Which team will win the NBA Finals 2024?
Jul 1
Boston Celtics
Minnesota Timberwolves
Dallas Mavericks
Indiana Pacers

Resolved according to https://www.espn.com/nba/ or a similar main sports website.

If for some reason there are no 2024 NBA Finals, this is resolved to PROB at the end of 2024. (This also includes if a champion is declared without any NBA Finals being played, e. g. via an armchair decision. If any amount of actual NBA Finals basketball is played and a winning team is declared following that, I will resolve to that team.)

If possible, use {city/area + name} for teams, e.g., "Boston Celtics" or "Golden State Warriors". In the case of duplicate answers, I will consider only to the first one added (e.g., if Team A wins and there are multiple answers "Team A", only the first one that was added is resolved as correct).

Get Ṁ600 play money
Sort by:

Something is still wrong with this market, fyi

bought Ṁ1 Answer #b17a03cb3448 YES

I still think something is wrong with the script @JamesGrugett ... this market is behaving very weirdly for a linked multiple-choice market.

Pacers are currently at 0.0%. Buying ONE mana of YES takes that to 4%. This market has a trading volume of 120k and a subsidy pool of 7k. That makes no sense.

@benshindel also, there's no way for me to cash out of my shares now before market resolution, due to this. Selling anything is basically at a 99% loss because of how illiquid the market is now. Also I could spend a trivial amount of mana to heavily manipulate temporary profits in this market for leagues.

@benshindel I tried to sell 5 shares in an option and the market gave me an error saying "sale too large for liquidity pool"... what...?

@benshindel I noticed the liquidity number on these MC markets doesn't always reflect the current open liquidity. Presumably it should say like 100 or 200 for this market now.

@travis but like.... why would it be so low? There's such a high trading volume in this market

@benshindel I don't think the trading volume has any affect on the AMM liquidity.

@benshindel IIUC, james calculated the liquidity for this market using the typical formula for standard markets these days, based on unique traders.

it feels strange because we placed bets under the different market type, & built large positions that would have been ~impossible to do into the AMM under the new market type. so this market now behaves a bit like people took a low liquidity market, & filled large limit orders into it. (in that case, you'd get the same behavior—traders have large positions despite low liquidity). which is definitely weird behavior, and not quite what was expected when people placed the bets

(e.g. before the switch you could sell out a bunch of your position, now you absolutely can't, your best bet is to find people in the other markets who want to place limit orders & let you sell out)

@Ziddletwix Yeah, it looks like there's at least 1000 liquidity, it's just split between all the options I guess.

Like it's hard to see how this market can have 6x as much liquidity as: /jdilla/who-will-win-the-2026-nba-champions

@travis That’s confusing to me because it’s a LINKED multiple choice market? So shouldn’t all the options have linked liquidities somehow? Or am I misunderstanding something?

@benshindel I believe it's 1 shared pool, yes.

I was thinking you should be able to eyeball the actual liquidity by checking the max profit of bidding one of the options from 1/n -> 100%. So that looks like about 900 mana here.

@travis It still has an unsubsidized tag, which is a little disrespectful if you ask me. @Joshua Why don't you get that off of my market ASAP, that would be splendid.

@Predictor Removed!

bought Ṁ1 Dallas Mavericks YES

Alright! I just ran a script to transform this market type to the new multiple choice. (It's the first to be converted in production.)

Let me know if you see any bugs!

@JamesGrugett oh that's neat!

@JamesGrugett Woah, thank you!

@JamesGrugett I was sooooo confused when I opened this market, lmao

@JamesGrugett also dang, I was really liking the fee-free bets here ;(

@JamesGrugett on first glance, it seems pretty buggy? there's way too little liquidity in the market for how many tens of thousands of mana are invested in it? like, betting 10 mana on the timberwolves takes them from 8 to 16%??? Even though I have like 16,000 shares in them already?

@benshindel Not a bug, we're just not adding a lot of liquidity.

Previous liquidity in DPM basically stole money from earlier traders haha. The new way at least doesn't do that.

@JamesGrugett But like… the market should still have at least as much liquidity as a comparable multiple-choice market would have with this large of trading volume, no?

would anyone be mad if I made a version of this with the new-style markets that allow both YES and NO bets

@SemioticRivalry I want to fade the Lakers

Comment hidden