Yes, this does look likely. The difference this time I suppose is that last year it was all new, and no-one knew how it could be managed. Whereas in 2021 we have last year as an example of how it can be done. I do expect a full calendar this year, particularly as the vaccine starts to have an effect. But yes, inevitably there will be some postponements and cancellations.

I think it's quite scary, actually. The US leads the world in many ways, and often what you see in the US today, you see replicated in other countries tomorrow. Democracy is in quite a bad place at the moment - of course it could have been worse, but the fallout from the election does demonstrate the sort of effect that such polarising politics can have, especially where there is scant regard for truth. We should hope that other coutries don't follow this path.

I do like the option to cash in once the odds have changed, prior to the actual outcome.
It does perhaps incentivise people to make bets on events where they think the odds are likely to fluctuate considerably, so there's a good chance that it some point it will swing your way and you can take a profit irrespective of what the eventual outcome turns out to be.




---

The below is I think a difficult one. Remember the recent excitement over chemical signatures in the atmosphere of Venus? Life doesn't necessarily mean little green men. This one is really difficult to call.

It does have a purpose, though. It prevents him running again in 2024.
Still, not sure it's a good idea, or what effect this will have on an already riled-up Trump fanbase. Actually, forget that, I am sure of the effect. Expect a gun-totin' outing to the Capitol.

If Trump thinks he won, then he should provide evidence to support his claim, which should then be considered in court, and everyone should then abide by the court's verdict. If anyone disagrees with the verdict they can then supply evidence to support their claim, and take it back to court.

That's how it should work and how it has to work to ensure transparency and accuracy. All hypothetical really though as Trump hasn't supplied any evidence. Unless he can come up with something quickly, then it's already settled. Tantrums and imploring people to storm the Capitol don't really support his cause. Evidence or at the very least reasonable doubt are what we need.

It depends on the specific event though, surely? For example I placed a bet on the below - only a small bet as it's play money anyway, but it seems to me an absolute nailed-on certainty that the Dems would start a second impeachment process. Even if there's little chance of them winning, it absolutely gives them the moral high ground, and leaves Republicans in the difficult situation of either betraying their leader or else appearing to condone the invasion of the Capitol. It's win-win for the Dems, regardless of outcome.
I'm perhaps a little late to the party as 'yes' is now 85%, but it's still favourable.

https://futuur.com/q/category/2438/transition-of-power

Obviously these two statements are linked, and it is starting to look like Messi is putting some of last summer's chaos behind him. Once he returns to form, he pulls the team with him. Nice to see that he is starting to consistently appear on the scoresheet now, too. I do hope he'll overtake Ronaldo one day on total goals scored, as Messi is certainly the better player.

It's horrific, isn't it? Sport is a bit of an irrelevance really at the moment.


A bit ghoulish, but of course if you can somehow predict which teams will have a Covid outbreak, and place a bet before the odds change, you have a decent chance of beating the system. It's unpleasant and I certainly wouldn't try to do this, but I wouldn't be surprised if somewhere out there someone is matching pandemic progression against football fixtures.

How will Trump leave the White House?

In retrospect, the answer was always going to be 'after an attempted coup'. I really should have seen that coming, and made it the first choice in the poll. It WAS first choice, but the Dems stole it.

Of course, barring impeachment, he does still have some time left for a second try. Perhaps 'four years after a successful coup' is a viable option - but then why abide by that pesky two-term limit? 'In a body bag' could cover a multitude of potential outcomes.

Bitcointalk Profile Link: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1118642
Futuur Account Name: Cnut237
Current amount of posts (including this one): 3008
Amount of EARNED merit in the last 120 days: 128
Do you frequently post in the Gambling sections (Yes/No): Yes

Will update sig and avatar promptly if accepted.

Bitcointalk Username: Cnut237
Profile link: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1118642
Rank: Hero
Current post: 3007
Btc Address: bc1q35y86908na4ep32ww38ha4gk4ssuvw89m2leqz

(Amount of merit earned in the last 120 days: 129)



Will update sig and avatar promptly if accepted.

A dramatic late swing in the voting gives us a new winner! Don't bother cross-checking this against the results at the top of the page - that's fake news. The totals below are the real results.

I don't understand this opposition to vaccination.

Perhaps there is an argument that this one has been developed too quickly and has not been tested sufficiently... but as there is such high demand and nations are only getting small quantities at a time, it's generally the oldest people and frontline health workers who are getting the vaccine first anyway, so unless you're in one of these categories, there are plenty of guinea pigs ahead of you in the queue to ensure safety.

'Too quick and not tested sufficiently' is the only reasonable argument. Any argument against vaccination in general doesn't make sense. How can anyone look at smallpox, or polio, and want them back, and deny that vaccination is what eradicated them?

Yes. This is a good illustration of how politics works. Promise anything you like, in order to get elected. Then once you are elected, well, job done, there is no need to then deliver on those promises.
Having said this, curing cancer is obviously a great goal, and if he can actually put some effort into this, even by just diverting some wasteful spending (say some of the defence budget) towards this, then that's certainly a Good Thing.

It really is

Some groups are starting to form though. Everyone from Southampton up, that big group of teams on 26 points, are in the top group. Then there's a 'mid-table' group forming from West Ham to Burnley. Finally the bottom four seem to be slowly being cut adrift now, a clear points gap, and games played gap, between Brighton and Burnley. Note also that none of the bottom four have won in their last five games. It's also looking fairly likely that Palace will drift into that bottom group before too long.

Sheff U look relegated already. West Brom with only one win all season also look destined for the drop.
Not sure who the favourite for the 3rd relegation spot would be. Fulham and Brighton haven't won in their last 5, but Fulham at least have 4 draws and only 1 defeat in 5. Palace are a concern - they may be up in 14th at the moment, but are sinking like a stone. If Arsenal hadn't beaten Chelsea, I'd have to have had them there as relegation contenders, too.

Yes, people are people, irrespective of origin. In my own country - and I suspect this is true of many countries - the areas where there is a high degree of ethnic mixture have less racism. The most racist and xenophobic areas are the poorer cities and rural areas that are almost 100% white. In general, people who regularly intermingle with people of other ethnicities are less racist... because they see that people are people, and there should not be any distinction based on skin colour, language etc. But across the country as a whole there are still plenty of people who are willing to see anyone 'different' as the enemy.

I watched it, too. I don't know how much was Villa being good and how much Palace being bad, but the gulf between the two teams was significant. Of course Palace had to chase the game after going behind, and Villa could afford to sit back and catch them on the break, but still, a side playing with 10 men for half the game shouldn't then go on to score another two goals without reply. 3-0 is flattering to Palace, it could easily have been 6 or 7, even with the 10 men. Traore first half and Watkins second half both hit the post and Watkins and Grealish should both have scored on other occasions. Palace barely threatened the Villa keeper.

A favourite trick of the political class is always to create some external villain who represents an existential threat to freedom or 'life as we know it'. China replaces the Soviets. Yellow peril replaces red peril. No, this is too easy, and people shouldn't fall for it. The strategy is simplistic, transparent, and repeated ad nauseam.

If you focus the people's attention onto some external 'problem', then you are diverting them from focusing on the problems at home, problems caused by the government themselves, whichever party is in power. It's all very convenient...