Will at least 75% of the USA COVID-19 cases between 1/1/22 and 2/28/23 occur between 1/1/22 and 2/28/22?

Basic

Ṁ26k

resolved Sep 22

Resolved

ALL

Resolved according to https://www.cold-takes.com/bet-with-zvi-about-omicron/ Dates are inclusive. #ZviOnOmicron #Omicron

This question is managed and resolved by Manifold.

Get

1,000

and

3.00

11 Comments

37 Holders

312 Trades

Sort by:

Zvi conceded this bet: https://thezvi.substack.com/p/covid-92222-the-joe-biden-sings

I somehow lost money buying in at 47%. Guess I should look more closely at the liquidity next time

predicted NO

@TjadenHess Unfortunate that happened to you, yeah the liquidity pool only has M$100 so selling a bunch of shares at once just can't yield that much M$ - the market went 5% → 99.4% for your sell order so a lot of your shares were sold for pennies on the dollar. It would be nice if there was a graph of number of shares sold vs the total proceeds and price changes (and a similar graph for buy orders too). If you had done a buy right away you could have regained basically all of what you lost, except fees, but I saw the market wildly mispriced and bought first :)

predicted NO

I was trying to figure out the maximum amount of money you can get out of the market by selling NO, and I think it's basically the number of YES shares available in the liquidity pool + YES shares available in limit orders. If you have infinite NO shares, but there are only 500 YES shares on offer in liquidity pool+limit orders, I think you basically can't redeem your NO shares for more than $500 total. This market's pool has roughly 500 YES shares, and there weren't any limit orders until after your sell happened, so that's why you got roughly M$500 of sell proceeds, I think.

Whoops...

Cases between Jan 1 and Mar 1: 21797514 Cases between Jan 1 and now: 29379163 % of cases which are between Jan 1 and Mar 1: 74% and it will only keep going down

@Yev Yep, your numbers are slightly different than mine (I used the Wikipedia numbers since that's what the bet references) but I also find it's dropped below 75% - numbers posted on https://www.metaculus.com/questions/9119/holdens-bet-with-zvi-about-omicron/#comment-96242 So Holden wins (NO resolution here) except in the unlikely event that one of the following clauses changes the outcome: - "Each of us has the option to appeal to a third party (whom we've agreed on) to perform an adjustment for undertesting." - unlikely to make enough of a difference, given that we still have half a year left until 2/28/23. - "This bet is intended to apply to Omicron and earlier strains, and it will be a “push” if a post-Omicron strain “muddies the waters”" - The latest Omicron variants are still considered Omicron, but it's possible Zvi and Holden could agree that the newer Omicron variants are sufficiently different from the original Omicron that the bet resolves ambiguous.

(post-omicron sounds like N/A, but this isn't post-omicron.)

Oh look a new variant. https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#variant-proportions It doesn't even have to be deadly. If a variant produces a light cough and everyone ignores it, this still resolves NO.

Whoa. Looks like I'm better at predicting reality than what other people think? :P

Brace for loans! 1. Smart money wasn't betting here because the market lasts too long, so you don't need to pay too much attention to past prices. 2. Everyone gets a M$ 20 loan to stake, so now the market can actually move. 3. Everyone was distracted by Ukraine, current goings-on should increase the chance of disaster. 4. NO loans pay out faster if they're right, than they come due if they're wrong.

Related questions

Related questions