A 100% win rate is nearly a reality in prediction markets

[viljy]

I believe we’re seeing an example of a lucky person here. However, this doesn’t rule out the possibility that one day he’ll be unlucky and will have to make up for losses over the next 100 bets. Yes, this "small‑scale" strategy works. But it’s not a gambler’s strategy - it’s a strategy for making money. In other words, this person isn’t a gambler.

Personally, I just don’t find it interesting to collect things grain by grain (especially with the risk of losing the result of long‑term work one day, which is much more disappointing than losing an amount of money that you previously won without any effort). But as they say, to each their own.

[KTChampions]

I don’t see anything interesting here, for starters, he isn’t gambling - he’s essentially providing liquidity by "paying out" rewards for outcomes that have already been decided to those who don’t want to wait for the official resolution. This is definitely not the kind of strategy that would interest someone with a small account balance - after all, even a 0.1% daily return on the entire deposit would amount to a negligible, tiny sum when the account balance is small.
Secondly, I’d like to point out that this is what’s known as picking up pennies in front of a steamroller - there’s a risk involved here, too. I’ve seen accounts that performed excellently while going all-in using this strategy, only to be completely wiped out by a single bet.

[danherbias07]

Low profits, and it could take a long period of time before they can be felt. But do consider just one or two mistakes happening. It would mean messing with the goal, and that is why there's no room for mistakes in those kinds of strategies.

It is possible, but it requires patience too. For me, that's not actually a good plan because I am not that patient to take low profit. I bet there are a lot more people who think the same because many would have been rich if they perfected this kind of strategy.

[swogerino]

This is a valid strategy but do not think it is 100% guarantee and fail proof for everyone

Many times a $0,95 outcome will fail and he will lose everything on that bet. If he wins 5% at every bet, he needs to win 20 bets just to make profit after one loss. In his case it is working because he loses 1 in 100, but what if this changes?

This is like thinking you can bet on 1.05x odds all the time and you will always bank. One day the outcome will be different and you will lose enough to put you many bets behind

Let me re-enforce this with just the game of Rosenborg vs Ham Kam where Rosenborg clear favorite with an odd 1.11 lost at home in Norwegian cup. The same thing can happen to this guy one day and of course we need to see his trading history for a long period of time as greed sooner or later hit all of us. If he has kept this going for more than 2 years then maybe we should sit and think that maybe this is possible after all but if he has no such long term history then this means that probably winning near 100% is impossible, be it in trading or gambling.

[Floxynice]

I am not impressed by his performance, my question is, can he maintain this performance over a long period of time? I guess that when he meets an unfortunate event where one loss wipes out his entire bankroll, he will no longer be this excited. Or, maybe he is actually making his profits off insider trading where he trades on only verified information. What ever his strategies are, it does not change gambling or trading from being luck based. Just like many of us here, I will also like to see his performance over a long period of time before I agree with him.

[Ashawowo(OS)]

The guy’s 99% streak is indeed impressive but that shouldn’t be mistaken for a perfect approach because it still doesn’t change the low edge rule you know because the moment the edge shrinks, everything might basically fall apart.

Bro that guy is incredible is all I can say. I just confirmed it myself and the profits are real. When I see such dudes, I only wish there is a way to reach them and attempt to get their predictions. Sometimes we just have to admit people are good at what they're doing and not think the opposite. 2 years is long-term enough to prove that his strategy is very effective. I only have a feeling he has some insider information that allows him spot those markets and take advantage of them on time.

[Somegory]

I believe this story even if it's not real because the possibility of not losing at all in prediction markets is very real, there are people doing this and they are making a killing, they know themselves and you can't even think they are among.

There are some people who are surrounded by information, they are close to politicians and other powerful people, and that's why I believe that powerful people getting more rich is why prediction market exists.

If you are in power you can tell a cousin of yours, don't worry I will help you, just open an account on prediction market and keep in touch with me, the possibility is endless.

[Africolo]

This should serve as a real-world example to shift how many people perceive luck, or perhaps it suggests that prediction markets are no longer a matter of luck, as gambling is. Even insider trading is limited to specific types of predictions; for instance, someone might consistently win only when it comes to political topics. So, here is the strategy (would you believe it?):

After 2 years of trading on Polymarket, this guy still doesn't know what a loss feels like
His win rate is 99%
That means he loses just 1 out of every 100 trades

--snip--

His strategy is ridiculously simple
He buys almost certain outcomes at $0.95-0.99 and waits for them to settle at $1
While everyone else is chasing 100x, he's quietly printing money on the most obvious outcomes

Source

This might be a good strategy but not a 100% guarantee rate for winnings and I will still tell you that winnings still comes from some elements of lucks in gambling, because if it weren't so every gambler would have been a millionaire from their winning rates so I will still attributes some of our winnings to having lucks, we all know that no amount of predictions can give us a 100% good winning ability but the assurances is not there as it varies.

I might believe in the area of you saying that someone might only be winning when it comes to political topics, because that might be where his luck lies or he is very good at strategying that very topics, we all know our limits and weaknesses and that's how winnings comes too. Though no doubt people are good in predictions but winning is not always a 100%, that's just my point.

[Alex077]

This should serve as a real-world example to shift how many people perceive luck, or perhaps it suggests that prediction markets are no longer a matter of luck, as gambling is.
....
After 2 years of trading on Polymarket, this guy still doesn't know what a loss feels like
His win rate is 99%
That means he loses just 1 out of every 100 trades
...

Yeah, maybe I wouldn't say that prediction markets are no longer gambling just because someone managed to achieve a 99% win rate. At the same time, I agree that prediction markets are different from regular casinos.
So personally, I'd be much more impressed by verified profits over those two years, including all losses and fees, than by a 99% win rate. Because on Polymarket, just like in regular gambling, what matters isn't only how often you win, but also how much you make when you're right and how much you lose when your predictions are wrong.

[Donk1]

Well perhaps this might look like a good strategy, but still in most cases not many folks would willingly take such risk. Because if you think about it, it's more like you betting $100 just to make $1.​Though the idea is that the win rate increases, the disadvantage is that a single loss would just end up wiping out your entire capital.but since the strategy gives him the edge, even if theoretically he is risking a big amount for little rewards the point here is that it works for him.still that doesn't mean it would work for everyone and the fact that when the outcome fails to go as planned you might lose everything entirely is still something many have to consider before trying to implement such strategies. That's all.....

[BigTarget]

This should serve as a real-world example to shift how many people perceive luck, or perhaps it suggests that prediction markets are no longer a matter of luck, as gambling is. Even insider trading is limited to specific types of predictions; for instance, someone might consistently win only when it comes to political topics. So, here is the strategy (would you believe it?):

You are forgetting something: there are no obvious outcomes in gambling, and prediction markets are also a sort of gambling.

Such betting patterns can only work if the bettor keeps getting lucky constantly, because this is not a strategy but it is luck that is favouring him, and as soon as he starts getting unlucky, his strategy won't be able to save his profits turning into losses and that will happen very quickly. When gamblers start to think that they have found a way to make money from gambling by using large amounts to target low odds, or using low amounts and accept the little profits they are going to get, they forget that if they lose a few consecutive bets, they won't be able to recover from that even if they keep winning after that.

What mostly happens when gamblers with such strategies start losing, they lose a few bets, then they realize that now if they keep making the same bets with the same low odds, it will take too many bets to just recover what they lost, and if they lose more bets in between, it will get out of their hands, so they decide to make a few bets with higher odds to cover up, and guess what? That's where the disaster begins.

[KiaKia]

If you know the right people and connections you will make a lot of money from prediction market, it's something that's not supposed to exists but it's the world that we are in now, we have big scammers and small scammers.

Who dares call out any Trump family for making millions on a prediction market? And yet it's happening within the family and family friends, prediction market isn't for the public

It's for the power houses and institutions+insiders, they made it for themselves to make money for themselves and wreck the public, I know that as time goes on many exposure will come to light.

[TheUltraElite]

This is similar to the 1.10x betting on a dice game. This is not fullproof at all, dont be deceived.

Try putting a 1.10x or even lower on the dice game and run it on autobet, you will surely get a large number of greens but one red and immediately your entire balance will go down because you will lose the wager amount which is nowhere close to the profited amount.

It is not a strategy but a foolish attempt to play with the numbers, one that has been tried by faucet farmers on primedice for years.

[Finebone]

I am not impressed by his performance, my question is, can he maintain this performance over a long period of time? I guess that when he meets an unfortunate event where one loss wipes out his entire bankroll, he will no longer be this excited. Or, maybe he is actually making his profits off insider trading where he trades on only verified information. What ever his strategies are, it does not change gambling or trading from being luck based. Just like many of us here, I will also like to see his performance over a long period of time before I agree with him.

I can't verify how true it is, that someone can win up to 99% of his trade, because if that is possible then he is simply a genius. The op said that he has been doing that successfully for the past two years now, so that is a very long time to prove that he is actually good, and as a matter of fact, as long as you are profitable in trading, like your winning is higher than your losing then you are doing the right thing.

I may agree with you that in trading you can use one bad trade to lose all the money that you made in a week or month, but a good trader will make use of a proper risk management strategy, which will save him from such thing,  because knowing how to manage your risk is what keeps a trader long in the market without blowing up his account.

Gambling and trading are not the same, even though many people will disagree with me, because in gambling, especially in casino games, it's all about luck, but in trading you need skills to survive, because even though you are lucky on a few trade, ignorance will later make you lose everything later on, so they are not the same.

[Lannakosa]

I think the risk of losing a large amount of money is still very high here. You can have an excellent track record betting on outcomes with a very high probability of winning, but it only takes a single losing bet to suffer a massive loss. And there's no telling how long it might take to recover what you've lost, assuming it's even possible to do so.

[Free Market Capitalist]

This is similar to the 1.10x betting on a dice game. This is not fullproof at all, dont be deceived.

Try putting a 1.10x or even lower on the dice game and run it on autobet, you will surely get a large number of greens but one red and immediately your entire balance will go down because you will lose the wager amount which is nowhere close to the profited amount.

It is not a strategy but a foolish attempt to play with the numbers, one that has been tried by faucet farmers on primedice for years.

The difference is that with dice, the outcomes are deterministic, whereas in prediction markets they are probabilistic. Ultimately, in a deterministic game, you won’t be able to beat the House Edge, whereas in prediction markets there’s no mathematical certainty working against you in the long run. So, hypothetically, someone in prediction markets can make a profit over the long term, and the OP's example is one such case—it's two years of trading. There's no way someone rolling dice with those odds during two years (and the same number of rolls per trade) is going to stay in the black.

But, setting that aside, there is some similarity.

[mak013]

This should serve as a real-world example to shift how many people perceive luck, or perhaps it suggests that prediction markets are no longer a matter of luck, as gambling is. Even insider trading is limited to specific types of predictions; for instance, someone might consistently win only when it comes to political topics. So, here is the strategy (would you believe it?):

~

Source

Go ahead, try it yourself - I'll have a laugh at the results.
Sure, someone can win 100% of their bets at low odds. The catch is that sooner or later they'll lose - and then again, and again.

It is not 100% anymore if they lose, so even with low odds a 100% win rate is impossible.  It is indeed nearly a reality, but it is not actually the reality.

And here's the real problem: it might work for one in a million. You sure you'll be that one?

The strategy of the account shown by @OP can be done by multiple people by sharing the strategy or giving forecast of his bet.  This way if the account win, those who follows win

Sounds like a cheap marketing trick to me. I'd rather use my head.

It does sound like a marketing ploy but it was backed by the account statistics.  The question would be how authentic the account is and is not manipulated by the platform itself to be used for this kind of marketing ploy.

I think some of us remember a thread here where someone lost more than a million bucks at odds of 1.07 (if I remember right).
I tried low-odds betting myself. Put in $100 and made $1 bets on every event with odds under 1.05. Lost the whole deposit in two weeks.
As far as I know, someone else here tried something like my experiment with the same results, but I forget who.
I remember a trick traders used to make their trading stats look good - they'd create a bunch of accounts with different trades and show off the best one with a great trading history. Maybe there's something like that here, I don't know. But I don't buy a 99% win rate.

[Floxynice]

I am not impressed by his performance, my question is, can he maintain this performance over a long period of time? I guess that when he meets an unfortunate event where one loss wipes out his entire bankroll, he will no longer be this excited. Or, maybe he is actually making his profits off insider trading where he trades on only verified information. What ever his strategies are, it does not change gambling or trading from being luck based. Just like many of us here, I will also like to see his performance over a long period of time before I agree with him.

I can't verify how true it is, that someone can win up to 99% of his trade, because if that is possible then he is simply a genius. The op said that he has been doing that successfully for the past two years now, so that is a very long time to prove that he is actually good, and as a matter of fact, as long as you are profitable in trading, like your winning is higher than your losing then you are doing the right thing.

He only stated that he has been doing that for the past two years, but such claims have not been verified by anyone else yet. How do we believe such claims when there is no proof? If he is actually telling the truth, then that's his luck. It should not be a basis for another gambler to believe that gambling or prediction markets are no longer about luck. Losses from this can hurt so badly because of the years of overconfidence that have been built. It looks interesting now, but the losses aren't.

[WhoYouCantKill]

I think the risk of losing a large amount of money is still very high here. You can have an excellent track record betting on outcomes with a very high probability of winning, but it only takes a single losing bet to suffer a massive loss. And there's no telling how long it might take to recover what you've lost, assuming it's even possible to do so.

Exactly the reason I’m also of the opinion that merely having a long winning streak shouldn’t make anyone already feel comfortable with betting. Some gamblers have already made the mistake of increasing their stakes simply because they’ve figured out a strategy that works all the time, and this made them let their guard down, and believing they edge has actually changed, and that’s often where things eventually gets worse. With this strategy, one loss can either wipe out several victories or push them into taking risks as a result of their emotions. So if you ask me, I’ll say it’s a lot more profitable to protect one’s money than attempt to maintain some winning records.

[Pandu Geddon]

Well perhaps this might look like a good strategy, but still in most cases not many folks would willingly take such risk. Because if you think about it, it's more like you betting $100 just to make $1.​Though the idea is that the win rate increases, the disadvantage is that a single loss would just end up wiping out your entire capital.but since the strategy gives him the edge, even if theoretically he is risking a big amount for little rewards the point here is that it works for him.still that doesn't mean it would work for everyone and the fact that when the outcome fails to go as planned you might lose everything entirely is still something many have to consider before trying to implement such strategies. That's all.....

That is indeed true, one loss will require many other bets to cover the previous losses. This can also be applied to sports betting, but the risk remains the same. Especially since we know that in sports, even odds that seem very convincing to win can turn out not as predicted. 
This method still carries risks and requires consistency and accuracy in choosing bets in large amounts.