According to most golds then most silvers then most bronzes ranking.
1,000🏅 Top traders
| # | Trader | Total profit |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ṁ8,093 | |
| 2 | Ṁ2,343 | |
| 3 | Ṁ1,156 | |
| 4 | Ṁ167 | |
| 5 | Ṁ146 |
Seems like discrete probability distributions (or ranges?) aren't a good fit for this type of question, given that a prediction for N means you actually buy at a mean of N +0.5. Headline number is showing "Expected 8" (7.5 rounded up) after result is known (7) and the liquidity has been sucked up.
Might explain why there was so much value to suck up even hours after the result was known. I stared at this market for over half an hour thinking I'd missed something. Guessing most potential traders were confused how this market worked too.
Yeah this is just an issue with the displayed expected value, not the underlying market (not that I particularly like numerical markets myself, I find 'em much more difficult to work with). The current system for displaying an EV is probably poor, but there's never going to be a perfect approach. (E.g. on Kalshi, they display an expected value based on the order book for multiple ranges and it's often wildly wrong).
it's true that with discrete probabilities you could technically get a more accurate EV estimate (whereas with ranges it's just a guess). but even so I don't think it will be that accurate. e.g. if nathan had set a much higher range here, up to 70+, i bet those buckets would also have had small-ish probabilities that only would get bet down sufficiently low if there was a lot of trading, but they have a lot of impact on the EV. (the root problem here is really with condensing all the info in the market into a single number)