|
Well, I'm going to be travelling home until New Years, so in lieu of playing any markets on my vacation I'm firing all my available money into BIDENNO shares for that sweet sweet 0.909% growth.
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 06:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 19:28 |
|
|
I'm so medium-term i think I'm missing out. I wish I were f5'ing to catch tips. I cashed out my Rubio and Cruz NOs because I have no idea what's going to happen between them and should probably get back into the day game. polls, maybe??
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 07:49
|
|
|
Necc0 posted:Yeah exactly. It almost feels like Biden.Run all over again where I have all the Very Serious people telling me to ignore the reality right in front of me. The guy is filling stadiums on an almost daily basis. I'm the one who was right about Biden No from the very beginning no matter how bad the hype got, and regarding Trump, I can tell you one thing: I don't know lol.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 12:38
|
|
|
Jewel Repetition posted:I'm the one who was right about Biden No from the very beginning no matter how bad the hype got, and regarding Trump, I can tell you one thing: I don't know lol. I don't think anyone knows, the whole thing with trump is can he turn his base out to vote or not? NO on trump winning any primary (and all related markets) feels like the next BIDENNO right now if he can't turn people out. At any rate, he's not the type of candidate to historically win Iowa and those shares will definitely see a bump after the caucus so I think it's a good investment even if you're not in it for the long haul.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 13:09
|
|
|
Trump has never had a chance and still doesn't, but if you must throw money away, keep this in mind: -the only reason his campaign "works" is his winner aura, so to get anywhere he must win each of the first three states (you could maybe argue a close second in Iowa is acceptable if you're very bullish, but he must win the next two regardless) -he must also keep his national numbers at the level they are today through February (although they're meaningless in and of themselves, a drop for a candidate like Trump is a self-fulfilling prophecy) -the people who could vote for him that he doesn't already have are Cruz and Carson voters Given all of those three the correct Trump bet isn't Trump.Yes, it's betting on poll numbers (because they're done faster and you can leverage your profits) and on Cruz to fade. Trump cannot win heads up vs. Cruz, who is too acceptable to his voters - he has to go up against a Jeb or a Rubio whom his base hates - so by betting on Cruz.No you are getting the Trump upside with every other possibility baked in. Disclaimer: if you bet on Trump you will lose your money.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 13:20
|
|
|
Trump winning something is my biggest bet now. My cost basis is 67 cents and I'm going to start getting lighter once it drifts over 80. You're right that he probably doesn't win Iowa. He probably comes in 2nd there. Where I disagree is how much that carries over to the other states and that losing there is an unsurmountable hurdle. Skilled communicators are able to spin anything into a win. Heck, Bill Clinton came in third in Iowa, 2nd in NH, and that made him into the comeback kid. Beyond communication abilities the Donald/Bill analogy breaks down, but no one is expecting Trump to do that bad. Iowa just about always goes to those who wear religion on their sleeve, New Hampshire doesn't, and its almost unheard of that someone wins both. I don't think he gets the nomination (I think Cruz does) but I do think he does well in a crowded race where he sucks up all the oxygen and easily gets a plurality. And he has to do that exactly once for that contract to resolve as YES.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 18:25
|
|
|
Trump.Yes.state or whatever the name of that K is has the same problem as Trump.Yes except bigger. That contract is a massive trap, because the states he wins break down roughly like this - 20%? Iowa + whatever (this is basically the chance of Cruz getting shanked by the other crabs in the bucket and no one replacing him, which is admittedly fairly possible) 70% NH + whatever 10% random caucus three months from now that no one pays attention to If you are discounting Iowa, Trump.Yes is virtually the same thing as Trump.NH. Trump.NH is 45% on Betfair right now and will spike lower if he loses Iowa or even if Cruz keeps making ground. There is no way in the world 67% is a fair price; you're buying directly into the knife drop.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 18:35
|
|
|
Adar posted:Trump.Yes.state or whatever the name of that K is has the same problem as Trump.Yes except bigger. That contract is a massive trap, because the states he wins break down roughly like this - You have a point that Trump winning NH is a cheaper way to make the same bet. Which I think he does, seeing how Cruz is #2 and that's not going to happen and he's still almost leading if you add up Rubio, Christie and Bush, and if in the unlikely event he loses NH then the value of the any contest contract plummets and becomes a cheap way to bet that he wins SC or NV. But I put the fair value of him winning something over 90.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 18:54
|
|
|
tinstaach posted:Well, I'm going to be travelling home until New Years, so in lieu of playing any markets on my vacation I'm firing all my available money into BIDENNO shares for that sweet sweet 0.909% growth. edit: I'm in both markets to the tune of several hundred shares, but I concede it's possible Hillary's support dwindles because of some scandal and she loses Iowa. Problem is you just can't predict that poo poo. StevePerry has issued a correction as of 20:41 on Dec 20, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 20:28
|
|
|
Sure you can. EV is EV. I had six figures on the '08 election. The only way any of it was at risk was with a 5 point or higher Bradley effect. That could have happened...but not enough to make the expected value less than huge. Political betting is where sports betting was twenty years ago; it's free money lying on the ground, you just have to pick it up. There is a universe where Hillary loses Iowa but she doesn't do it one out of five, ten or twenty times.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2015 22:29
|
|
|
I was going to sign up this morning. But I live in Nevada. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2015 15:34
|
|
|
Adar posted:Sure you can. EV is EV. I had six figures on the '08 election. The only way any of it was at risk was with a 5 point or higher Bradley effect. That could have happened...but not enough to make the expected value less than huge. love this analogy, but unlike sports betting, the availability of pol data is way behind even where sports data was back then, and (this is a guess) predicting outcomes based on that data is much more difficult than sports - not a closed system. the real risk in political betting is getting overconfident but there really, really is money lying on the ground - you can literally wait for things to happen before you bet on them happening, and still pick up real gains (jim webb, etc)
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2015 15:44
|
|
|
Yeah the North Korean thermonuclear market was the easiest money for me this year.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2015 15:46
|
|
|
Graham out
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2015 15:49
|
|
|
Rand No pays again!
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2015 16:53
|
|
|
Peachstapler posted:Graham has been consistently criticizing primary voters for their Trump admiration/giving into hateful rhetoric. That and he called the current political atmosphere "crap". My gut's telling me he's on his last leg but his good pal John McCain may've told him to limp past New Hampshire, so I haven't bought any shares yet.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2015 17:02
|
|
|
All those cheap Carson shares I bought during those panics did too!
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2015 17:18
|
|
|
Yeah whenever you miss an opportunity like that, just remember that you made some money on the shuffling around while the market was alive. Bunch of Rubio NOs at 99c if anyone has a big enough bank roll to make it worthwhile.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2015 18:39
|
|
|
The Spain PM Rajoy market is somehow not at 0 when the two center-left-to-left parties won like 45% of the parliament yesterday.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2015 19:02
|
|
|
Shear Modulus posted:The Spain PM Rajoy market is somehow not at 0 when the two center-left-to-left parties won like 45% of the parliament yesterday. I know nothing about this. Who do you like and why?
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2015 19:39
|
|
|
Zeta Taskforce posted:I know nothing about this. Who do you like and why? I have no idea, but I'd put better than even odds on not Rajoy. The two parties I just mentioned have both said they wouldn't back a grand coalition government. The socialists, who got the second-most votes, might be persuaded to back Rajoy eventually without a compromise candidate, but I think that possibility is overpriced from what I've read in the news so far. It sucks though because the rules on Predictit aren't clear what happens to the contract if they call new elections, which could happen. Shear Modulus has issued a correction as of 23:33 on Dec 21, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2015 23:30
|
|
|
so my penny stocks aren't working out who knew
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 07:48
|
|
|
acls just loving get back to 2.90 so I can sell! gently caress!!! I want to buy all that stuff arkane was talking about!!
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 09:02
|
|
|
Aliquid posted:so my penny stocks aren't working out who knew Necc0 posted:Just keep in mind that you're playing against others who are playing this same game, not public sentiment.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 18:26
|
|
|
Ted Cruz NO in Iowa is 27 cents right now. That feels extremely underpriced for a state that is notorious for changing its mind until the last minute. Alternatively you could buy a ton of dirt cheap YES on a few non-Trump candidates.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2015 11:20
|
|
|
nachos posted:Ted Cruz NO in Iowa is 27 cents right now. That feels extremely underpriced for a state that is notorious for changing its mind until the last minute. Alternatively you could buy a ton of dirt cheap YES on a few non-Trump candidates. i've bought up a few rubio YESes for 6-8c a piece, anticipating his campaign actually puts a tiny bit of effort in come jan/feb. This link is a couple weeks old, but he's always had sky high favorables, now ahead of carson for top spot among Rs. Not planning to hold all the way, and this could backfire, but feels like decent risk/reward
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2015 15:54
|
|
|
nachos posted:Ted Cruz NO in Iowa is 27 cents right now. That feels extremely underpriced for a state that is notorious for changing its mind until the last minute. Alternatively you could buy a ton of dirt cheap YES on a few non-Trump candidates. If anything Cruz is still UNDERPRICED in Iowa. Fair value should be upper 80's at least. They always go for the evangelical and that's not Rubio. The only one who has a snowball chance is Trump and that's probably not happening there. I've been watching it since the upper 50's and jumped in at 65 when I realized it wouldn't be getting cheaper. Iowa changes its mind last minute when there is an establishment front runner that they don't like and a base favorite who catches on at the end. That was the case in 2008 and 2012. A better analogy for this year is 2000. I have been bullish on Frank Underwood, I mean Ted Cruz for a long time. I have 200 shares on Cruz winning the entire nomination. I think the only thing that will stop him in the general is Claire Underwood.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2015 17:13
|
|
|
Zeta Taskforce posted:If anything Cruz is still UNDERPRICED in Iowa. Fair value should be upper 80's at least. They always go for the evangelical and that's not Rubio. The only one who has a snowball chance is Trump and that's probably not happening there. Ted Cruz has a lot of enemies and there is still plenty of time left. I wouldn't go near 80% on anyone in Iowa, much less 90%. Vox Nihili has issued a correction as of 19:56 on Dec 23, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2015 17:37
|
|
|
I would say upper 60's is fair to very slightly overpriced. Unless you are capped out at PI, the safe Iowa pick is Hillary at 80%, which is as close to a lock as you can find right now. Cruz is not 7/8 as likely to win Iowa as Hillary is, not even close (yet). On the other hand, he's definitely over 50%. I think the best play is to split your bankroll between the Hillary basket and Cruz noms in the low 30's. The nom contract should easily break 50% if Cruz does win Iowa which is a > 50% gain and beats the Iowa contract itself.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2015 18:32
|
|
|
Sanders 30 is pretty wild now. There's a new CNN poll that has him at 34, but that won't counteract the damage of losing the NBC poll that has him at 37 by the end of the month - it's not a guarantee, it's a real 50/50, but right now Sanders 30 YES is super overvalued at 91 cents.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2015 22:20
|
|
|
pathetic little tramp posted:Sanders 30 is pretty wild now. There's a new CNN poll that has him at 34, but that won't counteract the damage of losing the NBC poll that has him at 37 by the end of the month - it's not a guarantee, it's a real 50/50, but right now Sanders 30 YES is super overvalued at 91 cents. I'm not entirely sure how RCP works but won't that poll only drop if NBC releases another one, which they're not likely to do this close to Christmas?
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2015 22:39
|
|
|
EngineerSean posted:I'm not entirely sure how RCP works but won't that poll only drop if NBC releases another one, which they're not likely to do this close to Christmas? It seems to vary depending on what they are polling, but the presidential polls tend to fall off after about 3 weeks even if the polling company doesn't release a new one. The old one will always immediately fall off if the company releases a new one. IBD/TIPP fell off 2 days ago without a new one IBD/TIPP being posted. Of course RCP can do anything, but its seems like a sure thing that NBC, CBS and USA today will be dropping off in the next few days. It could do anything, but the odds are a lot closer to 50/50 than 89/11.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2015 23:06
|
|
|
pathetic little tramp posted:Sanders 30 is pretty wild now. There's a new CNN poll that has him at 34, but that won't counteract the damage of losing the NBC poll that has him at 37 by the end of the month - it's not a guarantee, it's a real 50/50, but right now Sanders 30 YES is super overvalued at 91 cents. Nope. Since CNN got added, unless a new poll comes out before the 31st and its low, any number of polls can drop and it still have him at 30 or higher.
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2015 00:46
|
|
|
watwat posted:Nope. Since CNN got added, unless a new poll comes out before the 31st and its low, any number of polls can drop and it still have him at 30 or higher. I'll bet a dollar on that!
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2015 07:52
|
|
|
Zeta Taskforce posted:They always go for the evangelical and that's not Rubio. Rubio's as evangelical as any Catholic could ever hope to be. He still has a decent chance in Iowa.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2015 17:12
|
|
|
Jeb Iowa is free money at this point:Montasque posted:Excitement flood incoming!
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2015 20:54
|
|
|
Necc0 posted:Jeb Iowa is free money at this point: Buh!?
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2015 20:58
|
|
|
a cop posted:
https://www.predictit.org/Contract/1475/Will-Bush-drop-out-before-the-Iowa-caucuses#data Free $.10 on every $.90
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2015 21:05
|
|
|
Necc0 posted:https://www.predictit.org/Contract/1475/Will-Bush-drop-out-before-the-Iowa-caucuses#data Ah, thanks. I'll make back my long shot on bernie no 30%.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2015 21:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 19:28 |
|
|
They still haven't closed the Graham dropout contract but the one after that should be Rand. If he misses the first tier debate cutoff he's gone.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2015 23:42
|
|