It's funny. I always used to think like, and probably like a lot of people think this way, like, who does like who does advertising work on? Like you watch this ad and now I'm just gonna like go buy a car. Like this, how does it work this way? But then you you make orders and like the Bryson thing. I I'll I'll have orders up for like you know certain sporting events, and they'll show some player or whatever, like before the game getting ready and like like clockwork, you see that's when the orders start coming in on that player. It's like nothing happened. They're just showing him like getting loose or whatever. And they're it's like, oh, there's that guy. I gotta bet on him. And it's like, I guess, I guess the marketing does work if it's that simple.
SPEAKER_02Um GP S P uh and a ton of questions is the headline here. So we did uh have a topic. I kind of tweeted out saying we have a main topic that's gonna be more technical. What are some questions? And we got 40 questions on Twitter. And uh when that happens, we tend to have to or want to shelve the topic is whatever. It's you know, boring, snooze topic, not like the vibes-based topic that that I pushed last last time, but uh and now we get to get to do a ton of pretty awesome questions, which I think is it's it's better, it's more fun to do the questions, right?
SPEAKER_01Yeah, I mean, my my perspective is always it's hard to come up with a a topic, just you and I. So if we can ever get enough questions that allows us to uh push a topic off, we should uh we should take those opportunities and not not waste one when we need to. So uh we will save that for a rainy day.
SPEAKER_02You get to bank a topic, banking a topic is actually like very valuable.
SPEAKER_01Yeah, because it's like two weeks, right? Now that we do the interview and everything, it's like wow, we say we've we've we've we've held ourselves off for two weeks here.
unknownRight.
SPEAKER_01We appreciate that question.
SPEAKER_02Um all right, well, let's get into it. I guess uh I'll uh I'll kick us off. So we have we have uh I think three questions that kind of touched around the same thing, but I'll I'll start with Isaac's uh Isaac, not Isaac number two, Isaac, I guess number one from the order which we had him on the podcast, Rose Berman. Uh, what are some ways you identify whether flow is recreational or sharp during the World Cup or in general, outside of average full size? How do you think about and manage risk when there are price disparities between exchanges and sports books? Sports books that appear to be caused by overwhelming recreational flow. Um yeah, I think I think a big yeah, I mean uh average fill size is is a is a good one, but you you really do want to know like obviously like why am I getting filled here? Is there a good is there like a thesis for like this being a recreational bet? And I think you know, the obvious ones that are gonna come up are Mexico England from the World Cup, uh you know, Jake Paul, Anthony Joshua, Jake Paul, Mike Tyson, Connor McGregor, and Holloway, um, you know, a bunch of those, and you you're kind of left with a pretty obvious thesis of like why this would be overwhelmingly recreational. And then you see those, like like Isaac kind of points out, you see the prices diverge from the sports books. And and I think like what we've seen now is that the prediction markets are more likely to be pushed off fare than sports books, which I think you know, that's good information. I don't I don't know if like before the World Cup, before Conor McGregor and all of this, I would have like been very firm in the belief that like a prediction market is going to be more likely to be moved off fare than a sports book, because you know, like the max bet at a prediction market's huge, and theoretically you should have all these people like willing to take liquidity or willing to provide liquidity and and whatnot. But like the sports books just will be more likely to be at a fair price. So if it is recreational, then you're gonna see the good price on the if it's like a heavy event of recreational volume, like a big volume event like Mexico, England, you're gonna see the good price on the p the production market and you know the the quote unquote like fare on the sports book. So in terms of like managing risk, I mean, you know, obviously put everything you can into an arb would be one one thing. Like if you can ARB it for a good good size, like take you know, whatever your Kelly is. If we're just talking about like playing a straight, like you know, figure out what you would bet from a Kelly standpoint, use some kind of like market fare on the sports book or whatever. And then, you know, whatever you're willing to take, you can kind of take that like uncovered, and then ARB the rest, you know, like whatever you can get down on an ARB for the rest, uh, especially in like the Mexico-England or the McGregor fight or whatever. Those were situations where you probably could get a pretty huge size ARB. Um, so yeah, that's kind of how I think about it.
SPEAKER_01I mean, we we have 40 questions, so I don't want to dwell on this too much, but one thing you said was that was really interesting, and I wanted to get your perspective on is like I think you touched on it. Like most people I would think would think the opposite. That like, you know, the people who complain like, you know, talk about the benefits of exchanges and whatnot, it's like, oh, many people compete, so like the price is always gonna be closer to fair, and you're not gonna get like ripped off, like uh, you know, these sports books which have a monopoly on pricing have. So, like, with that is like the thesis, which which I would have like, I generally agree with most of that. Like I don't, I I I have a hard time wrapping my head around why, you know, in these big spots the the prices diverge in the way it does. Like, you know, you can you can tell a narrative around it is that like, you know, there's like this um, you know, like hive mind effect of the of the market makers on these prediction markets that like all are willing to move back together because they know the flow is so strong. But like the people who work at sportsbooks aren't stupid. Like they could do you could you could extend that to the same thing. So it is really interesting because I think you know, pre-World Cup, pre-some of these events, I would have thought the exact opposite would have would have happened. And it's like actually sort of like damning for that argument of like it's always gonna be close to the fair, because like on the prediction markets, it's getting totally overrun.
SPEAKER_02Right. Yeah, and I I I wonder if the answer is like the Schwarzbooks should be moving more often, but they're just not, yeah, yeah, right.
unknownLike that.
SPEAKER_01They could just they could be charging more, but they're just not, you know. Right. I mean, I don't know what I I have a hard time thinking like what else the answer could be.
SPEAKER_02I I I agree. Like, I think the concept of like market makers being willing to move back and everybody's willing to move back as some sort of like implicit collusion is maybe there's some part of that, but like really I think it's more just like it's more just like I think the sports books aren't like fully fleecing the wreck. Because if you think about like why a market maker is moving back, it's like you go up to the you let's say you hop the Q and like whatever, let's say it's like 58 and you hop the 59. No, then you immediately get filled, and then you see 58 start getting taken. Are you gonna like hop or are you gonna go back to 58 or go down?
SPEAKER_01You know, like well, that's everybody's collusion, right? Like that's what I mean by is like whoever jumps out of line is like, whoa, whoa, whoa, I shouldn't have done that, you know. Right.
SPEAKER_02So right, but then if you're the sports book, like it's kind of the same example. It's like, okay, you're taking only Mexico at, you know, minus 110, and you're still only taking Mexico, like, why not go to minus 115? Why not go to minus 120? You know what I'm saying? It's like like I I do think that it's probably like the sports books for whatever reason aren't kind of going there, like really kind of laying the uh getting getting super obvious about it, I guess, is my my only guess. And maybe it's a marketing thing, or maybe it's kind of just like built into the culture of you know the sports betting industry. I'm not 100% sure, but that would be my guess.
SPEAKER_01Yeah, the only other difference, and I I I thought about that, I don't I don't know how much of a difference it it would be, would be like on the prediction markets, so like you're you're putting up collateral in a way that like the the sports groups don't necessarily need to in the same way. I mean they sort of do, but not the don't, yeah. But they don't, right? So that's another thing. That's a good point. I think that to me that makes a big difference, right? Um right.
SPEAKER_02Because you yeah, I mean, people only have so much money.
SPEAKER_01That's what I mean. Like eventually everybody just runs out of money, and that's why the price gets out of control, right?
SPEAKER_02Yeah, and you can see that in terms of like, you know, if a game hasn't settled in the World Cup. Like I think we talked about it before. Yeah, that's a good point.
SPEAKER_01So next one from from Tristan, because I think I think I think Tristan's question is sort of builds off of Isaac's, and then I could give my sense, my two cents on Isaac's in this one. Was what indicators alert you that a game has heavy recreational flow? Mexico, England, Holloway, McGregor felt obvious because the total volume arbitrage and limit orders filling easily. Are there any indicators missing, particularly ones that may be less off obvious? I think we really covered it all. I mean, I think the clear one is when it's like off-market and there's a ton of volume and like it's something you can be pretty confident, like of what the fare is. Um, and you have like like you said, you have like a hypothesis of why that is. Like if you think of Mexico, England, like Mexicans could bet on Calci or whatever. And so that makes a big difference. Um, so I mean, I think I think combining those two, um I think the total volume is just like another thing. I know you you that was mentioned in the question. Like I think if you go to any market on Calci with sufficient volume, like there is probably opportunities there. There's like basically if it gets a high enough volume, like there's just not enough, like we were saying, like the sharp money that it just runs out. Um, and so when there's enough volume and it's not assuming it's not like a collateralized market or whatever, where because that makes a big difference, but like where you actually have to put up the money, eventually people just run out of money, or the smart people or sharp people like can use their money in different ways or whatever. So I think those would be the the things to to Isaac's question about managing the risk. I mean, I think the thing with the the World Cup and some of these things was like, or or even Holloway McGregor is like I think it's a mistake to just be like the main line is wrong, it's like 3%, 6% off. I'm just gonna bet everything into the main line or whatever, um, and like fool Kelly and hope for the best and like not arbitrary. Like to me, on these events, like there is so much liquidity in everything. And so there's no reason you needed to be like funneled into one single outcome. Like if you were like gonna go broke if Mexico won that game, like I know everything else happened in the game, so maybe that's a bad example. Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa. But I'm saying, like, if if if Mexico won one zero and you would have like lost everything, I think you you would have done like a really bad job. I I would have said you would have done a really bad job if you lost like a ton of money in Mexico won one zero because a ton of stuff was mispriced. Like there's a ton of liquidity and a ton of different things, and there's just no reason to like push it all into one. So, you know, to Isaac's question, managing it. I think on these these huge spots where there's tons of recreational flow, then you try and diversify as best you can. Obviously, there's correlation beside between this stuff, but hopefully like the way you're diversifying and and doing all that is is appropriate and sizing. Um, and then sort of just let the the chips fall where they they may.
SPEAKER_02Yeah. And I'll I'll read Gavin's because I think like all of these questions kind of build build on each other. But uh Gavin wrote in this new exchange era, a huge part of the process is making markets with the most recreational flow. What are the best practices for identifying those markets across different sports? Um, first I want to point out that this is 100% correct. If it is, in my opinion, the most important part of the process is making markets in places with recreational flow, game selection, table selection, all of this will always be the most important part of a vantage play. So I think just to like really highlight on it, I think this is a great point by Gap. Um then what I said, so I think we talked about some of the the ones that are more like, you know, I guess market volume dependent or thesis dependent, but there's a couple of things that uh I think help. So I I have a few, I wrote down a few things. One, you know, check what is offered on the brokers. So like you should be checking what's offered on Robinhood, um, you know, underdog, although I know they're going to their uh own PM now, which actually we probably should add to the news section, but you know, whatever. Yeah, we hit it here. There you go. Um, but yeah, check what's offered on the brokers. That's that's quite important. Um another one, look at this is there's gonna be two ones here. Look at the Calci Reddit and see what people are posting as far as like you know, slips or plays that uh that that they're posting. And then I think the one that you hear a lot is the ideas section um on Calchi. Like, is it clear that there's a lot of people in here betting one direction because of you know some bias that might be going on? Or like is it active in the ideas section? Are there a lot of people like showing a slip and be like, when does this end? Did this win? Like, you know, those those are usually those are usually good markets when there's a lot of chatter in the idea section and uh people are betting it, but also don't understand how it works. Um and then just yeah, like put put yourself in in the wreck shoes. Like we all have friends who like to bet on sports and like what are fun bets for them and what are not uh fun bets for them, you know. We always say plus odds, kind of longer shot. They want to bet on something that they're watching or going to. Um and then another thing is like if a if a team or a player is like in the zeitgeist, I think one of the cre the a very relevant example was Bryson at the uh the British Open was you know, he obviously had like a very uh well publicized spat with a rules official Friday. And overnight on Friday, like we got an someone wrote a wrote, I think, a tweet that was like, so are people just like sp like spite betting Bryson because they think he got screwed over or something? And I was like, Yes, like we we saw an insane amount of flow on Bryson at like whatever price. Um so after that. So he was like in the zeitgeist or in the in the in the news or whatever, and like that that kind of impacts as well. So just like a lot of those little things, like just trying to trying to like put yourself in the wreck's shoes, trying to figure out what you know what's popular, what sh would be popular. And sometimes you don't, you know, like both teams to score in soccer. I think everybody's buddy was like, why do people like betting on that? I don't know, but people liked it. Like sometimes you just you just also have to go with what the data is telling you at a certain point.
SPEAKER_01Yeah, I mean, I think you hit hit hit a bunch of them that I was gonna cover. I think the the only ones I had that you didn't, um, and this is sort of related, but like the Cauchy front page, whatever is like on you know, they uh usually have seven markets or whatever that you could rifle through. Um, that's always good. Uh total volume, like I said, like if a market gets sufficiently high volume, I think you're doing a disservice to not look at it, no matter what it's in. Um just because again, like they when it gets that high volume, like there has to be recreational money in it. There's just not enough, you know, sharp people money like on the site to when it gets that high. Um like tracking like volume, like I think you've talked about on the show before, like tracking tickers and and like orders and stuff, like the tape. I know I think we're gonna talk about Calci Pro and some of that stuff, but um, I think that's one thing. What's in the news? You mentioned that with like Bryson. It's funny. I always used to think like, and probably like a lot of people think this way, like who does like who does advertising work on? Like you watch this ad, and now I'm just gonna like go buy a car, like this. How does it work this way? But then you you make orders and like the Bryson thing. I I'll I'll have orders up for like you know, certain sporting events, and they'll show some player or whatever, like before the game getting ready, and like like clockwork, you see that's when the orders start coming in on that player. It's like nothing happened, they're just showing him like getting loose or whatever. And there's like, oh, there's that guy. I gotta bet on him. And it's like, I guess, I guess the marketing does work if it's that simple.
SPEAKER_02Um well, the best example is the Tiger Woods getting in the car crash, and then everybody started betting him to win the masters.
SPEAKER_01I guess all press is good press, is the the idea with that. Um, and then the last thing I had was like, there's like what I've realized is there's just like this, there's obviously like the demand to bet, you know, waxes and wanes, right? It gets, you know, like the World Cup, there's gonna be way more volume than you know, a day without it. But there's just like this constant demand to bet on something from the the population. And so like something that is like not a good market, the day of the World Cup could be like a great market the day after the World Cup, because people need to bet on something. And so that's that's the other thing I would just mention is like dead periods, like where nothing is happening. It can make markets that are like totally uninteresting usually actually more interesting.
SPEAKER_02Yeah, I was gonna say like the the stuff that happens at like 10 a.m., 11 a.m. Right, like I don't, you know, is it like it'll be some tennis, right? And maybe some esports or uh I mean I know golf and on third like golf, early golf, like get some volume because what else can you bet on on Thursday at at 9 a.m. Oh yeah and watch on TV? Like yeah, it's just it's the middle of the night stuff, yeah. Yeah, so um okay. Uh yeah, I I would say that was similar to to me. As far as like what what I would uh as far as like what I think is like a good addition there, but let's go to uh Hayden's question. Uh what are you expecting?
SPEAKER_01Hayden and Pips basically had the same question. So we could just read both, maybe.
SPEAKER_02All right, why don't why don't you why don't you hit hit the combo, yeah?
SPEAKER_01Yeah, so Hayden's question was what are you expecting on Calci during the NFL season in terms of volume and flow, especially multiple games being played simultaneously, simultaneously? And Pips was what do you expect the volume on player proper prop markets to be on prediction markets, upcoming NFL and NBA seasons? So I'm curious like your perspective. I mean, I don't have like a you know, I don't I don't know if they were I'm assuming they were not expecting like a number answer, but I think like football specifically is gonna be like a World Cup day, like times multiple, like uh on like a Sunday or Sunday, okay. Like I think every basically like, I mean this could be wrong. It's hard to say, you know, like maybe barring the Mexico game because we had a whole other country participating there. Yeah. Um, but like I think like a standalone, like the Monday night game, the Sunday night game, Thursday night games are gonna be like comparable. They might not get like totally out of whack. Um but like in terms of like volume, I think it's gonna be I think it's gonna be crazy. Um in terms of volume for all of this stuff. Prop. Um, you know, main stuff, derivatives, all of that. I think, you know, in talking about this, like I think it's gonna be extremely important this fall to use your money wisely and like effectively and at the right time. So just to to maybe end my thought, like I think like a huge mistake would be like Monday morning, I'm gonna start booking some NFL sides or whatever. Like I have an opinion on NFL sides, it's gonna move a point. Let me start booking some action on Monday morning. Like, I think that is almost certainly a bad idea. Um, just because you know, you have college, you're gonna have college games, you're gonna have the Thursday night game, you're gonna have all the player props, you know. So I just I think it's gonna be crazy. And like the thing that's gonna separate people more, obviously, like strategy, get in front of Recflow, all that's important. But I think a new skill that's gonna be increasingly important is like using the money effectively.
SPEAKER_02Yeah, so that's spot on. And I think one one thing with the NFL was you know, I think almost the one answer the one spot where it's like, yeah, there's gonna, you know, a lot of volume equals soft or like or like rec money. I think it's true, but for NFL moneylines, it almost like doesn't matter, I feel like. Like I well, what one thing is like I don't know ball, so I could be wrong, but like it did feel like there was so much volume on NFL moneylines last season, and like you're still basically only booking at the penny price or or whatever, like like for that specifically, like didn't seem to get out of whack um with anything. I I don't know if it's because there's like so much faith in the NFL numbers at the books or or whatever it is, but like where yeah, where you're gonna see some I I think like NFL anything else is also gonna have a ton of volume, so like it's not a big issue. Like you'll get so much good stuff, but the money lines for for me like didn't seem to be too wacky. Whereas the World Cup, like even if you think of the final, I don't know if it was like out of whack with the sports books, but like everybody basically seemed who everybody was on Spain who I knew, and then like everybody else was on Argentina who's recreational, so it seemed like that line like was maybe maybe you know it's a Super Bowl line or something that could get out of whack, but that line seemed like wrong, like all the sharp people did you know seem to all be on Spain, so something seemed off there. Um, whereas like maybe that's not gonna be week one NFL, you know, money line, but I think what SP is saying, like you'll you'll see a a true World Cup day. Week one of NFL will probably be equivalent to the I think honestly, it could be equivalent if you take all of the categories together, it'll probably it could be the uh the biggest day of the year, like the first NFL Sunday, and that includes the World Cup final, would be my my guess.
SPEAKER_01I I would think it would be like material like materially bigger, would you like it? I could I mean you have all the NFL games, yeah.
SPEAKER_02Um I mean at the end of the day.
SPEAKER_01Yeah, like everybody's at the end of the day, America's like not like they don't really care about soccer, right? Right, like right. People bet it, but like they don't really care.
SPEAKER_02Right.
SPEAKER_00I mean people care about their football, so what do you think about NBA?
SPEAKER_01Yeah, NBA would be interesting. I mean, and yeah, I you know was participated in NBA at points this um at points this year. I mean, like the NBA prop offering is like sort of weird and weak in that um, you know, like it's one-sided, so that I mean, like one-sided without the API, so it makes it a little bit different. Um I think the challenge with NBA and why it'll always be like much, much thinner than something like NFL is just like an injury nightmare um to make. And so like you just you just can't have like like the amount of volume that's gonna be on like I don't know who plays that opening day, but like uh first touchdown, no. Like there's going to be an enormous wall on that. It's just you're never gonna have that on on like NBA props because you can't have something like there's too much news in NBA. So um, yeah, I mean there would still be a lot of liquidity, but I I just I mean I NFL is the the king's sport for a reason, you know, in terms of gambling. And I I think it'll be like I honestly think college football will do much bigger numbers than um NBA for props. Well, I don't think they're there, they're probably I oh yeah, are you even allowed? I don't think they're gonna push that probably like player props. Um certainly props that NBA would do better, but I just mean like I think a big college football game is gonna do oh yeah, yeah. I don't know, you know, if you compare it to playoffs. Ohio State and Michigan, there's no NBA game that's gonna do no, definitely not until the playoffs at least.
SPEAKER_02Yeah. So yeah, I mean I had a similar thing. I I said like the NBA menu, I feel like on straight props has been for whatever reason, like underwhelming, or not menu, but like volume. I think the combos cannibalize a lot of the NBA props, um, more so than the football props. But that's also because I don't think combos were around when NFL ended last year. Were they? No way, right?
SPEAKER_01I don't think so. I think combos were even sort of late for NBA, right?
SPEAKER_02So I could be it could be interesting because like NFL props last year did a lot of volume, touchdowns, first touchdowns. Like these, these kind of those types of props, like the touchdown props, the yards and and whatnot didn't do as much as much volume in my experience. But I do think like so, yeah, it'll be interesting to see like if now that combos are are here, will the straight props in NFL still do the big because you would see like some like a Derrick Henry to score a touchdown prop would be like a like an NBA game.
SPEAKER_01No, no, I mean great to see the the walls put up for these these first touchdowns or whatever, right?
SPEAKER_02So, like, you know, that like will that still be the case with combos? Will there be any cannibalizing there? Like, I'm not sure. But like NBA combos with with props did a ton of volume. So I think like, you know, there is that demand for player props in NBA, but it's definitely like very skewed towards combos as opposed to NFL, where there are some serious markets and straights.
SPEAKER_01It's so funny how people bet. Let's go to the let's go to the World Cup um topic. We had a series of questions. First one from Alex Hardin was the 2026 World Cup on prediction markets the single greatest multi-week gambling event of all time. I think in terms of like, you know, I don't know how you're gonna quote quantify greatest, but I think in terms of like size of being able to bet in confidence of like edge, meaning like you you are quite confident you're getting it in good. I mean, in my lifetime, I would say yes. You know, I don't know.
SPEAKER_02Oh I yeah, I I wrote, I have my little notes. I wrote yes correct.
SPEAKER_01It was good entertainment too. Like, honestly, it was a good world cup. I don't know if if like we were, you know, it was up and down, you know, it wasn't all winners in from from I think most makers' perspective, but it was all in all entertaining. I mean, you did have the best four teams in the final, but it was like not just like pure unentertaining games to get there, so right it was good.
SPEAKER_02Yeah, and I think just like I've said this before, but the schedule was amazing of like how it really felt like you were going through withdrawal and like the knockout stages went on because you're like, what do you mean I don't have three games today starting at 11 a.m.?
SPEAKER_01You know, like there and then yeah, I mean uh going to 64.
SPEAKER_02Count me in yeah, count me in. That's gonna be great. Um but yeah, I I I actually gave some thought. I was like, well, you know, I liked I'm I'm a bit of a gambling historian. I've I've tried to to read up on different spots, and yeah, I mean, outside of probably some like traditional finance spots and markets, I it's hard to say that there is a much better spot than this. Like, even if you yeah, I for sure. I think this has to be the best multi-week gambling event. Uh uh, maybe ever. So let's go. For now, until 64. Yeah, yeah. No, seriously, yeah.
SPEAKER_01Next week for me and Steve, and I can read this one. Yeah, go ahead. Looking back at the World Cup, did you feel like your infrastructure was able to handle the volume? What would you have changed to extract more value from such a large recreational heavy tournament? I think I've talked about it when you know, your perspective, but for me it was just it would be as simple as like being less aggressive on the really competitive games, like trying not trying to be so early to things and waiting longer, um, getting better prices, depleting the bankroll to zero at the you know, at the optimal time, those types of things. Um otherwise, I thought, yeah, pretty good. I was I was generally happy with like my diversification. I had, like I said, bad outcome games, but nothing like that was horrible. Um, so that makes me feel pretty good about it. But uh yeah, being being probably less aggressive overall.
SPEAKER_02Yeah, I was actually I was talking about this today with you know with with the team, and we were like, well, you know, we kind of throughout the NBA playoffs, I think, like worked out a lot of kinks. Um that by the time the World Cup came around, I was reminded of this by Dan, uh one of our one of our team members. He was like, I remember the first day of the World Cup, John said, wait, the World Cup started. So it was like we had at that point, I think, like through the NBA playoffs, like built out a and realized a lot of important things, especially about RFQs. Um that by the time the World Cup rolled around, we were kind of just there and ready. Uh, so I think like shout out to the NBA playoffs um for just like being a good you know testing ground for the real sport of World Cup. And then yeah, just similar to you. I think like earlier in the tournament, I wish I did some more A B testing and thoughtfulness around like what percent of cash do I want? X minutes from game time, Y minutes, buy kick, buy first half break, buy you know, and just started thinking a lot more about that early on. I think, you know, yeah, same, same, basically same as you. Um so let's go to Benjamin Chern. This is this is uh kind of a callback to you saying if anybody went broke in the Mexico game, you know, fuck them. Well, we weren't gonna go broke, but this is a this is the basically the question of you mentioned deploying the entire bankroll during the World Cup. What percentage was deployed across different types of bets, such as player goals, money lines, spreads, first halves, first half markets and totals. Had the true worst case scenario occurred, what would be your maximum, what would your maximum drawdown would have been? So like for us, the worst case scenario was basically the Mexico game, had Mexico won. Because it is funny, like the game of this World Cup to me is like a round of 16 game. Like I there's no game that that I'll remember more from this World Cup than than Mexico, England. And if we remember the game, Drew Bellingham, two goals, Harry Kane goal, both of the uh only Mexico players that people bet on to score, both scored corners over, first half, both teams score, you know, all this like it this insane, insane run out of of things that happened. Whereas like, you know, SP, we were talking about this. I don't know like if it was on pod or not, but it's like what didn't happen? Like it's hard to think of something that did not happen that game. And the only thing that basically saved us was Mexico winning. And like, I don't know the exact number, but we would have lost like I imagine like somewhere between 20 20% of our bankroll, maybe 30%, something in there, like like a big, big chunk, um, had had Mexico won that game. Um so yeah, that that would have been the worst case scenario. And we got close to it. I mean, England was playing with 10 10 men, you know, guarding a one goal lead. And uh, but yeah, I mean, what percent was the play across different bets? You know, again, like a lot of my World Cup was like RFQ action, so actually it did spread spread it out nicely. Um, so there's a little it's a lot of first half, you know, just a lot of like everything you mentioned plus more um was kind of stuff you're exposed to. So I think generally like you came in decently hedged, and then obviously there's there's games where one side's gonna be, you know, I think like yeah, there's gonna be games like Messi plus Argentina, like Messi to score Argentina to win, Mbappe to score France to win. Like there's gonna be some games where you're really exposed to like a specific two legs, but besides that, like the RFQs kind of spread themselves out decently enough so that you weren't just sweating like one specific thing.
SPEAKER_01Yeah, I I I if I had more time, I could have like actually run the numbers because I'd say for me, that Mexico game was about it wasn't truly the worst case scenario, right? Because Mexico won or Mexico lost, like you said. Um, but it was about as close to as possible to the way like I was deployed, I would say. Um, and I think it was, yeah, it was your number was actually pretty close to mine, like something like I think 20 to 30 percent in that range, like somewhere in there was was like uh what I lost on that game, something something around there. Um so yeah, I mean, I've in looking back at it, it was like I didn't feel that bad about it because it was it was just how the game unfolded. Like I didn't feel bad in retrospect with any other bets. I mean, a lot of the things also are like in theory anti-correlated against each other. Um, you know, and sometimes you just run bad. I was curious like what um what the exposure was like on that third place game, because that that game was also insane.
SPEAKER_02Um yeah, it was different. That game was a little different, like we lost on it for sure, but it wasn't there was certain like that was more mixed. Like I do think like you know, England and I think France was the more popular team.
SPEAKER_01They definitely were because you had like the benching of the England players, which which definitely helped the number of goals, and the other thing that did because you didn't have the stars playing, so like you didn't have like Cain scoring, and I mean Bellingham did score it, like Bellingham freaking in like the hundredth minute.
SPEAKER_02I know whatever we're doing, like why is he playing then? Umbappe scored twice, so certain certain things were like yeah, but I do think that that game wasn't as um like Mbappé scoring and France losing is is usually gonna like diffuse a lot of the pain.
SPEAKER_01That's true. Certainly if you're doing RFQs and stuff. Yeah, I mean I guess going back to the Mexico, like I don't feel that bad. I think it's it's actually like a good thing if you played if you played your entire bank role and the game went how it went and you lost like 20%. I actually think that's like a pretty good outcome. I think you actually did a like a pretty good job, in my opinion. So um yeah.
SPEAKER_02And certainly like the upside of the World Cup, like that's one of the things like going to the World Cup that it seems like I think we'd probably both agree that we're happy with is like we were willing to take a big hit, like you know.
SPEAKER_01Yeah, I mean you you're not gonna get those you like you don't get those opportunities all that often, you know. So like that's where to Isaac question to this question, like I mean, and the the topic I uh you know I always talk about like bankroll or whatever. Like I'm talking about what was in my Cal Shea account or whatever, like you could call that my bankroll or not, whatever. But like, yeah, I mean, you you don't get these opportunities that often, right? Like, and the the downside to me, it's not like I'm gonna go hungry, you know. So it is what it is.
SPEAKER_02Fair enough. Um, but where were we? Okay, even okay, sure. Uh okay. Uh the gentleman, given the recreational behavior and flow you observed during the World Cup, what would you change about the way you traded goal scorer markets, if anything? I think it's similar, right? To, you know, just making sure you weren't too aggressive. I think some funny things happen, like Hurricane 2 Plus steaming after Ronaldo scored two, like early in the World Cup. Um, but yeah, I mean, I think it's it's just one of those things where you learn to not price too aggressively too early and kind of see more try and see what you can get.
SPEAKER_01Yeah, I mean, I think it's a again, it sort of builds off the point I was just saying. Like, I I mean, I don't have numbers or whatever, but I think like early on the World Cup, this is like the highest scoring World Cup. I can't imagine there's like if you sim this World Cup, the star players score more goals that often. Like it feels like a 90th percentile outcome, at least for the stars in terms of goals scored. And so for it still to be very, very good for makers, like I think that that just uh emphasizes the point that it was worth like jamming in, taking a little bit more risk. And I think with the goal scorers, yeah, it was being less aggressive early, right? Because like things just kept moving and whole whole sort of uh tick sizes got wiped out. So let's go. That was that was the World Cup ones. We have one more, one more set of questions, and then we'll do the news, and then and then we have like some some additional questions because like we mentioned, we got I think 40. I don't think that's an exaggeration. I think we literally got 40.
SPEAKER_02Now I think it's 43.
SPEAKER_01Okay, we might need to stop the count. Uh all right. So this one is is is was categorized as prediction market structure in the future of sports method. First one from Magic School Bus. Do you see prediction markets becoming the source of truth for top-down betters? If so, how would that affect the top-down methods, viability, and ability to succeed? I think we've answered a type of this question before. I think in general, you and I both think like, yes, that that they will become like the efficient price. I think the caveats are you know, the prediction market needs sufficient liquidity. You know, it can't be a prediction market with like $30 on each side, or you can't assume it's efficient if it's a market with very little liquidity. So it needs sufficient liquidity and it needs sufficiently low fees and tick sizes to like actually distill the fair price. Because like if you just look at something like Kashi right now or whatever, um I would say there's plenty of instances where if you're trying to use that as like the source of truth, it would be wrong because of the width of the ticks, the fees associated with taking on each side, um, and then rec action like overflowing it, like we sort of talked about in certain spots. So like I think with those, you know, holding those things, you know, outside for a second, like I think in general, yeah. It's more people who compete on price, the better the price is gonna be. Um if it's gonna make it top down viable. And ability to succeed. We've not talked about this a ton. I think in general, like a top-down better does not want a transparent marketplace of the price. I think they want it as opaque as possible of like interconnect, like not connected sports books all have their own opinions, and the top-down better's like job is to figure out like who's sharp when and where. And with like a single exchange, if you imagine all the liquidity is there, like that's not good because the best top-down better or whatever is like putting that information there, and then every book knows that, and those opportunities go away. So generally, I think it's it's bad. Um, not in the short term, but like I guess like that was like a long-term answer. I don't I don't know how it would be good to have like a very transparent open marketplace for a top-down better.
SPEAKER_02I think that was I'll just I'll just let that that answer speak for itself. I think that was perfect. Um we go to Tylie. Will sophisticated market participants who currently originate liquidity on recreational sports books migrate towards prediction markets? If so, could that materially impair the recreational sports books ecosystem and potentially force them to become less restrictive with account limitations to retain higher volume betters? This kind of is like that question. I like remember, I feel like we're getting like that troll question from even Steven, like being like, Will this you know cause you know sports books to like I don't get the joke? It's a bookie beats joke. I feel like you know, I don't know.
SPEAKER_01It feels like a joke, you know, because Jack's question, the next question is like a very similar question. I don't know if we're just getting trolled. Like, are we getting I'm not trying to like I think it's I think it's a fairly normal question, like I don't think it's that crazy question.
SPEAKER_02So I have an earnest answer to it, but if you're trolling us, we're too stupid to realize we're getting trolled. So the joke's on you. Um, so my answer actually I wrote, I don't know if this is the joke question. Um so I don't think so. Like I I did write, like, I don't know if there's a there could be. I remember when we talked to Ant and he said that there was like a $50 better on Penny who was like legit, super sharp, and they would like move off his action. So I said, I'm not sure if there are instances of betters who bet small enough but are have such good information that rec books do keep them around. Like I again, I don't I'm not aware of any cases like this, but that certainly could be the uh could be the case for sure. Um but yeah, I don't think like in general there's much value to the rec books to keep you know people around because you're not really worried about it's definitely not the like I think maybe in an earlier time you'd be more worried about reporting like you know grow yeah, handle or or whatever to the street to get good valuations or to get you know to get you know your stock price bumped or to make investors happy or whatever. There's times when you wanted to report you know gross numbers, but I do think now you're kind of looking just to make money. So I don't I don't really see this uh helping sharp motors on recbooks.
SPEAKER_01No, I I I don't either. And if you're trolling us, you know, please ouch yourself as trolling us. But if you ask the question in earnest, you know, I I apologize. I'm just cynical, you know. So yeah, I I I agree with you. I think I think there's probably like relatively little overlap in like who the well these these sharp players, like I don't really think, yeah, the the sports books in general want them unless they can provide something of value over time. Um so yeah, I think I think they're just different customer bases.
SPEAKER_02So we're gonna assume Jack's question is the same question, right?
SPEAKER_01I mean, I feel bad if it's a serious question, but Jack's question was like the same type of question. But you know, I guess our guard is just up because you know, people are making funny songs of this question, and I don't know what's going on. So we just gotta we just gotta move on, I guess. I'll ask Cartoon Horse's question. Um, assume you are the dominant participant in a liquidity constrained market and are large enough to capture essentially all of its available edge. A new participant enters and trades the market in almost the same way, eating into your edge. Do you hold back and attempt to informally reach something resembling a split profit equilibrium? Or do you compete as aggressive aggressively as possible to ensure the new participant earns nothing, even though mirroring the other participants' profit and loss means eliminating their earnings also eliminates some of your own? I'd be you know, this this honestly is like it reminds me of like DFS and like owning the lobby and stuff like that, of like trying to trying to to to dominate the lobby and like what went into some of that would be like being willing to, you know, someone wants to sit high stakes, like take their games or whatever and play them, even if you think you're break-even to just get them to stop sitting, um, and so that you can get all the you know randos who who who just like submit and they go, they enter into your game. Um so I mean I don't have like a I to me, this is like a very case-by-case situation of what you like, whether you think that person is gonna fold, like whether you think they have more money than you, whether you think you can bully them out like in the short term, whether you think you're gonna, you know, burn more money trying to get them out than you'll actually end up making once they're gone. Um to me, it's like all part of a game, and there's not like one a one-size-fit fits answer to it. It's like the more you know about the counterparty, probably the better.
SPEAKER_02Yeah, how much money they have is certainly uh a key one. Um, and it's interesting in prediction markets. I I I agree with like the heads-up poker, heads-up DFS, like getting the lobbies, that was one of my notes. But um, it's interesting on prediction markets with like the taker fees being high. And like, you know, it if the taker fees were really, really low, I do think it would basically whoever was the best would kind of own the market. But sometimes you reach a situation, and I've I've definitely seen this in golf where I'm like, well, they're posting something that's stupid, but like if I take it, I'm also losing money. Like, so it's not so stupid, like it's close, but what I'm saying is like, you know, what they're posting is minus EV, but like, do I want to take it and also lose money? And there's times when the answer's been yes, depending on how valuable I felt like the um being like the person there uh was. Like I'm certainly willing to like lose a little money uh to make money, basically, like to make more money. Um but so yeah, I I think yes, I I think there's situations where you should be willing to to take a little pain to get some long-term gain in terms of like you know, holding your ground against other other participants. Yeah, like SP said, we've seen in poker poker and in DFS forever.
SPEAKER_01I was interested you actually did that. That was gonna be my follow-up question. If if you ever do take like something with fees and everything you know to be bad to try and accomplish a longer goal thing. Because like, I mean, you get all these like I mean, we've talked about it before, like the penny jumping bots, and sometimes you gotta just like fire in a message to let them know. Like, yeah, this ain't free. Let them know, dude. So um, yeah. I mean, I on sports, not so much, but in some of the other stuff, sometimes you gotta you gotta put these people in their place.
SPEAKER_02That's right. That's right. Um, okay, so now we're back to the news. So we got some some decent news this week. The first news item, and I think you got kind of tagged in this uh a little bit, um, was the ice cream shop. So do you I don't know if you have any, if you want to take take this one as it's as relevant to your hot dog stand, but I'd be curious to hear your thoughts on this ice cream shop copy.
SPEAKER_01Yeah, I mean this ice cream shop is a amateur. So if anybody didn't see, it was you know, some ice cream shop. There's an article that came out that an ice cream shop was hedging, um, I guess it's profits or whatever, using weather contracts on Calci. And, you know, I was as excited at first as a you know hot dog vendor who's been using these derivatives for for a while to hedge out, but they're betting like $20 a day. It's not, you know, it's not it's not at the level that you know a serious financial investor like myself would do. I mean, this is really this is like the extension of that bar article where they're like, I I just I wish they would just stop with this. Like there was that bar article where they're like hedging the Nick's win or whatever, which is like so clearly like a plant from Cal She. Right, right. And now there's this. I think there was one more that I'm not that I'm not remembering. Something about like furniture. I can't remember.
SPEAKER_02Oh, that's the mattress Mac.
SPEAKER_01No, I swear there was one with like Yukon or something. Oh, really? Maybe that was Mr. Maybe that was a SIG example or something. I can't remember. But there there's there's been like a handful of these where it's like so oh no, no, what I'm thinking of was the was the Spanish soccer team. That was real, but that was clearly like a Calchi pushed article because like the team would never publish that.
SPEAKER_02Or was it a SIG push article? See, here's the thing like I'm gonna start making these articles too.
SPEAKER_01That's some point I need I need to get doing so. I think SIG in there was like a comment for for proposal on on prediction markets, and SIG, I think it was them, had an example where it's like they gave some example with a furniture, it wasn't Mattress Mac, but I think it was a furniture company that hedged like Yukon men and women to win, and they gave away some furniture, and they're like, This is a reason for combos or whatever. So yeah, yeah. I mean, I I guess you you need to be on the front lines, you know, getting getting our local.
SPEAKER_02I wrote uh I wrote a comment on the thing too. It wasn't it wasn't as maybe as prominent as six, but yeah, I was out there fighting. So, you know.
SPEAKER_01Well, no, you gotta get boots on the ground, get the local local uh South Carolina businesses to start uh to start hedging their risk using using weather. And I mean, I I don't do you I don't to me this is like one of those cases where they should just pick a different lane of communication. Like I don't think the line lane of communication with any of this is like these are hedging project products. I think that's like totally bogus, and everybody sees right through it, in my opinion. My opinion, like a better line of argument is all financial products are the vast majority of them are speculatively traded and not used for hedging. Like we have options, we have all of like all of this stuff. Like, do you think those are primarily used for hedging? No. No, like can a random person sitting on their computer trade a zero-day option? Yes. Yes, like they're not hedging anything. It would be so stupid if like Robinhood was running these articles about like a 32-year-old like janitor who's hedging his business using like zero.
SPEAKER_02Microsoft options because he uses Microsoft as he uses Windows. Yeah, he wants to make sure Windows doesn't go out of business.
SPEAKER_01But yeah, exactly. So I I don't know I don't know if they feel like they need to do this, because like I I don't really know to me, it just like lean into the fact that like this is no different than every other financial product. You don't need to pretend it's like some hedging thing because it's just like bogus and nobody believes it. It's like the it's like the insider trading is a good thing, like just just ditch that and go on to something more believable.
SPEAKER_02That's a funny, funny time. Um so here's my th my thoughts. I think the weather market, so this is at least this is a good market, the weather market. So, you know, I think we talk a lot about like what's a good and a bad market for prediction markets. The weather feels pretty good, besides that one guy who like did the hairdryer thing in like France or whatever, whatever that was, which was like an iconic uh I guess he went to jail, but it's like it was kind of clever. Um, but like you can't, you know, control the outcome of the weather. So to me, that's a really good, just broad market. If you wanted to if you want to pose the concept that there's some you know economic value to having a good weather market, I think it's hard to argue definitively that there's not. Um so I guess there's some value there. But yeah, I mean I think like I think the weather is one of those non-sports ones that's a good a good market um as far as like you know, following SP's criteria for uh uh you know what actually makes a tradable market. But yeah, I mean I don't know, like is this guy actually is this like a part of his business plan? Like is it actually value to just take the under one one thing I thought was what I thought when I was reading this article was like he was like since I pay a lot of attention to the weather because my business is so impacted by it, then I'm trading it. But like to me, this is a good case of like if he if that is true, like he's just like grinding a strategy like that he knows well, and like he's not really hedging, he's just like making just a weather trader who sells ice cream, right? Exactly. He's just a weather trader who sells sells ice cream, exactly. Like, like the the thing is like, oh, I'm really tuned into this, which I totally believe. If I sold ice cream, I believe that the weather is impacting ice cream sales, like that makes sense, but it's more just like, yeah, so now I kind of have a good feel for how the weather works in this you know area, and I just trade it.
SPEAKER_01Well, the headline was like he makes 43% of his rent, I think, on trading the weather. And I'm like, brother, why are you selling ice cream? Like, yeah, markets trade good volume, like just right.
SPEAKER_02Also, why is it like relative to rent?
SPEAKER_01I think they were trying to make it seem like it was like really meaningful, but it has to impact his business, right?
SPEAKER_02Like it has to be why I think they did it that way.
SPEAKER_01Because I actually read the article and I think he was saying like he he was betting like twenty dollars a day or something, right?
SPEAKER_02And he was just like good at it, which yeah, that that's you know, that's great. I feel like, yeah, like it would totally make sense that this guy has a edge. But yeah, I don't again he had like a banking background or something, like he didn't he's not doing it just to like it's it's not the hedging, like he's just making money trading trading weather, yeah.
SPEAKER_01Which is fine. I I agree the weather markets are good, you know, like the weather markets, yeah. Weather markets, like those the markets that are related to like finance and stuff of like what will the down close today and stuff like good good markets that should probably exist, those probably should have existed like in the financial world. Um right, like there's those are equally legitimate to like soybean futures or something for sure. Like so yeah, I'm fine. Exactly. This line of narrative is unconvincing to me.
SPEAKER_02Do you think that that they can uh win on the true um opinion that all almost all of the financial products are uh the volume traded in a lot of these is just speculation and that's okay.
SPEAKER_01I'm not a lawyer. I'm certainly like not to me, like that's the only way they do win. It's not that specific line, but like the way they win is they say they they prove that this is no different than a soybean future or a swap or whatever. Like and they that's what they have to prove. They don't have to prove that it has like it's predominantly used for hedging. I mean, maybe that you have to do that to to to comp it to soybean or whatever, so maybe like that's that's part of it. But like, yeah, I don't think you need to convince the public, I guess. Like because the public's not gonna believe it. So no, no, no. That yeah.
SPEAKER_02I mean the responses kind of tell you that to the article, right?
SPEAKER_01I mean, all the comments are like, nice job, like promoting a gambling app or whatever. Like we just see right through it, you know. So it's just like if anything, I just think it's like harmful. I think in j in general, these things like saying less is is better, you know, just like not like just fight the battles in court. Like, don't you don't need to fight the public opinion battle, in my opinion, because they're they're just like not doing that great of a job at it.
SPEAKER_02We're like, don't fight it like this.
SPEAKER_01Yeah, yeah, fight it like don't don't people aren't stupid. Like people uh uh yeah, yeah, I guess we could leave it there. Let's go to the next one, which was uh a case of someone not being uh not being stupid. It was a really cool story, actually. You there was an article a guy wrote about a trader grinding 250k of World Cup tickets from ADI Predict Street, which if you watch the World Cup, it was like plastered everywhere. I'm not sure if you caught this. I don't know exactly what happened, but like halfway through the World Cup, it was like 80i Predict Street with Cal Sheet. Yeah. So like clearly Calci wanted to get on that, on those advertisements too, which makes a ton of sense. But I read the article briefly, and I you probably read it in more detail. But it was like an article of this guy basically like gaming the leaderboard and and some of the stuff on ADI Predict Street, which had like no liquidity um during the World Cup, and had like bots posting just like these wrong prices and stuff and all sorts of issues, and and uh making a ton of money like in World Cup tickets and selling them and stuff and just getting cool experiences from all that. And so I you could probably add to it, but I just thought it was like a sweet story of um going to the place where nobody else is going, like the new thing and like the the site that probably has like I I honestly I wanted to get on before this and like look at their UI and stuff. It was probably like the most unfriendly website, but being able to find like really good opportunities where there's clearly like a lot of money behind it by getting the World Cup sponsor, but also like no users, and that's that's usually like a recipe for good outcomes in the gambling world.
SPEAKER_02Yeah, no, that's that's exactly it. Like the this guy, um I I wish I I'll try and put his Twitter handle in the description. I forget the his name, but he basically comes from crypto and like does a lot of these, like yeah, you know, you hear people from crypto like talk about like farming. I guess it's kind of the same idea as like getting rewards or whatever. Um, but yeah, the the concept basically was that you know he's realized that there might be something there for the reasons SP said, like the ADI predicts streets like sponsoring the World Cup, but there's nobody there. And like part of the deal was like all of these free World Cup giveaways. So he basically traveled the US each day going to different World Cup games, um, giving tickets to his family, to his friends, because he like when he was number one on the leaderboard, he got there pretty quickly, and he did it through like some basic arbitrage style trading. Plus, he there was like some latency thing where a game would be over and like 80i predicts street like wouldn't actually realize it was over. So the breakdown I saw, he said he made like 70 grand trading or something, or 70 grand selling tickets, 90 grand trading. He gave away like you know, like 60k worth of tickets, and then he used like the rest or whatever. So he went to like all the World Cup games, like sat in boxes all the while. Like he's the only person on this like prediction market site that's sponsoring the World Cup that has nobody on it, and he's just using it to like go around, live like a king at the World Cup. It was just such a good story. I I I loved it.
SPEAKER_01Yeah, it is good, it is good.
SPEAKER_02Um, okay, we got friends at Novig. So Novig, now that they're going on to to CFTC Rails, which will be coming soon, they're switching to charging fees on uh combos and live. And I think like part of the reason, and this was in an article from this good new prediction market substack by uh I think it's like uh t PM today. Again, I gotta remember these things, but it's from Sam uh Schwartz, I think, but he interviewed Jacob, founder of Novig. And uh the the gist is like they want to charge fees live because they've had some trouble like attracting market makers to post live. And this is the big thing. It's like you got courtsiders, you got market makers. If you want live liquidity, you gotta have it so the market makers at least somebody's not losing. Like, of course, not you know, somebody has to feel like they're making money posting the live market. But to do that, they need to give rebates to the market makers or give some money, so they have to collect fees on the live taking, um, and then give some of it basically to the market makers, uh, or all of it, I don't know, because I know part of their model is to make money trading as well. So I think um that and maybe the on on combos they're just you know collecting the fee, would be my guess. Like you probably don't need to uh give that back as much as I feel like I am hurting my own pocket, but like, yeah, you probably don't need to uh rebate the the combo market makers, but uh yeah, live for sure. So I thought that was interesting. I think it's just a good example to me of like Novig really kind of understanding it, like they get it, they know it just like it doesn't feel like they have these like massive lapses of understanding that lead to like these big issues. They're like, okay, like it's obvious, like live is obviously an issue. Like you saw this like with the non-sports PMs early, like just couldn't conceptualize like why like market making live when there's no delay was like such a big issue, but like no big clearly like gets it. So, like you know, again, I think this is this is a cool way to do it, and instead of like trying to like hide their fee increase or whatever, you know, they're coming out and engaging with you know the community and being like, this will be our fee, this is why, and like it's actually a reason instead of like a fake reason, like it all makes sense.
SPEAKER_01So kind of I just makes me think, did the Discord melt down in the same? I don't know. Did anybody check on the Novig Discord? Okay, because I I the when you brought up the tick sizes on that one episode, I went into Discord and I had I was in there a good hour, you know, like having the time of my life, sending sending you like screenshots of the ones I thought were the funniest. So uh I mean to me this is honestly similar to that. I think the challenge that Novig is probably facing a little bit is they're having to unwind some of these decisions. Um, because like my view is always you want to be, because this is like an ex-I know we love our tick sizes here. To me, this is like an ex the the tick size width and the fees, like they accomplish similar things in protecting market makers. Like the wider they are, it protects them, the more fees they are, it protects them, especially if they're getting some of the fees like back. And so, like, you know, when you had like very, very narrow ticks and no fees, it's really hard to get makers on the site, uh, especially with like these toxic type, like where it's very top, it can be very toxic in live and stuff. And so, you know, I think they're having the challenge of it's always easier to remove these things than to introduce them. Like it's it's always easier to make the ticks smaller than it is the larger, and it's always easier to less than a fee than to increase or add a fee. So I do, I do feel for them there. But yeah, ultimately, I think this is probably a move you need to you need to make and they have a good understanding of that. Um, you know, just to to improve liquidity and experience on the site. I don't think the way the users react over the tick sizes, I think they're gonna have a I would be surprised if there wasn't a very active vocal um group of people who are very understanding.
SPEAKER_02You're a hundred percent gonna go into the Discord after this, right? And and check this out.
SPEAKER_01I mean, they're they're they're calling it like, you know, you need to rename your site, you're not you're now not Novig anymore. When they like increase the tick size to like half a percent.
SPEAKER_02Wait, that's funny because that would be the thing I thought they would say maybe for the now they're actually like now.
SPEAKER_01I can actually like understand that that comment is a little bit more appropriate. I still like at the end of the day, like I understand. I think you know it's fair to me what they're doing, and I think it makes sense. And from a business decision and like growing the product. Again, to me, it all makes sense, but you know, the the certain sect of people are not gonna be happy about this, I don't think.
SPEAKER_02So I don't envy I don't envy them because it's like it's like the loudest, least important part, too. You said it, not me. No, you tech you wrote that in the outline. I'm just reading what you wrote in the outline. Um yeah, uh that that's basically right. It's like the people, you know, probably the third group for them. Like it matters having users matters and having you know, the these are users that like also, you know, go out and probably you know, rep rep the brand in some way of suggesting it. So it's good to, you know, every every user matters, you know, to some extent, but you know, some do matter more than others. But this is gonna be the most vocal group, which I think these the recs aren't gonna be vocal, really, right? Like you're just not gonna hear from them that much. Like, yeah, you you know that you might catch them under like Book It Trent's like, you know, play saying like Novig, you know, guy, you know, Novig is doing parlays now, you should post it there. Like, but that like you know, barely you're gonna hear from that. And you're definitely not gonna hear from the institutional market makers.
SPEAKER_01No. So like you're only gonna hear that's what I mean. Like, if you think of who like the and that's why I don't envy them at all. I know we're sort of joking, but like if you think of who the people who were most passionate about Novig, probably like you know, three months ago, it was people who absolutely adored Novig because you could quote like less than a cent wide, and if you got like a good price anywhere, you could basically print money and just like arbit and no fee and like undercut and penny jump and all these things. And so, like that was you know, that was one of the things that set Novig apart, certainly. And like I I don't want to oversell the I don't know the fees and everything. I'm sure they're totally reasonable, you know, and and they're trying to keep them as low as possible, would be my guess, just knowing like knowing their strategy up to this point over there and everything. But like those people are your you know, your most vocal people in the Discord, and now you know, because again, there's like a common sentiment is like when I was reading it, it's like what makes this different than you know, and it's like do you not know how how like wide the the the ticks are at the other places of the fees and everything?
SPEAKER_02And so I yeah, I mean I I I don't I think it's just running a Discord, I don't envy anybody who has to well I I heard the lore of like odds gym had Discord then shut it down because they were like bitching too much about odds gym or something.
SPEAKER_01That's gotta be like the worst. I can't I mean that's gotta be a tough, tough job of like yeah, sports gambling related Discord manager or moderator or that. Like, oh man, that's gotta be tough. That's gotta be tough.
SPEAKER_02I wonder if like I wonder if uh, you know, if they still think it's value to have a Discord.
SPEAKER_01I mean, like every company has one, so they could like oh yeah, College has a Discord, Prize Picks had a Discord, right?
SPEAKER_02They probably still do.
SPEAKER_01I think they basically all do, but like it just descends into toxicity like so yeah quickly. Like even if you try and be upfront, like and send the message, like you know, people just get it's it's it's but we can move on. We can move on.
SPEAKER_02Um speaking of toxicity, uh the polycoltri wars rage on across the uh tabloids. So there's this new New York Times article that basically uh said that Colchy met with the federal they remember the Justice Department, I guess it was about like poly market in 2024 before they raided uh if you remember like Shane's apartment. Um and yeah, then like even like with this article, there's a lot of like back and forth on Twitter, of course. But yeah, I mean I think there's not much to say about this except for like it continues.
SPEAKER_01Yeah, I mean, I think you know, Galaxy refers to poly market as like offshore all the time, still. Um, and like anytime there's like insider trading, they're like, no, that's that offshore company or whatever. Um so yeah, it I I maybe I'm hallucinating. I thought this was like known news. I thought this came out before.
SPEAKER_02Yeah, I thought the post posted it, but then I started getting reposted. Oh yeah, yeah. I thought, well, it's definitely was speculated, right? Like back in the day.
SPEAKER_01That like, yeah, they were behind this.
SPEAKER_02Um but it's interesting to see it posted in the New York Times.
SPEAKER_01Yeah, it's like they're both, it's like both companies are playing like uh ping pong back and forth of who who's getting what reporter this week, and they both write like back and forth stories, like one week you get this, and then the next week you're gonna get like here are the cow sheet traders. Like well, the area, the era of the cow sheet sharper, whatever, like and then you're gonna get that. And yeah, you just sort of go back and forth of who's paying for the article this week.
SPEAKER_02It's too bad. It it it does seem to now be diverging. This is kind of the one area where I feel like it's diverged significantly from FanDuel DraftKings because eventually FanDuel and DraftKings, I think, started acting um in lockstep a bit more, or at least like realized that they needed to keep the pie in the oven so they could split it, you know.
SPEAKER_01I was on a pod, you know, a while back with uh on ETR with Nigel. I asked him like what what advice or I can't remember how I framed the question, like what would you do differently? Something like that, if like if you were if you were running one of these companies, that was exactly what he said. He said, like, they need to stop this type of stuff, because they're gonna have bigger fish to fry here soon.
SPEAKER_02Yeah, yeah, that's kind of that's I think then both of our reads every time, but then you know no one listens to us. That's not true. We got a lot of we got a lot of awesome listeners. Um okay, Rothera, quick some quick hits at the end. Roth era gets four percent market share in July. That is the SIG Robin Hood PM exchange. So that's actually a lot. Um four percent of I think it was like four point five percent actually of the uh total volume. That is a lot. I've not used uh Roth era, but you know, I think I don't know. I I think like you know, this is a company that has a good mix of like one on one hand you have people who are who understand like how exchange electronic trading works in SIG. And on the other hand, you have you know one of the biggest user bases of recreational customers. Like this is gonna, you know, this is an exchange that's very much set up for success. Like, I think a lot of the blunders that you see at other exchanges would not have been made if you had a company like like SIG in the driver's seat. Um, so yeah, I mean, generally, like I'd say that this is not too shocking for me.
SPEAKER_01I'm being I'm really interested on like you know, football season over, like where the production markets rank and like who's who's like vying for the top and who's just like dead and how it goes.
SPEAKER_02So I I do think we'll we'll see some. I think call calls you will still be number one. Like I think it'll be hard to to bump them off, but like I do, I am interested too. I think like at the end of football season we could see some weird stuff.
SPEAKER_01I think so too. I I think it's to me, it's like fairly open app behind them.
SPEAKER_02Yeah, I agree. I agree. So um, okay, you wanna so call Sheet Pro Terminal launched. I know uh friend of the show, PMT, did a video. I didn't get to see it. I haven't I haven't messed around with it too much. I know you've done some work with it. So do you want to give like a brief review?
SPEAKER_01Yeah, I mean I don't I don't know if I'm the most qualified, but yeah, it's it's it's basically like a different interface uh for Cal She, and it's supposed to be like more advanced. I've not I'm not like a you know finance guy, but I guess quote unquote, it's supposed to be like, you know, I'd probably heard this a million times, but like the Bloomberg terminal of prediction markets is I guess what it's supposed to look like. Um I mean, I don't I thought it was like pretty cool and it's it's like pretty ambitious for them to roll this out. I don't necessarily like know if this would be like high on my priority list if I was like at Calchi. It seems like anybody who would to me, anybody who would use this can do their like their own version of what they need of this. Um, because it has like additional features of like you can very easily see like the tape for different for stuff, which is which is cool. And it's just like better visualizations and like breakdowns of like the order book and stuff, is is at least all I've dabbled on it. And there's more like customizations of like you could put stuff in certain places and set it up how you want it to and and all that. Um, but again, like with AI and stuff, like I feel like anybody who would want that level of sophisticate sophistication could could do it reasonably easy. So I don't necessarily know like who the target audience is. Maybe that's just like me being in my bubble, and there are like a lot more sort of sophisticated like hand traders outside of sports that I'm like not plugged into. Like I could imagine like the mention market traders or whatever, like being into this. Um, so it's it's it's cool and like um pretty ambitious, like I said. Um, I don't know, like I'm not like on the Calchi website all that often, but I could definitely see like the time I'm on there, I'm using this instead if I get like my bearings around it. So it's cool. It definitely is cool.
SPEAKER_02Yeah, I think you bring up a point that like I also thought about, which is like exactly who is it for, because yeah, like you and I are like, yeah, we looked at it, but like a lot of I assume like both of our stuff is is really just like automated trading stuff that you have your own kind of views for and you're not necessarily on the website a lot, and then like but I mean maybe there is like this, you know. I think I don't know. I mean we always talk about like crypto native people or like this whole kind of other segment that like wants to gamble but wants it to feel like investing, you know, and like that could be kind of the the use case for it, like people who are who are like I don't know, like I to steal a a word a line from Jeff Feinberg, like sophisticated square. Like I could see that being a like a kind of a sophisticated square um thing, and then yeah, like good hand traders, like clay, like you know, this could be good for clay so he doesn't have to live in the uh position staff.
SPEAKER_01Clay is just gonna rocket up the leader. I'm hamstrung by the the old galaxy.
SPEAKER_02There's gonna be no money left for the rest of our big, big trouble. That's a big point. Um, but yeah, like so yeah, manual trading. I think it it seems to probably be a big, a big bump too. So I'd be interested to know, like, will it I think they seemingly did a good job from when I was clicking around in it, it didn't feel like anything was was breaking, like it like it did feel like it all worked. So like that must have been quite a heavy lift on their part to get it.
SPEAKER_01No, that's why I liked it. Like, even even like the the website just like doesn't work like half the time, right? So like the fact that this worked and like was fast, I was like, all right, this is already better. Yeah, it's I could like actually see my orders if I wanted to.
SPEAKER_02I think it gives them some legitimacy, like more legitimacy, you know, like yeah, like if you're looking if people coming into it from like more of a financial um bent, I think it gives them more legitimacy. Like you log into it and you you see something that looks very similar to like the best you know websites that you're seeing and and makes it look less like gambling, so that's good.
SPEAKER_01That's true.
SPEAKER_02That I think that uh I don't know, that could be another value. So yeah, anyway, very cool. And then we had this. So this one uh I I thought was fake news. I thought it got community noted, but I realized like, but basically the cardinals executive. We saw the tweet, it was like Cardinals executive places a five legger on the draft and makes 700,000 or or whatever. So like that part is fake news, but there was SP uh right, a Cardinals executive who is in trouble for gambling or non-public information or something.
SPEAKER_01Yeah, just another case of you know, someone in sports betting on sports and the public just not caring and moving on and gonna proceed to bet NFL week one. So fair enough. Glad they caught him. He should be in trouble, but you know, we can we can all move on.
SPEAKER_02Fair enough. All right, back to the questions.
SPEAKER_01I'll read uh I'll read Richard Lee's with the recent regulatory losses on prick prediction markets have experienced. Have you taken or will take more risk to maximize expected value or or continue to operating normally? For me, I'm operating normally. Uh, you know, I'm just I'm not even a sports trader anymore. I'm just a fool on mentions trader. So mentions and culture. So I'm good. I I don't know GP as a sports trader if you uh you were concerned.
SPEAKER_02Um yeah, concerned, uh, I guess. Um I don't know. I don't, yeah. Again, I just nothing's changing. It's it's obviously the best opportunity. Hit it. Um what I said was, you know, the the the hedging I'm doing is you know, I'm not I'm not like a traditionally like big spender of money. Like not to say that I don't spend any money or I'm cheap, but I just don't really do anything. So it ends up not, you know, I I'm not like inflating my lifestyle. So I'll just keep going. And if the party ends after Trump leaves office, you know, so be it. But you know, I feel like there's a lot of uh at this point, you know, I look they say like two faces out of the tube, or there's just too much built or whatever. I think there's some truth to that, so so we'll see. Um but but yeah, weather monkey, similar. If Calci contracts are banned in my state, which state would be the best one to move to, which state is likely to remain the most favorable towards sports prediction markets for the foreseeable future. So, like, I think the obvious answer is a state that doesn't have legal sports betting is you know, the states that are fighting back the hardest are the ones who have something to protect. So, you know, may I suggest the great state of South Carolina? You know, we're we're here trying to build the South Carolina Sports Betting Association or something or sports trading. I don't know what we're building, but you know, come on down, right, SP or up.
SPEAKER_01I wrote down South Carolina as well because not only do you not want one with a legal sports bank, but you also don't want one where it's like a hot button issue, sports betting. So like California, no good. Don't go there, Utah, no good, Texas, no good. You want to go to one where like, you know, the people haven't even heard of sports betting quite yet, and that's that's the great state of South Carolina.
SPEAKER_02Yeah, yeah. There's like there's no chance South Carolina's like coming after prediction market.
SPEAKER_01No, no, like all the sweepstakes was stuff was going on. I don't even think they knew. I don't even think they knew. No, that's what I'm saying. The news didn't get to us quite yet. It's gotta come by horseback to get here.
SPEAKER_02So yeah, so coming to South Carolina.
SPEAKER_01Um I gotta read the next one from Gianni.
SPEAKER_02This is a good one. Yeah.
SPEAKER_01How much responsibility should Calci bear for accelerate accidentally duplicating markets such as the duplicated New York Liberty market and allowing those duplicate contracts to be combined? As a second order question, how can a market maker remain resilient to platform failures like this? So I wasn't, you know, I'm not not. Really in the uh WNBA streets, but I guess there was like they put the same game up twice, is what I understand. The same WNBA game, and people could like combo that, so they could take like Liberty minus six with Liberty minus six, and you know, probably the pricing engines for certain RFQ quotas didn't work properly, is what I'm gathering.
SPEAKER_02Yeah, yeah, that's exactly right. Um, marked safe over here. Um, but uh yeah, I I think I think that it is an interesting question of like what responsibility Calci bears here. I mean, I uh to me this seems like an obvious spot to like bust these trades. You know, I don't it is a Calci mistake, but like obviously you do bear some responsibility to try to like because you know like platforms are gonna have make errors, like exchanges are gonna make errors and whatnot. But that's why I feel like eventually you should get down to the point where you just like bust the trades, like because what's gonna happen is like as a market maker, you know the exchange is gonna make mistakes, but like do you have to then be yeah, like I I don't know. I I think like it's just a you should bust the trades, but to the second part of the question, uh one thing that one key point here is that I don't think that you would have lost a ton in RFQs here if you weren't using Call Shi's internal order books to quote RFQs, which I think is like a very risky proposition to only rely on the Call Shi um mainline order books and then use those to quote RFQs. Uh because I was trying to think about like how it could have happened elsewhere, you know, and it and I don't see because that's not what we do. Um, but like it is that is dangerous for a variety of reasons. Um as we've seen, like we didn't we see like in baseball or whatever, you you know, people would just like move the underlying prop line. Yeah, yeah, or hockey. Yeah, like they're like there's been examples of like why this is bad, and this is just another example. So, like as a to Gianni's like explicit second question, like my my practical advice would be like don't use the call she order books or don't only use the call she order books as your uh as the thing that you're quoting RFQs with.
SPEAKER_01Think that's good there. Let's do the last one in this series.
SPEAKER_02Whoa, whoa, whoa, wait. What do you think? Does wait, do you feel like call she has responsibility? Like I'm just curious to hear like what you think to the first part.
SPEAKER_01I don't think Call Shea has any responsibility. Um I think if you're sophisticated enough to be quoting RFQs, you really have no right to cry. Um is my opinion. Like I which is different than because I on this podcast before I've said like you should void palps and stuff.
unknownYeah.
SPEAKER_01Like if someone if someone fat fingers plus 5,000 or whatever instead of minus 5,000, like I do think those should in generally be um those should be like voided. In this case, like my my general thing is you should always you should generally err on the side of the uh the least um sophisticated side. And so like uh RFQ quoter, like I don't is less sophisticated than the person who found the palette. Probably are they? Like that's that's a pretty easy thing to find. Yeah. Like just click the two. I mean, I don't know, it's all it's always hard. Like there's the amount of money at stake, too, that always comes into this. Like, I don't know. I mean, like, in my opinion, what they should have done, like in what the the good exchanges, you know, I was sort of I don't think I was bashing on Novig, but put you know, making light of the hard situation or Discord or but one thing they've always done great, and I think the ProfitX has done great um in a couple of experiences, is when things like this have happened, they they they pay it out of pocket. Yeah, that's the other thing. And like ultimately, Calci is like hella rich compared to those those two companies. Like they should just they should have just paid it. Like basically like busted the trades, like you said, and then paid the people who took it. Like it's a bad precedent, and you can't do that all the time, but like yeah, in reality, like that's that's like the optimal customer experience, in my opinion.
SPEAKER_02I don't know. It's it I'm not settled on kind of where I where I sit there. Because yeah, I do feel like you do have your RFQ is like the pain, the pain can come. It's it's so you have to guard like you're you know, you gotta guard as much as you can, um, and make make it as hard as you can to the first goal is not don't blow up.
SPEAKER_01Yeah, and I mean, but to me this is different. Like it would be one thing if like let's say the label was screwed up and you, you know, the label was one thing, and like you were quoting it some way, but it was actually like a different underlying, like it was actually a calci error. Yeah, this I mean, it's not really a calci error. Like they if they wanted to post the same game twice, like they should be allowed to do that. Like, I don't know why you but like they didn't actually make an error, right? Like the error was the person who quoted the same thing twice. Yeah, yeah, you know what I mean?
SPEAKER_02Like, yeah, yeah, but you wouldn't reasonably expect them to be a good one. Like you were the one who quoted it. That's true. I mean, you technically quoted it. You technically did quote it. Um I don't know. It it is interesting. That's an it it it is an interesting question there. I don't know exactly.
SPEAKER_01I've seen like where where I think I think I think Novic had a case like this, like past football season where it was like the date of the game. I think it was something like this. Like the get the on the app, the game said it was like the 12th, but it was really like the underlying metric was off for the game, the 13th or something.
SPEAKER_02And like in that case, to me, that's like a clear error on the well, one of the games was listed, I think, at the wrong date on Call Street.
SPEAKER_01Oh, was it? Yeah. Okay, well, like if the if it's like misrepresented what you're actually booking, then yeah, I I think then that needs avoided. I think that's pretty clear then. I didn't I didn't I didn't know that detail. I thought it was just like two games, booked the tenth, like separate liquidity pools, like you know.
SPEAKER_02Yeah, now I have to remember because it I know it was like the game got postponed, and then maybe when it got postponed, they re duped it. I don't know. I actually I don't know that for 100% sure, but I I know it's something around the dates and the game getting postponed, but I'm not gonna do it.
SPEAKER_01It's hard because like where do you draw the line? Because could you say like Cal she shouldn't let me Cal she shouldn't let me quote an RFQ? That's they shouldn't let me let's let's say the money line's 50% and then you know spread or whatever, like some some plus 200. And like if one if the spread hits, the the money line obviously has to hit. Like if I multiply those payouts together and do that incorrectly, like that's my fault. Correct. That's not Calci's fault, right? And so to me, it's not all that different. If if everything's labeled properly, sure.
SPEAKER_02Sure. But it yeah, I mean, you know, you don't want to list the same game twice.
SPEAKER_01No, you don't want to do that, you know. You anger some some people when you do that, but sure.
SPEAKER_02Yeah, all right. I'd love to hear everybody's thoughts on this. I'm I'm curious. But yeah, we can move on.
SPEAKER_01Um all right, I'll ask I'll ask six semper tyrannous question. Do you take any precautions against platform or site risk, such as the possibility of an FTX style failure involving Calci or Polymarket? I don't. No.
SPEAKER_02Don't just hopefully. Yeah, I could go into more detail, but it's like the value of the money there is so valuable, and they both raise a ton of money, and you know, yeah. Don't know if you're not going to be able to do that.
SPEAKER_01All right, next topics was modeling research, research. I can't speak, research and sources of edge from peanut. What phenomena or traits are you confident exist across different sports but are not yet being evaluated effectively because of sample selection problems, correlated variables, or similar analytical limitations? I would be also interested in things that are currently measured indirectly without fully identifying or measuring the underlying cause. So I had two for the first part and then one for the last one. And these honestly, I this was a great question, and I didn't have that good of examples. Um I was sort of disappointed at my examples. But two that I think um are sort of well talked about as this is like however you want to call hot hand or streakiness in most sports. I think I think in most sports it exists. I think quantifying it is very challenging to do for a variety of reasons. And the way people ask the questions are of are, in my opinion, usually not like specific enough to distill what they're actually trying to distill. To the second part, like you're trying to just measure hotness or like whatever, like doing well, but you should try and distill down to like what the sources of that are, and you might have more success at at identifying that. Because if you just think of like, you know, golf, obviously, like form is a thing. And like in any sport, like form is a thing. And anybody who's played a sport, like has felt this before. So I think, you know, that's one. The other one would be like clutchness or pressure. Um, I think is like very hard to quantify in most sports. But yeah, anybody who's ever played a sport for like money or you know, like anything, like like has felt this before and like has felt their performance deteriorate. So I think it's silly to think it just like disappears at the professional level. And then my my version of um things we we measure, but uh indirectly without like actually getting the cause. So like this is very common in football and probably other sports too, but like all these like over expectation stats, like the the common ones in football that I you know hear most often would be like rush yards over expectation or completion percentage over expectation. Like the whole idea of those metrics is usually like you fit some model saying, like, what's the average? How many yards are you gonna get on this rush, like running left on third and seven, blah, blah, blah. And like if this running back gets more than that on average, we're attributing like the whole residual to that person. Or like the whole, and like that doesn't, I mean, you're you're measuring a bunch of stuff and you're attributing it to a single thing. So like rush yards are of expectation, like there's lots of things, like it's only as good as what's in your expectation model. Yeah. So like if you don't have like obviously they all have like down in distance, but let's pretend you didn't have that. Like your expectation is gonna be really bad, and then your conclusions about who's a good running back is gonna be really like bad. Same with like, you know, pass completion percentage. Like, if you're not if if you don't have like the quality of receiver or something, or like how open the receiver is, and I know most of them like have stuff like that, but like there's other stuff that they don't have, which matters in all of these stats. And by assigning it like all to one person, right? Like rushing yards or expectations of running back stat, you know, it's like there's other factors that drive that. So it's like trying to measure a bunch of things and distill it to one would be my example for all those.
SPEAKER_02I like those. Yeah, I like it because I was actually I assumed like we potentially had a chance to overlap here. Um, but I I chose one and it was motivation. So like, and I actually went to like a you know, we all know what it's like. Like I remember when I was playing a lot of golf tournaments when I was growing up, I would all of my best scores eventually like would just come in tournaments because I felt like whenever I play like a casual round, like I just had the hardest time like caring or focusing. And obviously, like every time a professional athlete like steps onto the court or whatever, like they're playing for something, but it doesn't mean they're playing for equal things all the time. Um, and I think like I know in certain sports, like it's been touched on, like um divisional games, I think, uh, you know, the quote unquote revenge spot. I don't, you know, I don't know these uh sports as well, so I don't know how true any of this is. But I know in in Billy Walter's book, he like mentioned some adjust he did for like in division stuff. And then uh like there's some example of like zigzag. Like zigzag has some is built built somewhat of a motivational or theorized to be like somewhat motivational. So you know, obviously there's been there's things that have like kind of grazed against it, but I think a good example in golf was Rory last year. Like Rory won the career grand slam at Augusta, and then he just kind of like was mediocre for a bit, and he eventually like he would go on to talk about it and be like, Yeah, I kind of had a dip in motivation, and like it was clear eventually that that was true, but it is an interesting spot because like when Rory wins that masters, he's you know, by any like objective model, he's the second best golfer in the world, but he ends up playing like you know, whatever, like the 30th. So there's all this edge. If you kind of eventually picked up, like, oh, he might just kind of be mailing it in a little bit, um, and start fading Rory, and that was gonna probably be like one of your biggest edges that you could find, you know. Like, so the the value of it, I think, is quite high spots.
SPEAKER_01That's a great one as well, the motivation stuff.
SPEAKER_02All right, I'll ask you this one because this is this is for you. What are sports projections' views on modeling and betting mixed martial arts? He has said that he wants to operate where uncertainty is the greatest, and MMA seems like a particularly chaotic and misunderstood sport. I would be interested in any information or opinions he has on MMA betting.
SPEAKER_01Yeah, so MMA, I don't, you know, MMA might be an area where uncertainty is too even too great for me. Um I I I think the way I would think about like if I was to I was to bet MMA is you know, our main topic today was going to be like small data problems to give like a maybe a teaser of a couple a teaser of a couple weeks if we need one, um if we don't get 40 questions again. But like MMA is certainly that. And I think when you do that, like when you're in that realm, you need to like uh honestly, when we were talking with Denny last week, like him betting horses and UFC might seem like a weird combination, but I actually think it makes a ton of sense because the way I would think about MMA would be like more similar to betting horses, in that like you can't just look at like what has happened in the ring. That's never gonna be like enough data. Just like you probably cannot, I assume in horse racing, you can't just look at like the three races this horse has run. What Denny was talking about of like pedigree and and like um you know, like what you know the mother and father of this horse and stuff like that. Obviously, like not that necessarily in MMA, but I think what I would try and distill would be like athletic profile as a big component, like how trying to measure how athletic the person actually is. And then, like, obviously that's not enough. There's plenty of athletic people who are no good at MMA, but then doing some sort of like nearest neighbors type thing of like this guy has been fighting since he was 15. This guy's been fighting since this guy's only been fighting two years. This guy is, you know, styles are predominantly this and this. This guy's output is this to try and measure like cardio in terms of like pace and stuff. Um, and just try and like cluster fighters together as well as I can to try and get like an idea of like floor and ceiling and range of outcomes for guys, and um, and then try and come up with numbers that way. It would be like for me, it would be quite manual because the reality is you have like not that much much data. And the data I would use would not be like like I think you're gonna have a really bad model if you're like this guy's had four fights and he's taken, he's has nine takedowns and he's thrown 94 strikes, and like I'm gonna build some model that way. I think that would be total garbage. I think what you need to do is like like, like I said, like athletic composition, gas tank, style of fighter, you know, like experience level, all of those things, age, reach, like, you know, all of that stuff, like up and down a weight class, like all of those things I think could help you get like a number in the right direction. And then the rest of it would be like eyes and you know, hand on the hand on the canvas, I guess, not the dirt. I don't know if it's called the canvas, the mat.
SPEAKER_02The mat. I don't know. The canvas painting. Um all right, I got oh uh okay. We have if you had an NFL play-by-play simulation that consistently beat player prop markets by a wide margin, how would you best monetize it? Um you know, my DMs are open, so yeah, there's always there's always that route. But my my honest answer is you want to be able to run it live and you know use it to make and take live combos. Very simple. Like make sure if you have the sim, figure out how you can get it fast enough to run on live data, get the live data, and then go go that route.
SPEAKER_01Yeah, I mean, I'll just echo if you have a play-by-play sim that's good. Um, don't waste, don't waste it betting like straight. You know, every dollar should like the value you have, like a sim, the value is that you you ideally are going to capture correlation well. And so every dollar should be spent like on your correlation edge, which would be like RFQs, parlays, combos, etc. Uh I could read the next one. How much of your alpha do you and SP share with each other, given that you work separately? My understanding is that GP has a team while SP primarily works alone. Well, Quarry, that's a great question. I mean, you could tell how much alpha you know GP gives me by the our discrepancy in the leaderboard right now. We need to we need to push to get GP to give me more alpha. Um, I'm clearly not getting enough. So um, no, I mean, I don't I don't know what your perspective is. We we obviously live in the same city. We go out to eat and stuff and talk regularly, but I think you know, because you you have a bigger team and I'm one person, like the types of problems we work on are generally like different. And I feel like you and I can can both talk to each other both pretty openly. But at the end of the day, we both realize like we are competing in the similar type things. So there's there's certain things probably you wouldn't share and I wouldn't share. But I think like general strategy and just what we're seeing and what we're working on and issues, um, that's what I you know feel comfortable. And I think I think both of you know, because we're friends, like if something like we could say something and like the other person wouldn't just be like a dick about it and blow it up, you know.
SPEAKER_02So yeah, I have this basically the same thing. It's like I I actually don't I wrote like I don't think there's a there's a ton of overlap like in what we do. Obviously, there's gonna be some, but I think yeah, it's like we talk a lot about strategy about spots, like, oh, I'm seeing like a lot of volume here. Like, are you seeing like XYZ in everything? Sometimes it might not be like, oh yeah, like in this, you know, mention market, you know, XY, you know, this is like huge alpha, or like you gotta fade Bryson. Although, like, I you know, that one I certain things like sometimes it's like it doesn't matter, but you just don't think to be like, hey, like you should go. Let me message you to be like, hey, you should fade Bryson here. It's like, maybe, but you're probably doing like XYZ other things, and like, do you know what price it's actually you know, sometimes it's like a a specific spot could be you you know tough to share for multiple reasons, it like might just not fit your strategy, or you're just like doing other stuff. But yeah, I'd say like we talk pretty pretty openly, at least about strategy and general general stuff, which I think is like very valuable because it's always good to hear your opinion on on you know that type of thing and then be able to talk about it. So yeah, like definitely don't be afraid. To uh to share with your friends. Um doesn't have to be everything, but don't be too cagey, I'd say.
unknownYeah.
SPEAKER_01I mean, like if there's someone you're close with and they, you know, you tell them something and they would like destroy it for you. That's that's that's not good. That's probably like not a friend.
SPEAKER_02So yeah, yeah, yeah. Definitely reevaluate that that person, I would say. Not your strategy of sharing. Right.
SPEAKER_01Um, next one from Max Biddle. What do you think the sharpest sports betters average in terms of return on investment over a given season? So my answer was like something like two to three percent. I think any any more, and they're probably like, you know, not that sharp. And I mean they and that's extreme, but like they're leaving money on the table. And I think, you know, in general, people should probably target like something like you know, three. I think Denny said four percent is what he targeted or something like that. I think like some targeting something like somewhere between two and four percent makes sense, and then probably coming in somewhere like one to three is makes sense. I mean, it depends what you're doing. Like if you're if you're betting like junk markets or something, like it's it should be higher than that. But uh, I guess uh yeah, if we're talking like sharpest, like major markets, I would think. You know, low both single digits for sure.
SPEAKER_02Yeah, I wrote like one to two percent under the same kind of you know, I'd say like the average roi is gonna be like low, but the volume will will shock you. Like if I'm thinking about who I think this is, like Star Lizard or or someone, like it's gonna be the ROI is not gonna not gonna be super sexy, but you'll just your mind will be absolutely blown by the volume that they're getting down, would be my answer. Um okay, we have I guess we have to make a call here. We have a few more categories. Should we power through them?
SPEAKER_01I think we can do it. We can do it.
SPEAKER_02Okay.
SPEAKER_01All right, okay. I'll read this one. Risk of ruin. Could you walk through your technology stack from top to bottom? My tech stack is, you know, I'm you know we're like the two, I'm like the, you know, the in the Olympics, that guy with the you know, the the shooting contest who had who had no setup and GP's the guy with like or the the woman with like you know the glasses and like the special optics and everything. My setup, I got two laptops, you know, one I use for remote, one that I just use, two monitors, normal two monitors, and my uh AI setup of choice is codex through VS Code, and that's about all I got going on.
SPEAKER_02Um yeah, four monitors over here, five if you include the laptop. And then for yeah, I I use Claude, I actually like to use Claude um desktop. I've become a voice prompter thanks to uh Big Buck Hunter, and that's just like huge, huge edge there. And uh, but yeah, I think like I like to use Claude Desktop and then you know use I use cursor for an IDE. Everything's in Python. We use Git for we use Git and Dropbox uh to like version control and have one central repository to work from. And yeah, I mean there's probably a ton of things I'm forgetting. But yeah, basically like Git for the code, Dropbox for like the bigger database files, and you know, building in some version of Cloud Desktop, and then I use cursor for if I actually want to go in and like manually edit Python files. There's yeah, I don't know. Like, yeah, there's all sub there's sub things, you know, but like that's the main stuff.
SPEAKER_01Okay, next one from I think it got autocorrected again, but I think it's gonna say, like, are this on purpose? I think it's Statify sports, is what I think it is. How can I prompt Claude to build a Calci bet tracker? This may be a skill issue, but I cannot get the API to return the same profit number displayed on profile. Uh, he uses Calci Pro, gets a CSV, and that's a different number. Why might they differ? And how should the tracker be built? I've seen other people talk about this. I I guess the couple things I'd say is a leaderboard like stuff is seemingly always out of date and like not right. So I would take that with a grain of salt. Um, the other thing that I've noticed is like some of the profits, like if it's not taking into account unrealized like gains or like live positions or whatever, that could throw stuff off. Um I haven't personally run this in a while, so I I honestly can't answer that well beyond like telling AI, you know, pool all like every single bet and and trying to one by one compare that to what's in the CSV or whatever if in pro.
SPEAKER_02So yeah. Yeah, I was gonna say, like, I guess I'm I don't exactly know the issue here, but there's a few things that it could be like it depend like if you're using the the API and you're doing some like are you building your your PL from like the trades up? Are you getting your PNL from the call she you know from the basically like the account endpoint, which should be, yeah, like like SP said that would maybe just be like a cash and positions thing, um and not a PNL thing, like how much you actually up. Like, yeah, the leaderboard and your profile PL is always gonna be wrong. Don't I don't don't worry about that. But if if it's if it's more than that, if like you're trying to build it from the trade, you know, you gotta remember it could be a fractional shares issue, it could be a fees issue. Like again, I'm not exactly sure how you're you're building this, but if it's if it's just like, oh, it doesn't match the profile, like SP said, like the leaderboard and the profile stuff is just wrong, like it's lagging and and whatever. So I would never like think to use that as any type of sense check, but like your cash and your position should be correct. So I would start there. And then if you're yeah, trade by trade, I would just make sure you're accounting for fractional shares and um fees.
SPEAKER_01Next one is wiffle ball knower. How large is you how large is your trading team? What are the roles and responsibilities of each person? Well, for me, this is easy. I have all the roles and all the responsibilities. It is one person. So mine is easy. How about you, GP?
SPEAKER_02Um, yeah, I feel like maybe eventually this would be like a good thing to go a bit more in depth on. Uh, yeah, like as people may know if you're if you're listening or on Twitter, like trying to uh go through a hiring process right now, but as of the second, we got we have five people. The roles and responsibilities are yeah, I don't this could like drag on for a bit, but but basically I'd say like you generally want to have at least somebody, you know, at ass and seat, you know, making sure nothing's blowing up, and then a lot of the roles and responsibilities beyond that are just like ad hoc projects, probably similar to what you're doing SP, where it's like, okay, this is what we need to do this week, you know, and then something new comes up and it's like, okay, this is what we're doing. So the yeah, everybody kind of knows what's going on with the trading, everybody kind of knows what's going on with the I'd say like the dev work, like we're all it's small enough where everybody kind of is aware of what's going on, but there's certainly like people who are more traders and people who are more more dev, I would say. So, but later, I think in a future episode, maybe could go more in depth into that.
SPEAKER_01Our goal is to get one of your your teammates on the on the pod. You you protect them and shield them so none of them can be on, but that that's my goal. So hopefully we can get it. That'll happen.
SPEAKER_02That'll happen.
SPEAKER_01You gotta get them media chained, I guess. That's right.
SPEAKER_02That's right. Um okay, this one's bankroll growth, expenses, and longevity. So this is from uh former guest friend of the show, Adam Beagle Betts. How long do you think someone like me who does not originate sports markets or use advanced technical skills, although I do originate some non-sports markets, will be able to continue making good money on predicts? This sounds like a joke, but it's a serious question. Um, I thought Adam maybe he does NBA props, I thought. But um to the question, like I don't know. Actually, I I thought a lot about this. I can't really think of a great answer, although like you can get technical skills. It's never been easier. Um I would say that I don't know. I don't know. I think there's always gonna be big spots, but like you're gonna definitely feel like in the day-to-day stuff, I think you're gonna start to need technical skills within the next year. Like just the everyday, like standard markets. But you know, there's always gonna be spots like that. That will never go away. But if you're like, you know, just doing a regular, you know, you know, NFL touchdown market, like eventually you're just probably gonna, you're gonna need you know, you're gonna need some technical skills.
SPEAKER_01Yeah, I can act honestly, I can parlay my answer with the next question too. So I'll read that. But what are keys to growing a smaller bank role? Is it primarily a matter of long-term discipline? Or some or should someone be more aggressive about exploiting unusual, unusual or gimmicky markets? So the way I was gonna parlay this is I think in these like non-sports markets, I think there's gonna be good stuff for quite some time. Um like you know, I know Adam has tweeted about some of those, but like, and I talked about it in one of the shows recently, is like the amount of recreational to series money just is skewed in a way that it's not in sports, um, to the like good side there. So I'd say like those I would think be good for a while. And it's hard to see like big institutional money getting into like those gimmicky markets, as uh as can of corn said. And so like that would be my answer to to Adam's question of like I think those will be good for a while. Sports, I think with football, there's gonna be so much money that it's gonna attract a lot of like big money and it's gonna just get more competitive um pretty quickly. On for Canacorns, like I think I think there's huge value in these like garbage markets on Cal She. I mean, I joked about it early in the episode. I I think you know, unless unless you have like a ton of money, I think uh I think it's in, you know, like if if you're like a one-man operation, I I think it's very much in your interest to to look at these. Um so that's what I would do if I had a smaller bankroll, especially.
SPEAKER_02Uh sounds good. Well, speaking of smaller or bankrolls, how much money is it is how much money is appropriate to spend on tools and subscriptions relative to the size of your bankroll?
SPEAKER_01I think the way I think about it is not like the size of your bankroll. I think I think about each tool on an individual like ROI basis. Like, am I gonna get ROI based on this tool? Like, silly example, if your bankroll is $1,000, spending $500 on a tool seems really stupid. But if you can make $1,000 in two weeks, it doesn't seem that stupid to me. Um like with that tool. So I would just look at it like that way, is like where's the break-even point of when I make back the money for the the the tool? And uh does that if it takes me two years to to break even, like that's really dumb. Um but if it takes two weeks, that's probably not that dumb.
SPEAKER_02Only thing I would add is I'd say people generally tend to spend too little on stuff like this, then too much would be my other thing. So if it you feel like it's super close and there's a case for it making you money, like spend the money.
SPEAKER_01I am next one from Eevee Admirer. Can you discuss people you know who are sharp but ultimately failed or quit? What lessons can be learned from them? I honestly don't know that many. You know, I have not, you know, uh all of SP's friends made it. No, or you could take it that way, or hat or I have no friends, one of the two. I'll let I'll let the listeners decide. But I mean, I think the the people I see like just broadly who who I think you know aren't gonna make it or who have seemingly like faded to less relevance are people who are, you know, obviously like the betting size is probably the most common one, but like the other thing is just stubborn in their ways, very convinced that they're like the smartest person in the room and they they can't learn anything and get better. Um so that would be that would be like the lesson I would learn is be humble and like you always someone's always getting better than you, uh, you know, and you you can't be stagnant.
SPEAKER_02Yeah. Yeah, I I think that's a good point. Um, one thing I kind of alluded to earlier, but like I found a lot of really good gamblers who've kind of not made it, have had like terrible personal finance skills. Um like truly awful. Uh and that could be from just like punting in casino games to loaning tons of money to people and not even realizing you've loaned money to them. Like, like stuff that's like goes well beyond like you know buying a $8 coffee every day. But yeah, I'd say like that that's one example. But yeah, I I think what what SP said is like ultimately it's it's a game of who's wants it, who truly wants it the most, and who's gonna improve and change with the market. Because like, for example, in poker, you had a bunch of people who made a ton of money playing poker right after Chris Moneymaker won the main, who were not very good, but the conditions were amazing, but they didn't really decide to um get better, and then when the game started getting harder, they basically just like started complaining and went broke, but then you had guys like you know, Phil Ivey and Patrick Antonius, who like also won online, all right. Brief technical issue. Um sharp people who failed or quit. I think, yeah, like like I said, personal finance is a big one, and it's just not evolving. Uh not evolving is is so so key. The best are always gonna feel like they're behind and they're constantly trying to get better, like SP said, if you think that you're hot shit and the current conditions will last forever, then you know that that's it. Um, okay, we have some unique and insider-sensitive market questions. Uh have you been active in the this is big MCETH. Have you been active in the LeBron Jams next team market? Uh, what have you learned from such a unique market with astronomical volume? How would your approach change knowing that the market is more susceptible to insider trading? So I don't know about you, but I haven't been active. I was shocked to see the the total volume in here, though. It's it's crazy. It was like 60 million or more. I don't know. But uh, have you been trading this?
SPEAKER_01Uh I've not been trading the team. I've been trading a little bit on like day he's gonna announce. Ah, okay. Which is also has insane volume, you know, relative. So I I think the thing on the insider trading with this is in general, the bigger the market, the less I'm concerned about insider trading. Because you not need an inside inside trading is bad proportional to the size of the market, in my opinion. So like it's really disastrous in like a very thin market because $10,000 in a really thin market is gonna like destroy the market and you're just gonna lose all your money in a market that's traded, whatever, like six million dollars. Like the inside trader would need like a lot of money to you know, like hurt you, basically.
SPEAKER_02No, LeBron James has a lot of money.
SPEAKER_01Right. Yeah, well, I assuming it's not gonna be one of those, you know, like random, random person, like it's less harmful. So I think it's I think it's uh cool. I mean, it is like the classic case of the front, the couchy front page market doing crazy numbers.
SPEAKER_02So yeah. I don't I I think that I think that's a great point, honestly. It's kind of like the Super Bowl halftime show, like there's so much volume that even though there's like definitely insider trading, you could still probably make money pretty easily in that market. Um, so that's a good don't let insider trading completely scare you from a market as long as there's enough volume. Um, and then from Benjamin, are you planning to trade the 2026 midterm election markets? So this is for me, that's a that's a no just because you know, just too many other things. But I'm curious, I'm curious to hear your answer.
SPEAKER_01I mean, I think the timing is gonna be sort of rough because like the like we talked about, the value of money in the fall is gonna be high. And so I think anything on a long-term basis is probably a no for me. Um, but like that I haven't been involved in like this at all. But like if they're gonna like supposedly, like this prod election is just free money. Like, if people are gonna hand out free money, like this is something I've changed my mind on. I I've updated my belief that I'm gonna take the free money if people are gonna hand it to me. So wow. Brave. Yeah, brave. I may be in there, I may be in there for certain markets. We'll see. A couple bet yeah, bet bash questions. One, I can just read them both. From Bill, what do you plan to do to make the most of your time at Betbash? And then from David, will you release your Bet Bash episode or presentation publicly? I noticed the seminar is currently full. First off, lol, that our uh our uh our seminars full. That's uh quite the honor. We appreciate everybody who who signed up to go. Um, I believe they're trying to open up seats or something. I don't know. I think they did they would have announced this prior to this podcast even being out, but I guess just check again and keep checking. Maybe there'll be more seats on that front. Did you have something on that?
SPEAKER_02No, I said I I I met I messaged Spanky, and I think Spanky's trying to help us out, get us some more seats. And like I think right before we came. Sorry, recording, you said Spanky did tweet.
SPEAKER_01Yes, he did.
SPEAKER_02So by the time you're hearing this, I don't know if this is even going to be helpful, but it seems like there's more seats opening up. And then the first part, yeah.
SPEAKER_01Do we make the most? You've gone before, so you probably have to have advice here. Perspective. What?
SPEAKER_02I have some advice here, basically.
SPEAKER_01Okay, give it, give it.
SPEAKER_02I think like we we uh as like as a community interact so much online, but we still have like good, really good relationships with people that we've never met in person. Um and like truly friendships. Bedbash is a good time, in my opinion. Like, I wouldn't try every I think everybody's like, oh, it's this great like networking opportunity. I think like the first thing you should do is just like go meet up with the people that you haven't met in person, but you're friends with online, and like you know, maybe go play some blackjack or go get a coffee or you know, go get a beer or whatever it is, and just like make sure that you take the time to actually meet those people in person because you know that's big that's basically what I did in my first go-round of bet bash. And you know, it yeah, a lot of people that I you know met for the first time in person there, like I still talk to a lot today, and it was just like a boost. It was like a it was a it was a good to actually get to meet them. So that's my like semi-hot take on bet bash, is like it's less networking and more just like kind of you know getting to know the people that you know a bit better.
SPEAKER_01Yeah, I'm just gonna go around and ask every person I mean, do you have accounts? And and do you have that? No, I I I think that's great advice. That was the mindset I was going in with it being my first year and not knowing, like just knowing people from online. So I hope to meet a lot of people and just you know, bullshit and not uh not not you know asking if they have accounts. If they have accounts, yeah. Um there were two golf questions. I'll let you take those offline with Shipper. I do we do need to give a congratulations to Shipper's comment. Countrymen for winning the uh the open.
SPEAKER_02I forgot. I was like, is that you know, I said I'm so sorry, I forgot to congratulate you on the Claire joke.
SPEAKER_01Yeah, but I'll let I'll let you take his and Burroughs, you know, question about the 3M open offline because I I I got nothing to add, but there was so much terms in Shipper's question that Shipper's question's absurd. New Zealand type terms. And I had no idea.
SPEAKER_02Michael Campbell, I mean, you do not know who Michael Campbell is.
SPEAKER_01There's like zero shot.
SPEAKER_02Okay.
unknownNo.
SPEAKER_01I'll let I'll let you hash that out with him. We had the last like more uh lighthearted questions, I guess. From promo cactus, who's the better group to hang out with? Poker players, sports betters, or market makers. And my answer was sports betters, and then in parentheses, recreational, not uh that'd be that'd be my favorite group to hang out.
SPEAKER_02That's probably true. Okay, and so my I I feel like I can give some some insight here. So I'm I I have to say market makers first, because the only time I've like hung out with multiple market makers was when I played, I went on golf trip with uh Rufus and Tom Peabody, Shane, Sigsby, and someone who works with Shane Jason, and that was probably the most fun trip I've ever taken in my entire life. So market makers first, sports better second, poker players third. And when I was ranking these, I realized like a lot of it, honestly, comes to like how the industry is doing because poker players back when I first started playing poker were awesome, like they're just gambling on everything, like having so much fun. That is now like prediction market makers, and yeah, it's just like a a rising tide lifts all boats. Like, I think right now, if I had to rank them, that's that's how I'd rank them. And poker's going through very poker's kind of in a tough spot, so it's just like the vibes are not as high.
SPEAKER_01Who knew being around people making boatloads of money is more fun than people who are struggling and grinding? I would have never would have never thought.
SPEAKER_02Yeah, well, I'll tell you, like, despite Rufus making so much money, that guy never missed a five-foot putt. And uh he was still gonna take it.
SPEAKER_01It's a clutch scene, I guess. All right, gamberleys. What book are you reading lately? So I I've unfortunately not had a lot of time to read with the the newborn book I was reading prior. I I don't even have really a good good recommendation. I was reading a collection of essays by George Orwell, which is like very dry. I don't I don't necessarily recommend that. Um, but I can give one recommendation recommendation that I read before that. It was a book called Math Without Numbers, and it was uh quite enjoyable. It it sort of explains some uh some concepts in math that like, you know, it's not like algebra or whatever, like X and Y, like if that's what you think, math. It's like cool concepts in math about like, you know, proofs and stuff, but it's it's like very accessible. So I thought it was actually really cool if you like math at all. Um, I enjoyed that book. That was like the last good book I read.
SPEAKER_02That would be pretty funny if that book was like, you know, it it's like next to all the popular books. And it's like math without numbers, but it's just algebra.
SPEAKER_01So like this is not just an algebra. No, it's like, you know, topology and uh like the idea of infinity and um some of those.
SPEAKER_02Yeah, that sounds good. I have uh actually like I've kind of been looking for a book like that. Um, so recently I was reading uh right now I'm reading the book about Jim Simmons, who it's like probably the most successful quant trader ever, or like his fund is the most successful quant fund. I actually don't know now how it stacks up with like things like companies like James Jane, Street and Jump, or whatever, but they're like a family office, and he kind of was at the forefront of the quant trading revolution. And it's a book called The Man Who Solved the Markets or something. You're looking behind you.
SPEAKER_01You have it? Yes.
SPEAKER_02Okay, so I'm like, yeah, it's really good. I'm like a hundred pages in, it's a great book. Uh highly recommend. Uh Thon. Thon misser. Assuming you remain permanently in your current physical state, including your present age and fitness, and can decide how long you live, what age would you choose to die? In this hypothetical, you cannot die from anything other than the timer expiring. If the world ends first, you just float through space until your selected time arrives. I actually watched like this like animated thing, the short, like animated like stick figure short that kind of was this, where like this stick figure like lives forever, and you kind of see like, okay, you know, it's like his family, and then his family dies, and then he has these new friends, and then they die, and then no humans, and then you know, and then it just starts to like push it into infinity. And like I thought, wow, that sounds pretty terrible. So I don't know. I probably wouldn't choose to live uh too much longer than I guess like if I had kids, I would probably want to die like when my kids died. I don't know. That would be like as far as I could extend it.
SPEAKER_01That's what I was thinking, is like you don't want to like I mean, I I wouldn't want to like live like I don't think I'd want to live like two lifetimes, like like have to restart and be like, all right, here's my new like everybody I've known my whole life is dead now, and now I need to like like because ultimately like your third great grandson or whatever, like isn't gonna care about you, you know.
SPEAKER_02Like so you're just gonna think you're like that weird old guy at like a frat party.
SPEAKER_01Yeah, exactly. Right. So like yeah, I honestly I think like the you know, I think it's good all the longevity and stuff, but I think the uh the length of life is is well designed, you know, in general. So I mean it's I think it's pretty good if you can live like a good normal, normal-ish blank life.
SPEAKER_02So yeah. I think knowing you could live like a long, healthy, normal life is a good is a good win from this question. Might want to just take that and run. Um flop, this was I don't know.
SPEAKER_01Is this the worst question of all time?
SPEAKER_02I can see my response on Twitter.
SPEAKER_01Like, yeah, too much gamble, man. I'll I'll read I'll read it. Suppose every hypothetical question ever submitted by Peanut Butter, whether related to betting or something affecting your personal life, were randomized and you had to live in the resulting hypothetical world. Would you agree to do it? I and your response was like, What are you because I mean maybe I have selective memory or I'm not remembering, but like it feels like 95% of peanut butter's questions are like like, do you want to like shrink six inches or like have feet for hands or wear a fedora all the time? Yeah, everybody knows you're the reason, like, but they can't see anything. You have air, like I don't remember one where I'm like, oh, this is a choice between two good options. So I don't know what Club is talking about.
SPEAKER_02Yeah, this is like clearly a case of the most gamble. What was the positive? Well, he did, he responded to my thing. He said there were some good ones, but I actually don't remember any good ones.
SPEAKER_01No, I don't either. I I don't I can't remember a single one, so I don't know.
SPEAKER_02Maybe we just don't remember it, but yeah, yeah, I'm sure Fluff will correct the the record, but yeah, I think the answer to that's pretty obvious.
SPEAKER_01I would never do that. Yeah, no, I I'm I'm good. I'm good. I I don't need feet for hands or offedora or whatever is going on.
SPEAKER_02So um yeah, we'll skip the uh the Bayesian updates and we'll just thank uh thank everybody for the questions and I'm proud of us for for getting through this and hopefully some more Betbash spots opened up by the time this comes out and uh yeah we'll see you know look forward to seeing everybody there. Anything from you?
SPEAKER_01No, if you have something you we're still we're still deliberating on what we're gonna do for betbash. Um we are we are taking suggestions, so so let us know what you want to see.
SPEAKER_02Cool. All right, we'll see everybody on the uh next episode.