What am I missing here? It seems like this market keeps being significantly overpriced based on its description.

For the market to resolve YES, the electoral college margin needs to be no more than 40 points. The only elections where that's happened since Alaska and Hawaii became states were 2000 and 2004. So if we count the past six elections, that's a 1/3 chance, and the base rate is lower if you use any other window. It then also needs to hold that the winner wins Pennsylvania, which seems like it would not be much more than 70/30. (This is distinct from the unconditional probability of the winner winning Pennsylvania since this is in the case of a very close election.) The odds say it's a very close election given polls to date, but we're still almost two months out, and errors are likely to be correlated. (Also, I don't have Nate Silver's forecast, but at least recently it had the electoral college outside this bandwidth.)

I'd also think the odds of Pennsylvania being the tipping point state should be higher than this market, and Nate Silver recently had those at 32%.

I suppose I should also be betting on this and other markets.

It looks like maybe there's a miscalibrated bot automatically keeping this market high?

@ZacharyFreitasGroff No idea why @acc is so active here, as I recall it's just supposed to assess whether you are underconfident or overconfident and trade based on that.

My current best explanation is that people were perhaps betting on this market without carefully considering whether the numbers were correct first, or just mistakenly thinking this was about PA being the tipping point state.

As far as I can tell, 538 has the <40-point EV margin at about 20% and polymarket at about 30%.

oops misread the rules then Manifold gave stale odds when making a bit

oh well...

Potential arbitrage with https://manifold.markets/ManifoldPolitics/which-state-will-be-the-tipping-poi

@GustavoLacerda Yes, probably very correlated. More direct arb would be the 38 option I just added on this market (which also seems too high to me relative to 538 and polymarket).

@BoltonBailey It's a parlay on both, right? This is true when Pennsylvania is the tipping point AND the margin is 38 or fewer. Not true, this can resolve yes even if PA isn't the tipping point.

When the margin is under 38 in general, Pennsylvania being the tipping point implies the winner won PA, so yes, this will resolve YES when PA is tipping point and margin is under 38.

I don't see why it couldn't be the case that the margin is under 38, Pennsylvania is not the tipping point, and the winner still wins PA. It could just be the case that there is another state which also would have flipped the election which has a lower in-state margin than PA.

And conversely, PA could be the tipping point and this market could resolve no if the EV margin is >38.

They are still correlated though, I think it's just not a risk-free arb either way.

@BoltonBailey Yeah, you're right that this can resolve YES even if Pennsylvania is not the tipping point. It feels weird to say that Pennsylvania decided the election in this case, but it is true. (If Kamala wins, there's a good chance the "California decided the election", which is really weird.)

This just seemed massively overpriced to me on the basis of the 289 criterion alone.

@BoltonBailey Not to mention that the winner of PA losing the election is trading around 10% and is anticorrelated with the 289 thing. Am I crazy?

Upgraded to Basic