Current Position:
The highest priced answer at market close will be chosen. All other answers will resolve N/A.
The chosen answer will resolve Yes if the player who makes the move ultimately wins, No if they lose, and 50% if the game ends in a draw.
Tomorrow, a market will decide Black's move.
Answers must be legal, correctly disambiguated moves. Answers created in the final two hours of the market and edited answers are ineligible to be chosen.
Resigning and offering draws are not legal moves.
Ties (using the user view, not the api) are broken by (# yes holders - # no holders).
Who will win? https://manifold.markets/MaxE/who-will-win-futarchy-chess?r=TWF4RQ
Previous moves:
1. e4
Update 2026-04-02 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): Non-chosen moves resolve N/A, meaning all trades on those answers are reversed (mana returned to traders).
1,000People are also trading
@MaxE Right, but the chosen move continues and will resolve yes if black (in this case) wins. While the chosen move last move will resolve yes if white wins.
@MaxE couldn't we keep on trading the chosen moves throughout the game, or does that violate the futarchy system? i guess it makes it too easy to arb all of them against the main game odds.
edit: i still don't see how that's such a bad thing. it's the same as unlocking all this trapped liquidity and pooling it towards the game outcome.
@moobunny sorry, my 'bad thing' comment was about my own suggestion of reopening these move markets until the game ends so traders can keep betting on the outcome. Your interpretation of the resolution is correct, and would remain the same.
@moobunny your phrase "these all arbitrage with each other" is what made me think, why not reactivate this arb throughout the game, instead of only until the move(s) gets chosen.
Costs the host/liquidity provider mana in the end that they otherwise would retain -- this keeps total game cost down
Annoying and a lot of work to manage dozens of positions across many markets when you can mostly just work with the "who will win" market
I think it's okay as-is.
@deagol My reasons:
It feels like abusing the unique trader bonus to have many markets that all predict the same thing and it would be a pain for people to have to arb all of them.
I think it may create interesting dynamics if people are forcibly locked into one side of the game once they choose it and can't sell their position (and by extension allegiance) to someone else.
Someone could bet an option up at the perfect time and then immediately sell to kind of cheat the decision. Betting up an option rn causes the consequences of the move to fall on you.
It feels more authentic to futarchy (though it isnt needed to be "real futarchy" ig) if positions sit locked once the decision has been made.
It costs me literally 33 mana (after n/a answer liquidity returns to me) before unique trader bonuses to make each of these markets; the cost isn't an issue.
@Eliza just so everyone knows, the rules say this answer is invalid. Don't put too much on it because it will probably get N/A.
Guys we have several users already over-invested in a white win with e4 at 66%. That means they have CASH TO BLOW on rigging this one. Since only the winning answer will be chosen and all the others will N/A, they can spend the bad cash on all the answers to ensure the worst outcome for black.
REMEMBER WE HAVE USERS OVER INVESTED IN WHITE AND THEY NEED TO MAKE BLACK LOSE TO PROTECT THEIR LOCKED IN POSITIONS.
@Eliza all the evidence I'm aware of puts white e4 at roughly 52-55% so they are over invested by quite a bit. This might be a hard fight.
@Eliza not sure i understand how a manipulator can profit from propping up a bad move for black here to try to make black lose, since they're left holding the Y bag on the bad moves chosen?
@deagol if you have a large amount bet on the other team winning, a small amount spent to ensure the other team's loss might be acceptable. You could also choose to place No limit orders on good moves to make them not be picked and then get your money back
@MaxE so the defending team just bets N on the bad moves (these are good bets if that move were to be chosen) down enough to get them not chosen, forcing the manipulator to bet Y to keep them above the others, and thus why I said they'd be 'left holding the crappy Y bags'
@deagol Umm, basically @Mochi and I both got No on white 1. e4 at a good price. So we are actually in a good position right now! But those users who have Yes on white 1. e4 at 66% are highly incentivized to double down right away and push this to cascade into a dominating white position.
We need to spend our effort defending but those guys will act as a powerful bloc of 4 users to push white to victory!
@Eliza i don't even need to root for a side to profit from their overextended bets! I'll just bet Y on good moves, whether white or black, at good prices at their expense, and N on bad moves. I'd end up with a profitable position no matter which side ends up winning.