Last week William Hill were declaring that Ken Clarke enjoyed "very little recent support". Hills are singing a very different tune today:
"Bookmakers William Hill have slashed the price of Ken Clarke becoming the next leader of the Conservative Party from 10/1 to 5/1 following a massive Bank Holiday punt. Hills took scores of three figure bets on Clarke over the weekend, the biggest of which was £500 at 10/1 from a punter in Nottinghamshire. Hills have lengthened David Davis odds from 1/3 to 4/11 with the other front runner David Cameron unchanged at 4/1."
Who is this Nottinghamshire punter? Someone in Ken Clarke's Rushcliffe constituency?
Mrs Clarke could afford a £500 bet from the BAT and Independent salaries that go into the Clarke household. Perhaps it was Anna Soubry, the dripping wet PPC for Gedling (and NUS apologist when she ran for the FCS Chair).
Posted by: Selsdon Man | 30 August 2005 at 18:10
It was me.
Posted by: James Hellyer | 30 August 2005 at 20:14
Honest ;=)
Posted by: James Hellyer | 30 August 2005 at 20:14
Driving home form work through the centre of Nottingham I could have sworn I saw cigar smoke coming out of Labdrokes.........
Posted by: Jonathan Sheppard | 30 August 2005 at 21:11
And according to the BBC tonight - Ken will announce his candidacy in a newspaper article on Thursday. Game On.
Posted by: Jonathan Sheppard | 30 August 2005 at 21:12
Channel 4 reported that on its 7pm bulletin. Watch the papers tomorrow...
Posted by: James Maskell | 30 August 2005 at 21:25
Today's papers? The Beeb went crazy and announced it as fact last night. BBCi is glutted with pro-Ken articles (I've just sumbitted a hatchet job to "Have Your Say"). Anyone would think he's their candidate of choice.
Or that natural disasters and all, this is a slow news day.
Posted by: James Hellyer | 31 August 2005 at 07:41
£500? If that's all it took to cut Ken's odds so he surged ahead of David C (as he has), it was cheap at the price. Guido reckons it was five grand, but even that is nothing to a man of Ken's means.
And James- I couldn't see your demo job on BBCi- I think you've been "moderated".
Posted by: Wat Tyler | 31 August 2005 at 10:20
It was most likely one of you lot trying to hedge. Maybe I should plant £500 on a right winger – that way I can’t lose either.
Posted by: Oberon Houston | 31 August 2005 at 10:40
That's a hell of a lot of good publicity for a very small outlay.
The clever punters will see a great new opportunity though.
Posted by: EU Serf | 31 August 2005 at 11:35
"That's a hell of a lot of good publicity for a very small outlay."
And it's what the Lib Dems often do in tight by-elections, usually about 72 hours out. It gives a great impression of momentum and insider knowledge.
Posted by: Simon C | 31 August 2005 at 11:48
So that's why there are so many LibDems on Political Betting. And I thought it was the LD branch of Gamblers' Anon.
Posted by: Wat Tyler | 31 August 2005 at 13:41
Confirming Wat's post of above - the latest release from William Hill puts KC ahead of DC now as second favourite in the race.
Posted by: Editor | 31 August 2005 at 14:37
I've read elsewhere that it was actually a £5000 bid.
A £500 bid is barely worth mentioning really.
Posted by: Sam Coates | 31 August 2005 at 14:56
If you go to the original William Hill release it was definitely only £500 Sam. They should know!
Posted by: Editor | 31 August 2005 at 14:59
Correction, that was according to Guido Fawkes, but on finding the original statement (http://www.williamhillmedia.com/index_template.asp?file=4752) it appears that it is indeed £500.
Posted by: Sam Coates | 31 August 2005 at 15:00
They should indeed Ed!
Posted by: Sam Coates | 31 August 2005 at 15:01
It is surprising that, given our Party's opposition to gambling liberalisation, Conservatives (even the social variety) should be obsessed by the bookies.
Posted by: | 31 August 2005 at 15:07
My limited experience has been that Catholics, in particular, are keen gamblers. Take the socially conservative Bill Bennett for a start!
Posted by: Editor | 31 August 2005 at 15:51
Wow, makes you wonder who else could be a closet gambler!
I think it was someone in the Conservative Christian Fellowhip that called the Gambling Bill a 'tax on gambler's children'.
Posted by: Sam Coates | 31 August 2005 at 16:15
Catholics? Not in my experience. I suppose the rhythm method of contraception is a form of gambling. The Chinese are keen (to put it mildly) gamblers too.
John McCririck is celebrity Tory gambler but I read that he is a failed bookie - a very rare beast.
Posted by: Selsdon Man | 01 September 2005 at 13:20
Some nerdish plotter over at Guido's points out that the William Hill press release- while specifically mentioning a £500 bet- also says "scores of three figure bets". Which he calculates means at least eighteen grand in total.
Me, I reckon they probably count £1.00 as a three figure bet.
Posted by: Wat Tyler | 01 September 2005 at 14:16