Brexit and the Scottish Referendum have transformed politics from being of little importance to British bookmakers to becoming an increasingly vibrant market. Matthew Shaddick, of leading British bookmakers Ladbrokes, on Friday recalled how one former senior colleague had made clear his disapproval of them even having a political betting market.
"Ten years ago political betting was seen as a PR led loss leader. This now-former colleague of mine said to me that offering odds on political events was 'effing expensive wallpaper'... he was wrong," said Shaddick, speaking on a panel at the Sports Betting Conference in London.
Shaddick, who when he was handed the job over 10 years ago of looking after political betting was simply told don't lose the company money but get them some publicity, said the day of the Brexit vote had shown how lively a market it was now.
"In two hours on the day of the vote (to leave the EU) we took the same amount of money as we did for the whole of the 2005 general election," said Shaddick. "In terms of where it lies in the market annually well for us more money is bet on it than for instance motor racing or golf. "I would equate it to a mid-level sport."
Graham Sharpe of Ladbrokes' rival William Hill concurred with Shaddick's appraisal of the rise of political betting. "Political betting has come of age," he said. "For the Scottish Referendum (2014) we reckoned at best we would take £500,000 ($650,000).
"In the end one client alone bet £900,000 and overall £3.5 million was bet with us. We thought, right there is a market for political betting. We need to get some political experts in to help us," said Sharpe. While the bookmakers were seen to have got it wrong for the Brexit referendum - a vote to remain in the EU was favourite to the end - Sharpe said the betting figures weren't all that they seemed.
"Some 60 percent of the total amount gambled on the Brexit vote was for 'remain' but 60 percent of the bets placed were for 'leave'," said Sharpe. For Professor Leighton Vaughan Williams of Nottingham Business School the bookies were due a fall after calling the 2015 British general election correctly - the Conservatives being warm favourites - whereas the opinion pollsters were well off course. "For the Brexit vote the people believed the bookmakers and not the polls (who were largely giving the 'leave' camp as being ahead)," said Williams.
He highlighted how political betting had taken hold of the bookmakers in that they offered odds on each individual constituency at the 2015 general election for the first time.
"The bookies were victims of their own success as people took the markets to be the truth." The bookmakers' attention has now swung to the United States, and Sharpe says that because Americans can't bet on their elections. However, like with the Brexit vote surprise and the election of the once 150/1 outsider Jeremy Corbyn as leader of the Labour Party last year it is the anti-establishment figure of Republican candidate Donald Trump who is attracting the money and not the Democrat favourite Hillary Clinton.
"I had a call the other day with a person saying they wanted a bet on Clinton for the presidency," said Sharpe. "I said Hillary, and the person replied no Chelsea (her daughter). "We can't lay Clinton at the moment, there is heavy betting on Trump.
"If you had just a pound on a Corbyn/Trump double you would be looking at winning £30,000. As it is the biggest single payout we face for the US election in case of a Trump victory is a man from Cornwall who stands to win £100,000 having backed him at 150/1. "We do have a position (potential losses) where we hope Clinton stays healthy."