Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 25 of 25

Thread: Official PredictIt thread.

  1. #21
    Originally Posted by Dan Druff View Post
    A little tip:

    Often if you're only taking one position in a race (say, Buttigieg for New Hampshire), you should buy all NO for everyone you don't want, rather than YES for the one you do. It's the exact same bet, but you get better value on the NO.

    To figure this out, take the profit you would make buying one share of each NO (which would be all of them if your guy wins), and compare it to the profit you would make buying a single share of YES.

    Predictit doesn't charge you full price when you made redundant bets, because only one person can win each race. So if you were to buy NO one everyone but Buttigieg, you would "win" all of them except one in the worst case. Therefore, PredictIt calculates that, and the cost or owning a bunch of NOs ends up very similar to buying one share of YES.
    So say there are 6 in a race. A-F. So I buy 100 each of A-E as no's at .85.

    You're saying I don't need 100 x .85 x 5 in capital to purchase all these positions?

  2. #22
    Originally Posted by accountinquestion View Post
    Originally Posted by Dan Druff View Post
    A little tip:

    Often if you're only taking one position in a race (say, Buttigieg for New Hampshire), you should buy all NO for everyone you don't want, rather than YES for the one you do. It's the exact same bet, but you get better value on the NO.

    To figure this out, take the profit you would make buying one share of each NO (which would be all of them if your guy wins), and compare it to the profit you would make buying a single share of YES.

    Predictit doesn't charge you full price when you made redundant bets, because only one person can win each race. So if you were to buy NO one everyone but Buttigieg, you would "win" all of them except one in the worst case. Therefore, PredictIt calculates that, and the cost or owning a bunch of NOs ends up very similar to buying one share of YES.
    So say there are 6 in a race. A-F. So I buy 100 each of A-E as no's at .85.

    You're saying I don't need 100 x .85 x 5 in capital to purchase all these positions?
    Yes that's what I'm saying.

    https://predictit.freshdesk.com/supp...ntract-markets
    Check out my poker forum, and weekly internet radio show at http://pokerfraudalert.com

  3. #23
    Look at this BS regarding caucus states:

    Should two or more candidates be tied for the most delegates, this market will resolve in favor of the candidate with the first alphabetical name (last name, then first) among those so tied.
    WHAT?!?

    That's an insane rule.

    Why not just make the tiebreaker the popular vote received?
    Check out my poker forum, and weekly internet radio show at http://pokerfraudalert.com

  4. #24
    Originally Posted by Dan Druff View Post
    Look at this BS regarding caucus states:

    Should two or more candidates be tied for the most delegates, this market will resolve in favor of the candidate with the first alphabetical name (last name, then first) among those so tied.
    WHAT?!?

    That's an insane rule.

    Why not just make the tiebreaker the popular vote received?
    It is crazy. It makes pricing this a lot more difficult. So now you have to figure out the chances they tie and give that to Pete. With your rule, the price discovery mechanism doesn't need to know the chance they'll tie.

    It is doubly stupid when you look at predictit for what it is supposed to be. An academic thing aimed at predicting outcomes of events. Ok, then why the stupid rule where the outcome isn't particularly applicable to anything in real life?

    I was swing trading the candidates priced around 10 cents. It worked for Biden but then I venture out to Amy. Well she took a dive across the board and hasn't came back. So that erased the previous day's gains. I have to monitor this stuff a lot closer and stay away from fringe candidates. Biden is going to constantly bounce around being such an establishment guy. I diversified my swing trading to get access to more volume. These really are tiny markets, which is why they can be so profitable. You could never do this with significant money.

    Still up 40% overall though. Not worth my time, but better than wasting my time on something that doesn't make $.

  5. #25
    Ok I got out of most of my positions because the bets are very correlated and I don't have time to manage my positions. Up 30% from my buyin but lost back a lot to laziness.

    So I am trying to figure out if this is a lock. 48 delegates. If they tie, the < 1% is a loser. So how about 1% - 2%? How likely is this. So 24 vs 23. or any difference of 1 is the least possible, and that is 1/48, or basically guaranteed less than 2% but > 1%.

    So betting No on the 1% to 2% here seem like a literal mathematical lock. I have been drinking so tell me where I'm wrong here. I was just perusing stuff to find something to churn my balance through. Fuck, I bought 2% to 3% and sold it at a loss. Ok, now I have the right position. Such an idiot.

    Watch the Democrat fuck this up and lock my money up for 3 months over this 3-4% edge.

    https://www.predictit.org/markets/de...evada-caucuses

    The winning contract shall be that which identifies the difference in the percentage of county delegates in the 2020 Nevada Democratic caucuses awarded to the candidate winning the largest number of county delegates in excess of the number awarded to the candidate winning the second most. The percentage of county delegates awarded will be calculated as the number awarded to a candidate divided by the total number of awarded. In the event of a tie between two or more candidates for the largest number of county delegates awarded, the contract "Less than 1%" shall resolve to Yes.

    Should the result fall precisely on the threshold between two contracts, this market will resolve to the contract with the higher numerical range.

    PredictIt may determine how and when to settle the market based on all information available to PredictIt at the relevant time.

    PredictIt reserves the right to wait for further official, party, judicial or other relevant announcements, reports or decisions to resolve any ambiguity or uncertainty before the market is settled. Markets may stay open or incur a delay in settlement well past the date of the contest in certain circumstances. If there is any change to an event, or any situation arises, that is not in PredictIt’s view addressed adequately by the market rules, PredictIt will decide the fairest and most appropriate course of action.

    PredictIt’s decisions and determinations under this rule shall be at PredictIt’s sole discretion and shall be final.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 83
    Last Post: 03-02-2019, 01:00 PM
  2. Replies: 201
    Last Post: 10-03-2018, 05:51 PM
  3. Caesars files for bankruptcy -- it's official
    By Alan Mendelson in forum Las Vegas
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 01-20-2015, 08:04 PM
  4. False Colors official trailer
    By Alan Mendelson in forum Movies, Media, and Television
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-14-2013, 02:53 AM
  5. The Official Arci - Singer Kid's Table
    By Vegas Vic in forum Las Vegas
    Replies: 212
    Last Post: 09-08-2012, 10:54 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •