5 ms·

The WSJ ran an earlier article stating that unless you have access to a lot of data, computing power, and statisticians, you're going to lose on those bets.

FinnLobsien 4mo ago
It’s gambling, and the house always wins.
- Saline9515 4mo ago
  There is no house on polymarket, it's pvp.
  - minraws 4mo ago
    Not true, polymarket and kalshi have a lot of system bets, basically bets where the other side is the market, and further they take a cut from the money gambled. There are other things as well, like they control which side wins, so they can leverage trade or even swing trade internally with a few bot accounts, not saying that they do but I don't see a ToC that says they can't.
    - Saline9515 4mo ago
      Polymarket can market-make, but so can you (i.e be on the both sides of the order book). You can't do that in a casino for instance. They don't control which side wins (UMA voters do). You should read up about prediction markets and in general sport gambling. Sport gambling platforms with a "house" usually derive their odds from pvp markets. Polymarket is similar to a classic order book market.
      - minraws 4mo ago
        1. Kalshi doesn't use UMA. 2. Yeah spend more money to get UMA votes to decide controversial decisions. That's how polymarket works. I have a lot of experience with similar systems, that's what we call rigging the election. Imagine a handful of anonymous UMA wallets dominate Polymarket’s contested resolutions, and reporters have linked some deciding wallets to positions in the very markets they judged. :But you don't have to it happens way too often and there is no oversight against it: https://www.wsj.com/finance/polymarket-bet-disputes-fb1b8c6a https://www.wsj.com/finance/polymarket-bet-disputes-fb1b8c6a https://www.barrons.com/articles/polymarket-prediction-market-disputes-uma-crypto-e3eae345 https://www.barrons.com/articles/polymarket-prediction-marke... I hope we can all agree to read this stuff. > Polymarket can market-make, but so can you (i.e be on the both sides of the order book). You can't do that in a casino for instance. That's like saying Elon can be a trillionaire, but so can you, I mean sure, anyone can, but how lucky do you think you have to be for your market to actually get any meaningful traction and for you to make any money. And even when you do, you are basically suggesting you should insider trade or rig bets to make money... I am certain that might be a flex for some but man I don't think that's the dunk you were looking for. At the end the only folks making money are the markets, but who am I to stop the blind. Best of luck, hopefully you don't regret it. I only hope people don't get addicted or robbed by this stuff, rich people can have their own fun I don't really care.
  - KeplerBoy 4mo ago
    Of course there is a house. You have a spread and probably a ton of other not so obvious fees. The house always wins by design, especially on polymarket.
    - coolguy456 4mo ago
      No not really. Polymarket collects fees which are simple and deterministic. Bets on outcomes are tokens on the blockchain and can be "split" ($1 into YES/NO outcome tokens) and "redeemed" (YES & NO outcome tokens into $1). Placing a bet is simply a market order on a plain ol' central-limit orderbook for these tokens. The only house there is maybe the market makers, which isn't a house. If it were a type of "house", then NYSE/NASDAQ has a house too.
  - karel-3d 4mo ago
    They take cuts.
    - Saline9515 4mo ago
      This is not what a "house" is, such as the "house edge" you get in a lottery game.
  - 40four 4mo ago
    In general, so is sports betting at a casino. It seems many people don’t understand this. You aren’t betting against the casino, you are betting against the other gamblers. The house “wins” because of the juice, eg. even odds past out -110. A smart book is going to try to keep the money balanced, but that’s not always the case in practice
Dilettante_ 4mo ago
You don't need Colossus-level compute or a genius-level IQ to evaluate the question "Will the steam machine cost more than $700 at release", or "Will 2026 be the hottest year on record".
- weird-eye-issue 4mo ago
  Sure but that level of confidence is what would also eventually wipe you out because gamblers are not necessarily known for proper risk management. You could win 10 bets in a row but then it would only take one bet that you had 100% conviction on for you to lose and you get wiped out
  - warmedcookie 4mo ago
    I don't know much about gambling but is it not common to set for yourself max bets so your pool of cash doesn't deplete like you do when buying stocks or trading options so you can leverage up or down. I know it's a little different, but there is a similar principle. Maybe only allow people to spend 1/5 their pool of cash per bet so it never reaches zero
  - Dilettante_ 4mo ago
    You're sneaking in a prior assumption that people will act stupidly, and then make the argument "Well since they act stupidly they will have bad outcomes". That's like me claiming "Your startup is gonna fail, I can tell, because you'd need to be able to read and write to make it in business!"(sneaking in the prior assumption that the person in question is not in fact able to read or write) Your strategic consideration is wise, though. 'Diversification' is one of the first things people will teach wrt investment literacy.
    - weird-eye-issue 4mo ago
      Well my assumption that gamblers will do something stupid is not that far flung. And regarding your comment about investment literacy yes I agree with you but just to be clear we are discussing gambling and not investing.

FinnLobsien 4mo ago

It’s gambling, and the house always wins.

Saline9515 4mo ago
There is no house on polymarket, it's pvp.
- minraws 4mo ago
  Not true, polymarket and kalshi have a lot of system bets, basically bets where the other side is the market, and further they take a cut from the money gambled. There are other things as well, like they control which side wins, so they can leverage trade or even swing trade internally with a few bot accounts, not saying that they do but I don't see a ToC that says they can't.
  - Saline9515 4mo ago
    Polymarket can market-make, but so can you (i.e be on the both sides of the order book). You can't do that in a casino for instance. They don't control which side wins (UMA voters do). You should read up about prediction markets and in general sport gambling. Sport gambling platforms with a "house" usually derive their odds from pvp markets. Polymarket is similar to a classic order book market.
    - minraws 4mo ago
      1. Kalshi doesn't use UMA. 2. Yeah spend more money to get UMA votes to decide controversial decisions. That's how polymarket works. I have a lot of experience with similar systems, that's what we call rigging the election. Imagine a handful of anonymous UMA wallets dominate Polymarket’s contested resolutions, and reporters have linked some deciding wallets to positions in the very markets they judged. :But you don't have to it happens way too often and there is no oversight against it: https://www.wsj.com/finance/polymarket-bet-disputes-fb1b8c6a https://www.wsj.com/finance/polymarket-bet-disputes-fb1b8c6a https://www.barrons.com/articles/polymarket-prediction-market-disputes-uma-crypto-e3eae345 https://www.barrons.com/articles/polymarket-prediction-marke... I hope we can all agree to read this stuff. > Polymarket can market-make, but so can you (i.e be on the both sides of the order book). You can't do that in a casino for instance. That's like saying Elon can be a trillionaire, but so can you, I mean sure, anyone can, but how lucky do you think you have to be for your market to actually get any meaningful traction and for you to make any money. And even when you do, you are basically suggesting you should insider trade or rig bets to make money... I am certain that might be a flex for some but man I don't think that's the dunk you were looking for. At the end the only folks making money are the markets, but who am I to stop the blind. Best of luck, hopefully you don't regret it. I only hope people don't get addicted or robbed by this stuff, rich people can have their own fun I don't really care.
- KeplerBoy 4mo ago
  Of course there is a house. You have a spread and probably a ton of other not so obvious fees. The house always wins by design, especially on polymarket.
  - coolguy456 4mo ago
    No not really. Polymarket collects fees which are simple and deterministic. Bets on outcomes are tokens on the blockchain and can be "split" ($1 into YES/NO outcome tokens) and "redeemed" (YES & NO outcome tokens into $1). Placing a bet is simply a market order on a plain ol' central-limit orderbook for these tokens. The only house there is maybe the market makers, which isn't a house. If it were a type of "house", then NYSE/NASDAQ has a house too.
- karel-3d 4mo ago
  They take cuts.
  - Saline9515 4mo ago
    This is not what a "house" is, such as the "house edge" you get in a lottery game.
- 40four 4mo ago
  In general, so is sports betting at a casino. It seems many people don’t understand this. You aren’t betting against the casino, you are betting against the other gamblers. The house “wins” because of the juice, eg. even odds past out -110. A smart book is going to try to keep the money balanced, but that’s not always the case in practice

Dilettante_ 4mo ago

You don't need Colossus-level compute or a genius-level IQ to evaluate the question "Will the steam machine cost more than $700 at release", or "Will 2026 be the hottest year on record".

weird-eye-issue 4mo ago
Sure but that level of confidence is what would also eventually wipe you out because gamblers are not necessarily known for proper risk management. You could win 10 bets in a row but then it would only take one bet that you had 100% conviction on for you to lose and you get wiped out
- warmedcookie 4mo ago
  I don't know much about gambling but is it not common to set for yourself max bets so your pool of cash doesn't deplete like you do when buying stocks or trading options so you can leverage up or down. I know it's a little different, but there is a similar principle. Maybe only allow people to spend 1/5 their pool of cash per bet so it never reaches zero
- Dilettante_ 4mo ago
  You're sneaking in a prior assumption that people will act stupidly, and then make the argument "Well since they act stupidly they will have bad outcomes". That's like me claiming "Your startup is gonna fail, I can tell, because you'd need to be able to read and write to make it in business!"(sneaking in the prior assumption that the person in question is not in fact able to read or write) Your strategic consideration is wise, though. 'Diversification' is one of the first things people will teach wrt investment literacy.
  - weird-eye-issue 4mo ago
    Well my assumption that gamblers will do something stupid is not that far flung. And regarding your comment about investment literacy yes I agree with you but just to be clear we are discussing gambling and not investing.