pull down to refresh
42 sats \ 8 replies \ @mega_dreamer OP 19h \ parent \ on: We've not fogotten about ~Stacker_Sports Stacker_Sports
Yes your thinking is correct if this was a single binary (YES/NO) markets. The more wager(more shares issued on each side) it has, the less the odds move. Odds also move in relation to liquidity. Odds move in relation to N (no. of shares) and b (liquidity).
Multi or "Range" markets are very deceptive in nature. In a range market when you're placing a NO bet on 49ers, it gives you an illusion that you're trading on that outcome (49ers). But in reality, you're not even betting on that outcome, NO means you're buying YES of all option except 49ers. In a range market, NO is just a convenience YES bet on all other options. That's why the odds are not sticky as you would normally think it should be.
Pro tip: If you really want to move the odds of 49ers, you'd be better off picking top 5-10 teams that you think has better chances than 49ers and placing YES individual bets on them. Better efficiency of your capital.
Mega Pro tip: When you're buying NO of 49ers, you're actually buying YES of all 31 teams. Worse efficiency of your capital.
49ers No bet is my DCA
reply
Yeah, I’m definitely hoping I don’t have to divest from it.
reply
It seems like it’ll work once the SB plays out. It just won’t resolve once the 49ers are eliminated in the first round of playoffs
reply
We've been thinking in the same direction. A lot of my team members wants to bet against 49ers 🤣
reply
Risk free return
reply
The main reason I don't often buy No shares, is exactly what you said, and I usually do so only when arbitraging a Yes with better odds from another site (or just to irritate @grayruby).
I guess I was just thinking there might be a way to have elements of both worlds in play, where each outcome has it's own liquidity that effects the odds rebalancing.
reply
Ha ha!
Valid point: It's ok to buy NO shares to irritate @grayruby. LMSR allows it ;)
I guess I was just thinking there might be a way to have elements of both worlds in play, where each outcome has it's own liquidity that effects the odds rebalancing.
Yes there is a way to do it. It can be achieved by creating Single/Binary YES/NO markets for each outcome/team. And group together in the UI to disguise it as Multi-option market. That way every option/team->market has its own isolated b and N.
However this approach is very liquidity intensive( much more liquidity will be needed to create such markets).
This type of markets will only work if there is a high volume and high frequency trading, where trader's are waiting like a hawk for arbitrage opportunity between the individual teams/option market. High frequency trading automatically tends to fix the odds variance between the teams market.
Bottom line, we are not there yet, once Predyx reaches such high volume and high frequency trading levels, we will for sure start launching isolated markets like explained above.
Hope this helps.
reply
I feel like there should be a way to internalize those arbitrage opportunities, rather than wait for 3rd parties to do it.
For instance, let's suppose for simplicity that about half of the liquidity is on the 49ers and the rest is spread evenly across all the other teams. If I buy enough shares that the 49ers would move 2% in a single market, they would now only move 1% and every other team would move proportionally to rebalance the cumulative odds.
I'm thinking about it like a physical balancing act, where liquidity is analogous to mass.
reply