Ok so, this is not really a bug. What has happened is because you sold such a massive amount of pre-league-owned shares for such an incredibly low probability, you are functionally "short" that massive amount of shares for the leagues period.

M1 at 0.000005% prob = 10,145 shares. When prob later moves to 0.9%, those shares are evaluated as M91.

This means you would have lost M91 on this trade had you gone short M10,145 shares at 0.000005% prob, which is functionally what you have done here.

That means to change this, we would have to basically either:

• remove phantom short positions (i.e. selling positions during a league would no longer act as though you have shorted the position during the league), OR

• add a probability threshold (i.e. exclude trades <1% or >99% from leagues consideration)

I'm not opposed to either of those changes, but they are fundamentally game-design alterations rather than a bug fix per se, so I am not actioning anything immediately.

Let me know if you have any questions. We can open up a discussion about leagues changes in discord or a new post thread to see what people might want to see. There are other issues with leagues people want addressed as well:

• bot participation in leagues outside of silicon: remove all API trades from leagues, make all API trades qualify the user for silicon, etc.

• own-market trading exclusions from leagues (or similar)

• easier punishments to invalidate someone's league position this month if they are identified as participating in abuse

• change league tiers to have more or less promotions/demotions/stays

I'm sure there's more

@Gen I like a lot of those changes. Still confused about the losing 588 mana thing - is it because it's counting unrealized profits that were lost when Anonymous sold?

@Qoiuoiuoiu When you bought a position prior to the league start and sell it during a league period, it doesn't care that you already owned it. It only records the sell. This means your leagues tracked position includes a "phantom" short position which doesn't actually exist.

What happened: bought M1 at ~0.000005% prob for M10,145 and sold it back a month/year later or whatever. Total loss of ~M1

Leagues saw: sold M10,145 at 0.000005% prob, prob moved to 0.9% during the month, your loss on that short position is -M91 recorded in the league. - because had you kept the position, you'd be up M91, so your action during the league was -M91 in outcome

Leagues only considers the trades during the months, buys = long, sell = short, regardless of whether they are covering a pre-existing position or not. Past grievances have come up around taking profit during league and actually having a bad league outcome on what was actually a good trade. Buy at 20% in January, then in March you sell to take profits at 80% for a big gain, but leagues only sees that you sold. It resolves YES mid-month, leagues record shows a loss, "by selling you missed out on the extra 20%, so it's a 20% loss" (simplified for example)

@Gen I think what should be done is there should be a specific condition for leaks such that any market below 1% or above 99%. When a trade is placed in the opposite direction, that is yes for 1% and below and no for 99% and above, it should stop counting potential profit as actual profit. Please correct me if I am misunderstanding something here.

@100Anonymous Yeah, I like that as a solution, mostly because there is a way for people to 'manipulate' their leagues scores by buying up very very low positions in popular markets which are not always worth buying back down.

Especially as we have guarded binary markets from exceeding 1% or 99% in each direction, it makes sense that leagues would have a similar safeguard.

edit: I'm not actioning anything now though, I need to think about it more and it is working as intended

@Gen for removing api trades from league, Is just all api trades? Or is it past certain limits? Because I sometimes trade on a custom UI overlay that is essentially manifold(better filtering for me) that sends an api trade and they are entirely human trades. If hft is discouraged (I don’t think it should be discouraged), then I think adding some api trade limit before it stops counting for league would be a better approach to still allow some users to place some api trades. Also, there really needs to be some incentive for silicon league, as it stands I don’t even want my dedicated bot accounts to end up in silicon due to strictly worse rewards.

@Mochi idk the exact way to do it, generally I want to do the simplest changes to explain so that we don’t need a 60 page doc on league bet inclusions/exemptions

If we excluded all api trades then people making those trades would just need to compete in silicon league and we would need to modify silicon league so it doesn’t exist as a punishment

@Gen please help.

@100Anonymous Fixing something else atm but I will get to this next. Should have a response/update within the hour even if it is that I cannot quickly fix this

@100Anonymous I think I have identified the issue but it could be more complex. A bug with how leagues calculates things. Doesn't impact your regular profit, only the leagues profit.

I think I can fix it, will aim to have a working and tested fix before the season ends. Thanks for pointing it out!

@Gen you're welcome.