|
Yeah, if you think she's gonna win and feel comfortable betting money on it, then go for it. However, sometimes you can familiarize yourself with the rules of a contract and try to maximize chances of winning that way. For example, if candidates X and Y are both running for Senate, and you feel confident that candidate X will win, all things being equal, I would recommend buying some [Candidate Y No] shares. If X wins, you win. If Y wins, you lose. But if Y wins but then gets hit and killed by a bus the next day, you'll still win, as Y will never be sworn into office. I've never had anything like that happen in any of the markets I've bet on, but it doesn theoretically give you an edge. That being said, if [Candidate X Yes] shares are cheaper than [Candidate Y No] shares, then you need to weigh the possibility of increased returns versus a slightly increased chance of winning. Really, that's a personal calculation that you need to make on a case-by-case basis.
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2018 21:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 6, 2024 15:07 |
|
|
there was one market of who would win the iowa straw poll in 2016 but then they canceled it because trump was going to win and they didnt want that to happen and so every no contract paid out lol
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2018 21:48
|
|
|
Shear Modulus posted:there was one market of who would win the iowa straw poll in 2016 but then they canceled it because trump was going to win and they didnt want that to happen and so every no contract paid out lol What? I knew PI could be lovely sometimes but I've never heard of anything like that before. Also, ^^^ this market ^^^ is a nice reminder to read the rules of every contract and be careful what you buy, and how much you invest into any given market.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2018 21:55
|
|
|
no, predictit did the correct thing. the contracts were "will candidate x win the iowa straw poll", and the iowa straw poll was canceled, so nobody won the iowa straw poll
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2018 21:56
|
|
|
Shear Modulus posted:no, predictit did the correct thing. the contracts were "will candidate x win the iowa straw poll", and the iowa straw poll was canceled, so nobody won the iowa straw poll lol, the ball landed on 00 is what you're saying
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2018 21:59
|
|
|
https://www.predictit.org/markets/detail/1328/Who-will-win-the-2015-Iowa-Straw-Poll
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2018 21:59
|
|
|
literally this big posted:What? I knew PI could be lovely sometimes but I've never heard of anything like that before.  that market is still open?? Incredible
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2018 22:04
|
|
|
literally this big posted:So I read thru this multiple times, and all I can say is: wut. Click on the link that says: Your Risk in this Market Is: $X.XX It will give you the breakdown of your payouts for each contract, and your total risk for the market. In this case, you probably had another contract in that market and so your overall risk increased. As has been said, it can be unintuitive. But it can also be profitable: if every YES contract in the market adds up to 110c or more, you can guarantee a profit by shorting every contract because your overall risk will go negative. In that case, PI just credits you the negative risk. So for that market I had negative risk of $35 (PI gave me back $35), plus I'd win $30 more if 217- hit. Here's another example: I have the full $850 invested in four different contracts. But because they act as a hedge against one another (I can only lose one), this combination of bets only "costs" me $614. So my payout if none of the above hits will be my maximum risk ($614) plus the payout for that scenario $473. If I sold one of the contracts at 99c I would take the profit, but at the same time as PI credits me the profit it would subtract from my account the additional risk I'm exposed to.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2018 22:55
|
|
|
literally this big posted:Yeah, if you think she's gonna win and feel comfortable betting money on it, then go for it. Also this is, all things considered, correct. NO covers you for significantly more outcomes than YES - including the hit by a bus thing. Also, NO shares are often cheaper than the YES shares for the same outcome. On the Pelosi thing, one of the scenarios being discussed is that Republicans could vote for her. In that scenario, a higher number of Democrats could vote no and she could be speaker. So it's not precisely the case that they represent the same thing. Figuring out what scenarios could happen that would gently caress you over is part of the game. Also this thread is making me realize how inured I've become to betting larger amounts.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2018 23:00
|
|
|
Hufflepuff or bust! posted:But it can also be profitable: if every YES contract in the market adds up to 110c or more, you can guarantee a profit by shorting every contract because your overall risk will go negative. What, exactly, does this mean? What should I be doing in this market, where all the Yes options currently total 127¢?
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2018 23:27
|
|
|
literally this big posted:What, exactly, does this mean?
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2018 23:39
|
|
|
Utah 4th market sitting right at 50/50 now. It's coming down to whether the last batch of provisional ballots from Salt Lake City tips just Democratic enough to push McAdams over the top.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2018 23:51
|
|
|
UT-4 feels like a genuine coin flip at this point
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2018 00:25
|
|
|
https://mobile.twitter.com/Taniel/status/1064687346875072512 looks like the coin is coming up mcadams
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2018 02:46
|
|
|
literally this big posted:What, exactly, does this mean? best way to understand negative risk is a thought experiment. say you have a market with two contracts. one contract will resolve yes, the other no. you can buy yes or no in each contract. somehow you are able to buy a share of no at 1c in each contract. so the contract that resolves yes loses you a cent in that contract, but you gain 99c in the other. you are guaranteed a profit of 98c in this market no matter what. now note the yes shares at the time you bought each cost 99c, so they add up to 198c. now do this for the same setup, but you bought no shares at 2c. leads to a guaranteed 96c profit. and note the yes prices add up to 196c. now keep doing this increasing the prices you bought no at. you’ll eventually see buying no at 49c in one contract and 50c in the other is the least, though guaranteed, profitable negative risk arrangement. and those yes shares would add up to 101c BUT WAIT! there is one element we forgot for the sake of making that explanation as clear as possible—fees! basically, after including fees, the least, though guaranteed, profitable negative risk arrangement is when the yes side of your no shares add up to 109c.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2018 05:48
|
|
|
https://mobile.twitter.com/Tom_Winter/status/1065000119920197634 yes shares currently trading at $.84, opportunity for quick cash.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2018 23:10
|
|
|
isnt the market whether he testifies? do the test answers count? i dont want to bet on whether predictit decides if it counts or not
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2018 23:26
|
|
|
The rules include written answers, though I am still new at this and have yet to be totally burned by a predictit ruling.quote:On or before December 31, 2018, Donald Trump, while serving as president, shall provide sworn testimony, whether written or oral, to Robert Mueller or one or more other members of the Special Counsel for the United States Department of Justice team, in the course of their investigation of Russian interference with the 2016 presidential election or related matters. Disclosure by the White House, the Special Counsel team, and/or an authorized representative of the Department of Justice that such testimony occurred must take place on or before that date. Kazak_Hstan has issued a correction as of 23:32 on Nov 20, 2018 |
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2018 23:30
|
|
|
In conclusion everyone should immediately put $850 on yes without any further investigation.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2018 23:33
|
|
|
I wonder if there will be some weaseling around "sworn testimony" on account of his written answers not being "sworn" or whatever
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2018 23:39
|
|
|
The final page of answers is just PSYCHE scrawled in crayon.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2018 23:56
|
|
|
https://www.washingtonpost.com/amph...impression=true Wapo has it, including Giuliani on the record confirming written answers. Price is hovering around $.80.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2018 00:00
|
|
|
bawfuls posted:I wonder if there will be some weaseling around "sworn testimony" on account of his written answers not being "sworn" or whatever
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2018 00:12
|
|
|
ask yourself: why is the wh worried about a perjury trap as they’ve constantly stated if these are not sworn answers? the ‘these are not sworn answers’ argument makes zero sense abelwingnut has issued a correction as of 01:44 on Nov 21, 2018 |
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2018 01:42
|
|
|
Yeah but PredictIt still hasn't figured out if there was a furlough back in what, February? I wouldn't put it past them to get confused about "sworn" here. That being said I bought some Yes shares so 
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2018 02:30
|
|
|
There could also be some question about what constitutes a disclosure that such testimony took place, but with Giuliani going on record that seems unlikely as well. I think really this market is an opportunity to make money on the difference between the title and the rules- the title sounds like a face to face interview while the rules are pretty broad.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2018 03:11
|
|
|
lol, just lol if you haven't lucked out and/or been screwed by a rules blundering and or clarification by PI Sometimes in the same market!
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2018 03:44
|
|
|
yes shares of jr indictment before the year end are down to $.20
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2018 03:58
|
|
|
Social Studies 3rd Period posted:lol, just lol if you haven't lucked out and/or been screwed by a rules blundering and or clarification by PI I have not yet, so hopefully i’ll get hammered on this and have something better than money: a legitimate grievance I can nurse for years
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2018 05:12
|
|
|
cargo cult posted:yes shares of jr indictment before the year end are down to $.20 They're worth about 5c hth
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2018 14:25
|
|
|
lol trump testifies 2018 is down to $.54 i still think it will resolve yes soon
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2018 17:58
|
|
|
Kazak_Hstan posted:lol trump testifies 2018 is down to $.54 Yup. this is one of the most egregious examples of PI bettors' idiocy. E: headshot. https://starspangledgamblers.com/2018/11/21/update-sell-your-car-sell-your-kids-trump-is-giving-sworn-testimony/ dik-dik has issued a correction as of 19:29 on Nov 21, 2018 |
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2018 18:26
|
|
|
quote:Do you think that when President John F. Kennedy said that the USA, “Should commit itself to achieving the goal, before this decade is out, of landing a man on the Moon and returning him safely to the Earth,” he was worried about the opinion of some scientist who screamed, “Wait, we shouldn’t go to the moon because we don’t understand black holes yet?” hell yes, this is exactly the motivation I needed to put my savings in predictit
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2018 20:37
|
|
|
lmao I had not read the comments until this market, this unhinged sweaty nerdfighting is well worth the $16 I irresponsibly risked on this venture
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2018 00:11
|
|
|
Kazak_Hstan posted:lmao I had not read the comments until this market, this unhinged sweaty nerdfighting is well worth the $16 I irresponsibly risked on this venture The comments are typically 60% hapless chuds raging out, 30% pure trolling/bait, and 10% whales styling on the chuds/idiots/trolls and bragging about winning. Oftentimes you can tell when a market is ripe by the sheer volume of chudspam. They almost universally just pick the Republican to win/outperform regardless of anything else
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2018 03:44
|
|
|
literally this big posted:What, exactly, does this mean? Abel basically covered this, but if you see a market where the "Sell Yes" prices add up to 110+, it's pretty much guaranteed negative risk if you short every contract. You can test this by buying one share of each contract. The most profitable "best" way to do this is to try to short at even higher than the "sell yes" price, but this means you are hoping that your orders will fill before the price moves. "Sell Yes" is the price at which you can short right away.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2018 03:11
|
|
|
Espy has been available in the 4-6c range tonight. Haven't bought any myself (since I'm tied up in Pelosi etc.) but it's a pretty drat good value on a race that's probably closer to 80-20. Lottery tickets, etc.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2018 08:12
|
|
|
i'm betting on the swedish election. they already had it and are just now hashing out coalitions. my guess is the current PM is gonna pull something together
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2018 08:18
|
|
|
MS runoff markets have some volume going
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2018 02:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 6, 2024 15:07 |
|
|
BrutalistMcDonalds posted:i'm betting on the swedish election. they already had it and are just now hashing out coalitions. my guess is the current PM is gonna pull something together How's that going so far? I got into a negative risk position by shorting everyone hoping it would be not any of them, but then changed my mind and sold everything for +$3. Hooray. Just now starting to draw out some of my winnings for the year that I can't find dumb markets to stash them into. Already have maxes in shorting all of Comey, Ohr, Abedin, Clinton, and Comey charges.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2018 06:41
|
|