Is this the Worst Cricviz/Winviz yet?

[firlandsfarm]

When play just restarted Eng v's Aus Cricviz as it's now known had the probabilities as Eng 0.49, Aus 0.34 and the Draw 0.17 whereas the market had the probabilities as Eng 0.22, Aus 0.56 and the Draw 0.22. Has anyone ever seen a worse one?

[Euler]

You would producers of these graphics would sanity check these things.

[firlandsfarm]

OK, the title I nominated for this thread assumes the market probability is correct and crickviz is wrong ... but is it? Has anyone extracted the records to see which is right. Has anyone tested the market's assessment? In that given situation at the time do England win half the time (Cricviz) or a quarter of the time (the Market)? We always/usually/often say the market is efficient but that is often taken from the book being 100%'ish. It doesn't mean the split of that 100% between the contestants is accurate. Does BA conduct any research into the accuracy of in-running odds and the probability they imply?

[megarain]

IMHO cricviz/winviz give financial advice and should be regulated.

They are incredibly reckless and prices are just plain wrong.

If u ever try to get a bet with them/get a dialog, they shy away.

How they got the gig is one thing. How they keep it when their odds are often 50% off, is quite another.

HANDLE WITH CARE

[firlandsfarm]

HANDLE WITH CARE

Definitely, I don't follow them but comparisons are there if trading the match and watching on Sky when they pop-up the latest probabilities! I posted my second comment wondering if anyone had done/seen any research on the accuracy of in-play odds.