No part of the territory left uncontrolled by Israeli forces, in the sense that 'control' is typically applied in these kinds of situations.
Related questions
🏅 Top traders
| # | Name | Total profit |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ṁ1,466 | |
| 2 | Ṁ732 | |
| 3 | Ṁ628 | |
| 4 | Ṁ361 | |
| 5 | Ṁ301 |
I'm arbitraging this market with https://manifold.markets/JoaoPedroSantos/will-gaza-be-de-facto-controled-by. Complete military occupation surely implies "de facto control", so this market should be trading at a price below the linked market.
@EgeErdil Your arbitrage worked, but now I wonder if things haven't swung too far in the other direction?? Between this market on "complete military occupation" (24% before I bid it up to 27%) and this other market asking about "de-facto control w/simpler criteria" (was 53% before I bid it down to 44%) is a large gap!
https://manifold.markets/connorwilliams97/will-gaza-be-de-facto-controlled-by
Seems like the large difference in probability might stem from:
- the other question maybe doesn't require "complete" control of all the territory (maybe it's just referring to Gaza city, in the northern half of the Gaza strip?)
- the other question includes other options that aren't "military occupation", like some kind of puppet government which is "de-facto" under the thumb of Israel? But it seems hard for this detail to account for such a large difference in likelihood?
