It is the maximum consecutive streak on each side and the maximum number of accounts with the same number of mana positions for each side.
So if the yes positions are 6, 7, 7, 7, 8 and the no positions are 3, 4, 5, 10, 10, 10 then both of these score 3*3=9 and because this is a tie it resolves no.
1,000🏅 Top traders
| # | Name | Total profit |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ṁ152 | |
| 2 | Ṁ10 | |
| 3 | Ṁ9 | |
| 4 | Ṁ9 | |
| 5 | Ṁ6 |
Any one of 4 people could defect to no and cause a no resolution. Also more to be made from betting no. First to jump may well get better terms but perhaps doing it early opens them up to risk of it swinging again. So this possibly suggest switching to no in last few seconds?
Risk free mana: For anyone at close having a position of spending 1 mana for a position of 1, 2 or 3 shares on no, if they don't profit from that position I will put a 3 manalink on one of their resolved markets and tag them.
I reserve the right to withdraw this offer if someone offers more for yes positions. (If anyone has taken up a position before I withdraw this offer then I will still honour it.)
Hmm, not popular still listed. I thought lots of people would pile on to 5 yes. Same being less subject to last minute changes than a long consecutive streak.
@cloe With 3 3 4 4 5 the longest chain is 3 and the max same is 2 so the calculation is 6, Yes a long chain is vulnerable but lots on the same number is less vulnerable.
Another thing is a large bet moves the % chance quite a bit. with % chance down to 40% more people may see the advantage of small bets on yes.