4 ms·
As a record of how likely people considered this outcome: Prevost was hovering around 1% on Polymarket, and was <0.5% between white smoke and announcement.
by comeonbro 1y ago
As a record of how likely people considered this outcome:
Prevost was hovering around 1% on Polymarket, and was <0.5% between white smoke and announcement.
- andrepd 1y agoAmong the most unlikely papabile I would have preferred someone like Tolentino.
- oytis 1y agoSounds like an amazing opportunity for insider trading
- Onavo 1y agoIsn't the max profit limited by counterparty liquidity? Polymarket won't pay out anything extra.
- bowsamic 1y agoI wouldn't be shocked if that's one of the reasons why they sequester
- connicpu 1y agoThe sequestering goes back centuries, but it's certainly a reason to keep doing it beyond just removing outside influence once the process begins.
- bowsamic 1y agoI'm sure insider gambling also goes back centuries, probably even since before Christ
- b800h 1y agoThere was a horrendous problem with gambling on the election at one point. I believe the most recent episode of "Tasting History with Max Miller" covers this.
- desertrider12 1y agoThere was also an interesting article here a month ago about the history of betting on conclaves. https://nodumbideas.com/p/betting-on-the-pope-was-the-original https://nodumbideas.com/p/betting-on-the-pope-was-the-origin... https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43290892 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43290892
- TechDebtDevin 1y agoYes, but how much liquidity was available?
- jowea 1y agoWell, seems that conclaves really are notoriously unpredictable
- aidenn0 1y agoAt least for recently, it's almost always someone on the short list, but often not near the top of that list.
- kylehotchkiss 1y ago"people" "Polymarket" How many non-technical people are on polymarket? That seems like a poor sample size.
- pie_flavor 1y agoOne of two things must be true: Either Polymarket's more accurate than you are, or you can make free money.
- aaron695 1y ago[dead]
- handsclean 1y agoIt’s not free money, it’s high risk with a net positive expected return. Any significant profit would carry an irresponsible level of risk. Significant profit without significant risk would take many bets, which means sustaining the accuracy advantage over broader subject matter, which means lots of time spent, which means it’s time for money, which is just a job.
- ookdatnog 1y agoSuppose I gave Provost 5% chance of winning the papal election. Then I would have been more accurate than Polymarket. But I wouldn't call betting on what I perceive as 5% chance of winning "making free money"; from my perspective it would still be a wild risk to bet any significant money on that outcome.