IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Why are some favourite-longshot biases positive and others negative?

  • Leighton Vaughan Williams
  • David Paton

Most studies of both pari-mutuel and fixed-odds betting markets have shown a systematic tendency for the expected return to bets at lower odds to exceed those at higher odds. Some work, however, has revealed in certain markets the absence or even reversal of this bias. We present a model which distinguishes two separate types of bettor, and use this to demonstrate how transactions costs, the extent of public information, and consumption benefits of betting can explain the disparities. Our empirical evidence, taken from a fixed-odds market, lends support to our theoretical conclusions.

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.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/000368498324841
Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Article provided by Taylor & Francis Journals in its journal Applied Economics.

Volume (Year): 30 (1998)
Issue (Month): 11 ()
Pages: 1505-1510

as
in new window

Handle: RePEc:taf:applec:v:30:y:1998:i:11:p:1505-1510
Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.tandfonline.com/RAEC20

Order Information: Web: http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/RAEC20

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. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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.
  6. Terrell, Dek & Farmer, Amy, 1996. "Optimal Betting and Efficiency in Parimutuel Betting Markets with Information Costs," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 106(437), pages 846-68, July.
  7. 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.
  8. Hurley, William & McDonough, Lawrence, 1995. "A Note on the Hayek Hypothesis and the Favorite-Longshot Bias in Parimutuel Betting," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(4), pages 949-55, September.
  9. Woodland, Linda M & Woodland, Bill M, 1994. " Market Efficiency and the Favorite-Longshot Bias: The Baseball Betting Market," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 49(1), pages 269-79, March.
  10. 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.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

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

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:applec:v:30:y:1998:i:11:p:1505-1510. 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: (Michael McNulty)

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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.