December.
    10. Michael Cain & David Law & David Peel, 2002. "Is one price enough to value a state-contingent asset correctly? Evidence from a gambling market," Applied Financial Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(1), pages 33-38.
    11. Jianbo Li & Minggao Gu & Tao Hu, 2012. "General partially linear varying-coefficient transformation models for ranking data," Journal of Applied Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(7), pages 1475-1488, January.
    12. Alistair Bruce & David Marginson, 2014. "Power, Not Fear: A Collusion-Based Account of Betting Market Inefficiency," International Journal of the Economics of Business, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(1), pages 77-97, February.
    13. Jinook Jeong & Jee Young Kim & Yoon Jae Ro, 2019. "On the efficiency of racetrack betting market: a new test for the favourite-longshot bias," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 51(54), pages 5817-5828, November.
    14. Smith, Michael A. & Vaughan Williams, Leighton, 2010. "Forecasting horse race outcomes: New evidence on odds bias in UK betting markets," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 543-550, July.
    15. Kai Fischer & Justus Haucap, 2020. "Betting Market Efficiency in the Presence of Unfamiliar Shocks: The Case of Ghost Games during the Covid-19 Pandemic," CESifo Working Paper Series 8526, CESifo.
    16. Michael A. Smith & David Paton & Leighton Vaughan-Williams, 2004. "Costs, biases and betting markets: new evidence," Working Papers 2004/5, Nottingham Trent University, Nottingham Business School, Economics Division.
    17. Stefan Winter & Martin Kukuk, 2008. "Do horses like vodka and sponging? - On market manipulation and the favourite-longshot bias," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 40(1), pages 75-87.
    18. Kent Grote & Victor Matheson, 2011. "The Economics of Lotteries: A Survey of the Literature," Working Papers 1109, College of the Holy Cross, Department of Economics.
    19. D. A. Peel & D. Law & M. Cain, 1999. "Market movers and tote and bookmakers returns: further empirical evidence on a market anomaly," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 6(12), pages 801-804.
    20. Hegarty, Tadgh & Whelan, Karl, 2023. "Disagreement and Market Structure in Betting Markets: Theory and Evidence from European Soccer," MPRA Paper 117243, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecolet:v:109:y:2010:i:2:p:82-84. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolet .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.