[foxhound6]

> You would have bet the farm on the undervalued bet on the prediction markets.

This is what's frustrating about sites like 538. They have Biden as an 87% chance to win. A betting site I frequent has Biden's winning odds as -180 (1.556 for Europeans). If they really believe the accuracy of their models, they should literally be betting the farm on a Biden win.

[srtjstjsj]

That's not how gambling works. You don't "bet the farm" on a single 87% chance event to win 1.5 farms.

[gifnamething]

That is how betting works when you hedge.

[anonymoushn]

How are you planning to hedge this?

[gifnamething]

Uh, bet on the other guy

[anonymoushn]

At most (all?) venues, betting on both guys is worse than not betting on either guy. So this sounds like a bad plan.

[anonymoushn]

The Kelly criterion says you bet 61% of the farm in this situation.

[rsynnott]

> If they really believe the accuracy of their models, they should literally be betting the farm on a Biden win.

I mean, maybe they are; how would you know? (Though it would seem vaguely improper; not sure about the journalistic ethics take on this but it's at the very least not a great look.) Presumably the money a few 538 employees could bet wouldn't shift the betting markets very much.