🏅 Top traders

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GDVqz4OWEAAQ6Sv?format=png&name=medium

Do we now expect: Angry: “I told you Peregrine would be deployed before Starship launches” ?

@ChristopherRandles Haven’t come across a post/clip from him directly but that would probably be the case given there are some comments congratulating him. If that interpretation holds it puts the “success” date and time somewhere on Jan 8 which is after the Jan 1 deadline for this market hence 50%, see the dates used in the example scenario.

I have decided to pause trading on this market, I will be paying out all open positions (Yes and No) at 2x the win amount plus refunding any losses. Both will be determined by the “Positions” page and will be sent via the “Send Mana” feature. This market was intended to follow Angry’s bet and the final paragraph was meant to be a summary of the rules he set so you did not have to look at his YouTube page, however I have not edited this paragraph or posted updates to the rules as they have been made. I believe the market question is still accurate as it will resolve to whichever has the first successful mission but the definition of what that means has changed due to the resolution source. Because of that this market will still resolve on top of refunds but the final paragraph will not be taken into consideration since the original description gives enough clues that it was meant to be an overview of anything discussed on the channel (which I never updated so that’s my bad). It shouldn’t matter anymore but in case you are still interested here are some scenarios:

Starship launches Dec 1 - “successful” but no soft landing, Vulcan Launches Dec 25, Deploys Peregrine Dec 31, Lands on moon Jan 2.

Angry: “I told you Peregrine would land on the moon before starship launches” - Resolves at 50%

Angry: “I told you Peregrine would be deployed before Starship launches” - Resolves NO

Angry: “I originally said soft landing but I really didn’t expect them to have an OFT first so I was wrong and I’ll get the tattoo” - Resolves YES

All of these fit within the market title and description minus the overview paragraph (Remember partial orbit counts as orbital). In the event he makes a ridiculous statement where the result of his bet completely contradicts the market title or he forgets about it/ ignores it this market will resolve N/A. In any scenario you keep the 2x payout for your open position.

Possibly getting very close to being able to resolve this at 50%?

SpaceX not planning soft touchdown on IFT2 and I doubt IFT3 will be before year end.

For Peregrine

"The launch is scheduled for 24 December 2023 at the earliest, with a window that runs to December 26, and another launch opportunity in January. After a 3 to 33 day Earth orbit and cruise to the Moon, followed by a 4 to 25 day lunar orbit phase, it will descend and land in Sinus Viscositatis (Bay of Stickiness)"

https://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/nmc/spacecraft/display.action?id=PEREGRN-1

24 Dec +3days +4days =31 Dec

but the chances of both 3 to 33 being 3 and 4 to 25 being 4 seems very slim.

or is it just needing to deploy peregrine from Vulcan rocket before 1/1/2024 date?

If something unfortunate happened to peregrine such that it does not land then SpaceX could have lots of goes at it in regard to the tattoo, but this claim says Vulcan's first mission..

Does that mean for this question if Vulcan (the rocket not the payload) first mission does what it is supposed to do but Peregrine payload has some issue that could cause a no resolution here?

Is this an intended deviation from the bet? Or should we interpret 'Vulcan first mission' as referring to the peregrine payload landing on the moon?

@ChristopherRandles As long as Vulcan does what it is supposed to do (put peregrine in proper orbit/ path) that counts as a success, so if something goes wrong with peregrine that is entirely it’s own fault that does not matter for this market. If it’s reported Vulcan damaged the payload which directly caused the failure that will not count as mission success even if it’s in the correct orbit.

"If something goes wrong with peregrine [..] that does not matter for this market"

That's in direct contradiction to the description, which says

"if starship [is successful] before Peregrine lands on the moon, [..] this market will resolve to Yes"

I'm not invested in this market cos the conditions have been a mess from the start, but like, please be specific and consistent from early on.

@Mqrius Market is will Angry lose or win his bet, description is the rules at the time of market creation and comment was most recent version of the rules I’m aware of. There has been some moving of the goalposts from Angry but that’s just part of the market, bad resolution source on my end but it’s how the market was written so I have to stick with it.

@Vortex That leaves me no wiser, if anything it adds more possibilities.

Now it could be:

A .Market is "will Angry lose or win his bet".

So if he claims victory this market is resolved no, if he concedes this market resolves yes and maybe if neither happens by 1/1/24 it is 50%

B. Market is about title question so before Vulcan can complete first mission. This is about what happens with the rockets not the Peregrine payload as indicated by 8 Nov comment. So that seems as if we are using the title and not description.

The outstanding problem here then is how the "If neither happen by 1/1/24 ET this market will resolve at 50%." works. This is in description which seems over-ridden by the title question at least in some respects. So does this mean

a) This 50% resolution but is ignored, we are just using the title question. If so, is market left closed or reopened until resolution reached?

b) 50% resolution can apply and it works as stated ie Peregrine has to land on the moon before 1/1/24. So if Starship doesn't complete successful OFT with simulated landing and Peregrine is on route on 1/1/24 it resolves at 50%

c) 50% resolution can apply but we are saying the mention of Peregrine landing in description is a (the) mistake and so it should be Vulcan completing its first mission at payload deploy. So Peregrine on route on 1/1/24 can mean a no resolution even if it subsequently fails to land due to a Peregrine issue.

d) some other interpretation.

C Market is what description says. This seems ruled out by your 8 Nov comment. However, you now say "but it’s how the market was written so I have to stick with it." but this isn't clear whether the part you think you have to stick with is the title question or the description or what sort of combination.

@Vortex "Market is will Angry lose or win his bet"
It's really not. The title doesn't mention the bet and the first sentence is that the market is inspired by AA's bet. If this market was titled "Will AA get a tattoo saying "SpaceX Fanboy" on his ass" it would be a different story, and it would have been an obvious No because AA would just change the conditions until he doesn't have to do it anymore. But the way you've written it has you deciding the conditions — and changing them later is poor form.

@Vortex Any updates?

@Shump Jan 8 Launch = Resolve at 50%

@Vortex It seems close to certain neither Vulcan nor Starship will launch before end of 2023. Does this mean 50% resolution is almost assured and will be resolved soon after 31 Dec or maybe earlier if it becomes sufficiently certain? Alternately does it still somehow depend on what angry says resulting in a potentially long wait?

@ChristopherRandles Resolves on Jan 1, I am open to someone to making their case as to why it’s impossible for Vulcans first mission to launch before the new year, therefore by default it can’t “finish” its mission before the New Year and this can get resolved early if there are no disputes.

fwiw they don't intend to do a soft landing, so I presume that's not necessary for this market to resolve Yes?

@Mqrius If there isn’t going to be any soft landing attempt then it won’t meet the criteria for a successful OFT.

That makes no sense imo, they're intentionally not planning it, so they're not failing at it.

Oof, this is another market that hinges on the definitional question of if Starship's first flight counts or not. They probably won't actually go for full orbit, but it will still be called an orbital flight test. OFT for Starship currently seems to be March, with Vulcan NET May — and this is also assuming that everything goes well with Vulcan and Peregrine. I'll buy some Yes, but I'm not sure I trust Angry Astronaut very much in this.

@Mqrius If it’s the “land in Hawaii” plan I’ll count that as an orbital flight for this market just because that’s what everyone is calling it, I think he will use the same definition as he’s called it an orbital launch numerous times in his own videos.

@Vortex Cool, that's good to know, thanks for clarifying!
Related markets:
Condition of reaching over 100km altitude rather than landing on the moon:

Condition of full orbit (Vulcan vs Starship), partial orbit doesn't count

Further related: