Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

An Alternative Explanation of the Favorite-Longshot Bias

Contents:

Author Info

  • Martin Kukuk

    (University of Wurzburg)

  • Stefan Winter

    (University of Bochum)

Registered author(s):

    Abstract

    Empirical studies of horse race betting in the US, the UK, Australia, and Germany have empirically established the so called favorite-longshot bias. It was found that bets on longshots on average lose much more than bets on favorites. The theoretical literature on wagering markets has offered a variety of explanations for that bias. One of the most prominent is the assumption of a homogeneous bettor population with a preference for risk. However, the risk-love explanation has also been severely challenged. We add to this challenge by proposing a different explanation of the favorite-longshot bias. We show that if populations of bettors have only noisy estimates of horses' true winning probabilities, a favorite-longshot bias will be the market equilibrium outcome even with risk neutral bettors and even if the median estimate is correct. We provide evidence on four different types of bets broadly consistent with the noisy estimates assumption but not with the risk-love explanation.

    Download Info

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
    File URL: http://www.ubplj.org/index.php/jgbe/article/view/532
    Download Restriction: no

    Bibliographic Info

    Article provided by University of Buckingham Press in its journal Journal of Gambling Business and Economics.

    Volume (Year): 2 (2008)
    Issue (Month): 2 (September)
    Pages: 79-96

    as in new window
    Handle: RePEc:buc:jgbeco:v:2:y:2008:i:2:p:79-96

    Contact details of provider:
    Web page: http://www.ubpl.co.uk/

    Order Information:
    Email:
    Web: http://www.jgbe.com/index_files/Page492.htm

    Related research

    Keywords: HORSE RACE; BETTING; RISK; MARKET EQUILIBRIUM; FAVORITE-LONGSHOT-BIAS; NOISY PROBABILITY ESTIMATES;

    Find related papers by JEL classification:

    References

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
    as in new window
    1. Swidler, Steve & Shaw, Ron, 1995. "Racetrack wagering and the "uninformed" bettor: A study of market efficiency," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 305-314.
    2. Dowie, Jack A, 1976. "On the Efficiency and Equity of Betting Markets," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 43(17), pages 139-50, May.
    3. Schnytzer, Adi & Shilony, Yuval, 1995. "Inside Information in a Betting Market," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 105(431), pages 963-71, July.
    4. Erik Snowberg & Justin Wolfers, 2010. "Explaining the Favorite-Long Shot Bias: Is it Risk-Love or Misperceptions?," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 118(4), pages 723-746, 08.
    5. Richard H. Thaler & Eric J. Johnson, 1990. "Gambling with the House Money and Trying to Break Even: The Effects of Prior Outcomes on Risky Choice," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 36(6), pages 643-660, June.
    6. John Gandar & Richard Zuber & R. Stafford Johnson, 2001. "Searching for the favourite-longshot bias down under: an examination of the New Zealand pari-mutuel betting market," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(13), pages 1621-1629.
    7. Kelly Busche & W. David Walls, 2001. "Breakage and betting market efficiency: evidence from the horse track," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(9), pages 601-604.
    8. Bruno Jullien & Bernard Salanie, 2000. "Estimating Preferences under Risk: The Case of Racetrack Bettors," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 108(3), pages 503-530, June.
    9. Bird, Ron & McCrae, Michael & Beggs, John J, 1987. "Are Gamblers Really Risk Takers?," Australian Economic Papers, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(49), pages 237-53, December.
    10. Kahneman, Daniel & Tversky, Amos, 1979. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(2), pages 263-91, March.
    11. Harry Markowitz, 1952. "The Utility of Wealth," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 60, pages 151.
    12. Richard Thaler, 1985. "Mental Accounting and Consumer Choice," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 4(3), pages 199-214.
    13. Raymond D. Sauer, 1998. "The Economics of Wagering Markets," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 36(4), pages 2021-2064, December.
    14. Tuckwell, R H, 1983. "The Thoroughbred Gambling Market: Efficiency, Equity and Related Issues," Australian Economic Papers, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(4), pages 106-18, June.
    15. Hausch, Donald B & Ziemba, William T, 1990. "Arbitrage Strategies for Cross-Track Betting on Major Horse Races," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 63(1), pages 61-78, January.
    16. Michael A. Smith & David Paton & Leighton Vaughan Williams, 2006. "Market Efficiency in Person-to-Person Betting," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 73(292), pages 673-689, November.
    17. Quandt, Richard E, 1986. "Betting and Equilibrium," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 101(1), pages 201-07, February.
    18. Busche, Kelly & Hall, Christopher D, 1988. "An Exception to the Risk Preference Anomaly," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 61(3), pages 337-46, July.
    19. Shin, Hyun Song, 1993. "Measuring the Incidence of Insider Trading in a Market for State-Contingent Claims," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 103(420), pages 1141-53, September.
    20. Milton Friedman & L. J. Savage, 1948. "The Utility Analysis of Choices Involving Risk," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 56, pages 279.
    21. Weitzman, Martin L., 1965. "Utility Analysis and Group Behavior: An Empirical Study," Scholarly Articles 3710799, Harvard University Department of Economics.
    22. Snyder, Wayne W, 1978. "Horse Racing: Testing the Efficient Markets Model," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 33(4), pages 1109-18, September.
    23. Joseph Golec & Maurry Tamarkin, 1998. "Bettors Love Skewness, Not Risk, at the Horse Track," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 106(1), pages 205-225, February.
    24. Stefan Winter & Martin Kukuk, 2006. "Risk Love and the Favorite-Longshot Bias: Evidence from German Harness Horse Racing," Schmalenbach Business Review (sbr), LMU Munich School of Management, vol. 58(4), pages 349-364, October.
    25. Shin, Hyun Song, 1991. "Optimal Betting Odds against Insider Traders," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 101(408), pages 1179-85, September.
    26. Les Coleman, 2004. "New light on the longshot bias," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 36(4), pages 315-326.
    27. Ali, Mukhtar M, 1977. "Probability and Utility Estimates for Racetrack Bettors," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 85(4), pages 803-15, August.
    28. Tversky, Amos & Kahneman, Daniel, 1992. " Advances in Prospect Theory: Cumulative Representation of Uncertainty," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 5(4), pages 297-323, October.
    29. Williams, Leighton Vaughan & Paton, David, 1997. "Why Is There a Favourite-Longshot Bias in British Racetrack Betting Markets?," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 107(440), pages 150-58, January.
    30. Thaler, Richard H & Ziemba, William T, 1988. "Parimutuel Betting Markets: Racetracks and Lotteries," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 2(2), pages 161-74, Spring.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Lists

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:buc:jgbeco:v:2:y:2008:i:2:p:79-96. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Victor Matheson, College of the Holy Cross).

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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