Bachelor Australia - Season 4 - Richie Strahan - F1-F6 - *Sleuthing - Spoilers*

Sundy wrote:^ I posted the odds twice right at the start of the season. I will try to find the thread. I do think though that I posted a link through to the betting page not a photo. Hang tight I will look.

So this article was originally posted in the social media thread on 15 July

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Hope it helps

mslat92 wrote:I think Olena's drop in odds after an initial 'favourite' position could be attributed to the fact that she fell off the grid for like 2 episodes after her first date. No screen time = no exposure = drop in popularity. Now that she's had her second date and had a few SQTs with Richie, it's not surprising her odds of winning have now increased again.

Yes - you could be right. I remember thinking that first night and after her first date - wow this woman is amazing, can't wait to see more of her story - and then she went missing in the edit for a couple of weeks.

mslat92 wrote:I think Olena's drop in odds after an initial 'favourite' position could be attributed to the fact that she fell off the grid for like 2 episodes after her first date. No screen time = no exposure = drop in popularity. Now that she's had her second date and had a few SQTs with Richie, it's not surprising her odds of winning have now increased again.

True, that is my opinion too. As I already observed though, I didn't find peculiar to see Olena losing preference, but what I did find strange was seeing her going from 7.5 to 21...this happened around the same time when the @10,000 of the paparazzo was rejected...the second date was right after and then she recovered.   If we were to draw a graphic of Olena's odds in Sportsbet, it would show a curve that goes up and down, up and down. Clearly,  she was amongst the leading ladies (although we still don't know exactly her position), then she dropped a bit to top 4 but not for much; and after a while (around the same time the paparazzo;s 'rejected bet') she went from $7.5 to $21 (interestingly, by that time she was out of the top 5 finalists)...and after her second date Olena recovered and was paying $11 (I remember because that was the day after I placed my 5 dollars for her, I knew she wouldn't stay in $21 for very long)...and now she is paying how much? She is paying $6. In Alex's case for the last weeks she has consistently been leading. Obviously the punters think she is F!, whereas Nikki has consistently been  in the top 4 but  never considered as F1. That is why I think it would be great if we find any article that mentions the departing point of all the contestants in Sportsbet before or only when the punters just started placing odds I think that may be very difficult to find though but not impossible, it has to be there, somewhere.  

I guess it is time to go and watch the show.

The thing is with odds, if she's paying 21 then that means $21 paid out for every dollar put on. If her odds went out to that after the pap tried to place his bet IMO that makes it less likely that Olena is F1 because they don't want to make more of a payout if she wins?

I am not really following this sportsbet conversation. Here is the latest odds via the webpage.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

^ yup I'm really confused too

But why would only Olena's odds take such a dramatic swing? The paparazzi who claimed to know the winner only would've placed this $10 000 (unsuccessful) bet on one lady, and surely it would be her odds that would've changed? And if not, then why didn't Alex or Nicki (depending on who wasn't bet on) also get changed to the $20-ish? I'm not a betting person, so I could be way off the mark here, but it just doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

Also, the paparazzi failed in making the bet, so how do we even know that Sportsbet were able to figure out who he was trying to place the bet on? Yes, he deposited $10,000 into his account, but there was never an official transaction of money placed on any girl because the site automatically disallows bets over $80 (based off the article written on this story)...

I think that he must have attempted to place the bet though, and had it rejected because Sportsbet dorsn't allow such big bets on things that are pre recorded. They would allow him to have $10000 in the account, but when he then wagered that amount on the Bachelor it would have been rejected, so they would have known that the bet was attempted, which would have perhaps led them to think that he had inside info, IMO.

mslat92 wrote:I think Olena's drop in odds after an initial 'favourite' position could be attributed to the fact that she fell off the grid for like 2 episodes after her first date. No screen time = no exposure = drop in popularity. Now that she's had her second date and had a few SQTs with Richie, it's not surprising her odds of winning have now increased again.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] True, but one thing is a small drop, which is what we often see in statistics and qualitative research, but what is rare is a big drop, and coincidentally it happen when the paparazzo had his odds rejected....it was only for a couple of days, no more than 3 days that she was paying  @21, the 'big fall' which is also strange. After she went to 11, and then to 6...which makes more sense.

As I said, I can't make any affirmations, I am only speculating.  I can't automatically infer that she dropped because of the paparazzo, but neither can I conclude that it was because of the editing, after all, correlation doesn't equal causation. I am merely making an observation and we can examine it or we can simply discard it and focus on something else

mslat92 wrote:But why would only Olena's odds take such a dramatic swing? The paparazzi who claimed to know the winner only would've placed this $10 000 (unsuccessful) bet on one lady, and surely it would be her odds that would've changed? And if not, then why didn't Alex or Nicki (depending on who wasn't bet on) also get changed to the $20-ish? I'm not a betting person, so I could be way off the mark here, but it just doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

Also, the paparazzi failed in making the bet, so how do we even know that Sportsbet were able to figure out who he was trying to place the bet on? Yes, he deposited $10,000 into his account, but there was never an official transaction of money placed on any girl because the site automatically disallows bets over $80 (based off the article written on this story)...

How much can a bet affect someone's odds has to do with the amount of punters placing bets for a particular outcome; since we don't know how many people have money on The Bachelor, we can't know if $10,000  will affect the odds strongly or not.  There may not be more than 20,000 dollars in bets! Who knows! Also note that initially the max amount that could be placed for a bet was higher (at least, online). This is true because during MC the limit was not  @80 but higher, and it was noted that from the beginning Elena had big amounts of money placed for her, whereas Matt and Harry had more punters supporting them but those punters placed much smaller amounts in individual bets, thus whoever was placing bets for Elena was pretty confident.

The articles that refer to the paparazzo mentioned that Sportsbet changed the cap limit for bets after the paparazzo placed the 10,000, that is why the paparazzo was complaining and he said that if Sportsbet decided not to take the bet, then they should refund his money, which suggests that initially they accepted the paparazzo's bet, and later they may have revised it and rejected it. That is unclear. Now, after the incident with the paparazzo, the maximum bet for The Bachelor is $80.

Overall, as I said, I am not stating/affirming that the paparazzo was definitely  the cause for Olena's drop, I am just considering every possible scenario. Finally, please do not forget that the last thing I said in my previous message was that correlation doesn't equal causation but that IMO all possible factors should be analysed. Thanks.


.

I don't know much about the betting and odds for Richie's season so it will be interesting to see if any of it holds water when the finale airs and the F1 is known.

Based on sleuthing Richie's season since filming back back in early March, looking at all SM activity involved up until the season aired and while the season is airing, and going by the edit and other clues, I think Nikki is F1.

That being said, regardless of who is F1, I am hopeful for Richie that whomever he picks he is happy and in love and from his interviews and other SM clues I think Richie is happy.

AllAboutLove wrote:I don't know much about the betting and odds for Richie's season so it will be interesting to see if any of it holds water when the finale airs and the F1 is known.

Based on sleuthing Richie's season since filming back back in early March, looking at all SM activity involved up until the season aired and while the season is airing, and going by the edit and other clues, I think Nikki is F1.

Okay girls, this is it. I found the article and  it says that according to William Hill's (not Sportsbet) early odds, Olena was considered F1 with  $4.50, Kiki with $5 and Keira with @5.5 , now please note that, when establishing the initial bet, they don't care about accuracy when it comes to the other finalists because the  bet is only for the winner and not for places, that is why  betting companies focus on the person they see as the potential winner and regulate their starting odds accordingly. This also means that if there are people who already know the name of the winner and they were placing bets (as it seems to have been Elena's case on MC as it was noted by a few people on Facebook an by the media) they are the ones who may have been placing bets on Olena initially, when they thought she was paying well (4.50 in betting is considered good profit if the option wins). Also, I think it makes sense that Keira was an early favourite since before the show aired, it was revealed that he was friends with Richie's cousin, which means some people saw that as an advantage. Finally, I was wondering if in this article  'Kiki' was a typo and they meant to write Nikki, or perhaps they confused them. I say this because I recall another early article mentioning Nikki in the top 3 on Sportsbet. Obviously, after seeing the whole list, this may not be a typo, because as I said, they only care about the winner because they have to pay for the winner. What is telling is that at this stage the person who was paying less was Vintaea. Having said that, the difference of money placed was very little, often just 0.5 whereas the difference between F1 and F2 was larger. I also think it is surprising to see William Hill having in their top 3, only one one of the contestants that is still 'on the run'.

This was posted on the 14th of July and things changed after that.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

So what do you think guys? Olena was considered F1 by William Hill when the show started. IMO we should take this with caution but analyse it nevertheless. BTW, I don't believe William Hill is receiving bets for The Bachelor anymore only Sportsbet is doing it. It is rather peculiar, isn't it? As I said, we should take this with caution, but we shouldn't just dismiss it

Apologies for any typos I am having breakfast..and my coffee is just starting to exert its effect :P