by Declan Jordan

A recent discussion on Newstalk’s Talking Points with Sarah Carey addressed the difficult issue of gambling addiction. It is very difficult to assess the scale of gambling addiction in Ireland (and elsewhere), particularly with the advent of online gambling websites and mobile phone apps. Gambling is a particularly invidious form of addiction. As pointed out in the radio discussion, gambling addiction is a silent and hidden disease – there is no smell on the breath or puncture marks in the skin to give it away. Addicts may believe that a way out of their problems is to ‘double down’ so that more gambling becomes the ‘solution’. It is unlikely that any alcoholic or drug addict believes that a way to solve their addiction problem is to drink more. Gambling is also a difficult addiction to address because it is not a substance introduced to a body, but rather is bound up with an individual's self-worth and need to be right.
 
As a society Ireland is coming to terms with its damaging drink culture. There is more education about the dangers of alcohol and there is an opening up about the problems of gambling addiction, with several high profile sportspeople now talking about how they suffered from their gambling problem.
 
This is not the case with gambling, and if anything we are normalizing gambling as an activity, just as we did (and to an extent still do) with binge drinking. The saturation coverage on all media of the Cheltenham festival is a perfect example. However, it is clear now that betting has infiltrated many parts of our national discourse with coverage of the recent election often showing the odds on different election outcomes and potential Taoisigh. Football on television has become an opportunity to bet as the game progresses with odds flashed on screen continuously during, for example, Sky Sports coverage. Of course, once you have a mobile phone then it is so easy to put down a stake.
 
Of course there are many (probably a majority of punters) who can control their gambling, just as there are a majority who can control their drinking. There is no way a prohibition on gambling makes any sense. Indeed there are many strong vested interests who would have a stake (pun intended) in keeping the gambling industry as strong as possible. The Irish government levies a 1% tax on bets (which in the last budget was extended to online betting). The take from this tax is paltry however.

Even this small amount is used to prop up the bloodstock and racing industries – irrespective of whether the bet being taxed was placed on horse racing or not. It’s fairly clear there are very strong vested interests at play here – and the popularity of horse racing in Ireland means the government continues to forego what could be a very profitable source of tax revenue. The ring-fencing of revenue from this tax for the horse racing and bloodstock industries also makes little sense. The value of bloodstock industry itself was estimated at €0.9bn in 2010. The industry receives approximately €11m from the betting tax (or approximately 1% of the industry value). Does this very successful industry require state support?
 
This boils to little more than a question of priorities however, until the issue of gambling addiction is considered. Whatever the scale of gambling addiction in Ireland, there can be no doubt that the gambling industry, and the sport of horse racing that relies on gambling to exist, have negative social external effects. The effects are more significant also because they are so highly concentrated, in that the damage done to individuals and families are catastrophic. An issue raised in the discussion on Newstalk was the lack of investment in gambling addiction support in Ireland. Potential solutions were in short supply, though it is clear that a large part of the solution must be internalizing the external costs of gambling. That means dramatically increasing the betting tax. There can be little justification for VAT rates of 21% and a betting tax rate of 1%. This could be paid by bookmakers (as is currently the case) or by punters. This could be supplemented by a levy on bookmakers’ profits. And instead of ring-fencing the income for investment in an industry that hardly needs such investment, the proceeds could instead by invested in gambling addiction counseling and other mental health supports.

By John Eakins

The final round of games in the 2016 National Hurling League were played last weekend. The quarter finals are scheduled to be played in two weeks times as well as the relegation playoff which will determine which team will play in Division 1B next year (either Galway or Cork).  The winning/losing of the relegation game is generally seen to be of great significance to each team as the winner stays in the higher quality and more competitive 1A division whilst the loser plays in the lower quality and less competitive 1B division. And playing higher quality and more competitive matches is better preparation for the championship in the summer.  
 
So the story goes. There are a couple of interesting aspects to this however. Since the league was restructured in two divisions of six teams (Division 1A and 1B) in 2012, each team that has been relegated from 1A to 1B has immediately i.e. the following year, being promoted back to 1A. The table below outlines the teams involved:

So what does this tell us? Firstly it is clear that there is gulf in quality between teams in Division 1A and 1B. The relegated team is guaranteed 3 to 4 wins and promotion is usually determined by one match. This match is normally against Limerick as they have been the team which fights it out with the relegated team for the promotion spot. Does being relegated and playing in Division 1B affect a team’s championship prospects? It doesn’t appear to be the case. In 2013, Dublin won the Leinster championship. In 2014, Cork won the Munster championship. In 2015, Waterford went on to win the National League and progressed to the All-Ireland semi-finals. 

So perhaps been relegated is not such a bad thing. As long as you ensure you outperform the one and only nearest rival in Division 1B. That is the one caveat to this analysis. If you do lose this game and stay in Division 1B for more than one season it may become progressively more difficult to get out of it.

By Robbie Butler

On the Tuesday the 1st of March and Thursday 3rd of March 2016 the Republic of Ireland Under-17 team played their Swiss counterparts in two friendly matches in the Waterford Regional Sports Centre. A team sheet was produced for the games which provide a list of players representing each country. Nineteen Irish players are list, alongside twenty Swiss. The list includes the date of birth of each player. I present this data below for both countries by month-of-birth and by quarter. 

Here are some interesting points to note:

• Of the thirty-nine players selected for either country, just four were born after the 6th of August 1999.
• Just six of those selected were born in the second half of the calendar year. This means almost 85% of those on the squad lists were born between the 1st of January 1999 and 30th of June 1999.
• January alone accounts for ten of the thirty-nine players (25.6%).
• In total, twenty-one players (53.8%) are born in Q1 (January to March). 

By Robbie Butler

Another five selections went to post on the final day, of which Ruby Walsh rode four. Results as follows:

Time          Horse                          Finished         Return
1.30pm      Footpad                        3rd                  €2.25
2.10pm      Dicosimo                       Fell                 €0.00
2.50pm      Long Dog                      Pulled up        €0.00
3.30pm      Djackadam                    2nd                 €2.13
4.50pm      Childrens List                17th                €0.00

Total return: €4.38. Loss on the day of €5.62.

For the week:
Stake €46. Return: €44.71. Loss: €1.29

Again, following Ruby Walsh ridden horses only on Day 4 would have seen a stake of €8, a return of €4.38. A loss of €3.62 on the day. 

Ruby for the week:
Stake €36. Return: €44.71. Profit €8.71 for the week. That's a 24% return from following the Irish champion jockey.In fact, Ruby was the only Mullins' jockey to finish in the winning or placed positions. Next year we'll just have to follow Ruby!

By Robbie Butler

A very good day for Willie Mullins on day three. Five selections went to post, of which Ruby Walsh rode four. Results as follows:

Time          Horse                          Finished         Return
1.30pm      Black Hercules             1st                   €7.00
2.50pm      Vautour                         1st                  €4.00
4.10pm      Ballycasey                    5th                  €3.50
4.50pm      Limini                            1st                  €0.00
5.30pm      Sambremont                 8th                 €0.00

Total return: €14.50. Profit on the day of €4.50.

For the week to date: Profit of €4.33

Again, following Ruby Walsh ridden horses only on Day 3 would have seen a stake of €8.00 and a return of €14.50. A profit of €6.50 and €12.33 for the week to date.

By Robbie Butler

Seven horses represented the champion Irish trainer, Willie Mullins, in our experiment on Day 2. Details below:

Time          Horse                          Finished         Return
1.30pm      Yorkhill                          1st                  €8.00
2.10pm      Roi Des Francs             6th                  €0.00
2.50pm      Blood Cotil                    Pulled up         €0.00
3.30pm      Un De Sceaux              2nd                  €0.00
4.10pm      Uncle Junior                 10th                 €0.00
4.50pm      Voix Du Reve                Fell                 €0.00
5.30pm      Barcadys                       3rd                 €5.00

Total return: €13. Loss on the day of €1.

For the week to date: -€0.17

Again just following Ruby Walsh ridden horses only would have seen a stake of €12.00 and a return of €13. A profit of €1 and €5.83 for the week to date.

By Robbie Butler

Six horses represented the champion Irish trainer, Willie Mullins, in our experiment yesterday. Details below:

Time          Horse                          Finished         Return
1.30pm      Min                                2nd                 €0.00
2.10pm      Douvan                         1st                   €2.50
3.30pm      Annie Power                 1st                   €7.00
4.10pm      Vroom Vroom Mag       1st                   €3.33
4.50pm      Pont Alexandre             Pulled up        €0.00
5.30pm      McKinley                       Fell                 €0.00

Total return: €12.83. Profit of €0.83 on day one.

Following Ruby Walsh ridden horses only would have seen a stake of €8.00 and a return of €12.83. A profit of €4.83.

Roll on Day 2.

By Robbie Butler

It's the eve of the greatest racing festival on earth which means it's that time again. During the course of the next five days we are going to attempt to systematically beat the market. 

This will be our eighth attempt at challenging the Efficient Market Hypothesis and over the course of the next five days we will place 27 imaginary wagers to see if it is possible to beat the bookies.

The scorecard reads 4-3 to the market. We have successful beat it in 2010, 2011 and 2013. The last two years have been disappointing. Prior to last year, a selection was made on which our hopes rest. Last year, with the help of Fiona Mullins, we followed the favourite to see if we could beat the market this way. We failed.

This year we are going to continue with the Mullins influence and follow the great Carlow trainer. In 2003 the Champion trainer brought eight horse to the Cheltenham Festival. In 2015 he had eight winners! Such is Mullins' rise that this year he will saddle sixty horses over the four day meeting. We can't back all sixty. Instead we will follow the horse he saddles with Ruby Walsh on board.

If Mullins has a runner or runners and Ruby isn't riding in the race (e.g. amateur jockey races), we'll revert to his shortest starting price horse.

We will place a €2 win bet in each race if the horse is less than 4-1, and €1 each-way bet if the horse is 4-1 or greater. As always, daily updates to follow.

By Robbie Butler

With the 2015-2016 Premier League entering the final two months, a clearer picture is now starting to emerge of each club's performance. Incredibly, Leicester City (5000-1 shots at the start of the season) continue to lead the race for the title and the market now prices them as short as 11-10 to lift the Premier League trophy. As late as Christmas 2015, finishing in the top four would still probably have been viewed by many as an over-achievement for the Foxes.

While Leicester have far exceeded expectations they are not alone. West Ham United are very much in the hunt for Champions League qualification. In fact, had it not been for Leicester's remarkable season, it is likely West Ham would be getting far more attention for their excellent performance to date. Other clubs to exceed expectations this season probably include Tottenham and Stoke City. 

At the other end of the spectrum, the big underachievers include the likes of Newcastle United, Everton, Aston Villa and Manchester United. All of these clubs probably thought they would be better off at this point in the season. However, no under-performance has been quite as dramatic as Chelsea. The current champions will do well to reach 7th place, the joint worst performance by a defending EPL champion (Blackburn 1995-1996, and Manchester United 2013-2014).

So how might we explain these performances?

One way is to consider the summer 2015 Transfer Window and assess how productive were each club signings. The key to this measure is capturing the relationship between productivity and transfer fee. Generally in economics, productivity is used as a measure of performance. When it comes to footballers the official Fantasy Premier League can help us out.

I previously wrote about the site here and here. Each week players are assigned a performance value based on that round of fixtures. Points are awarded for goal scored, assists, clean sheets, saves, etc. Points are deduced for goals conceded, cautions and red cards. The weighting of each is based on the players position (e.g. defenders are awarded more points for scoring than strikers). On balance, it appears attacking players find it easier to accumulate points, and this is one small quirk in this analysis. However, a closer look at seventy-four observations for which transfer fee data is available during summer 2015 provides some interesting results. The number of fantasy football points is measured on the X-axis while the transfer fee, in millions of pounds sterling, is measured on the Y-axis.

The trend line is of interest. Based on these observations, players above this line have either under-performed or were over-valued (note the observations do not control for long-term injuries).

Some of the best buys in the Summer 2015 window include Dimitri Payet, Petr Cech, Toby Alderweireld, Georginio Wijnaldum, Virgil van Dijk, and Robert Huth (who has scored 105 points and cost just £3 million). West Ham's resurgence can be explained by the excellent performance of not just Payet but also Michail Antonio (93 points), N'Golo Kante (82 points) and Angelo Ogbonna (64 points) who all appear below the trend line, and cost just £7 million, £5.6 million and £8.5 million respectively. 

At the other end, the over-valued/under-performing stars include Chelsea's Baba Rahmen (£21 million and 15 points) and both Manchester United signings Memphis Depay and Morgan Schneiderlin. Both cost £25 million and have accumulated an identical number of Fantasy Premier League points (53). Aston Villa's Idrissa Gueye has also amassed 53 but cost just £9 million pounds last summer. 

Manchester City unsurprisingly paid the most for any player. However, the £52 million the club spent on Kevin De Bruyne looks out of line when compared to Robert Huth's 105 points and £3 million fee. Other expensive purchases include Rahmen Sterling, Anthony Martial and Christian Benteke. Firmino, while currently over-priced is moving closer to Payet and more good performances might see the Brazilian become relatively good "value-for-money" before the end of the season.