Nothing Ever Happens: Polymarket bot that always buys No on non-sports markets
A meme trading bot for Polymarket that automatically buys “No” on non-sports prediction markets — based on the claim that roughly 73% of such markets resolve to “No” — has sparked debate over whether this simple contrarian strategy can actually make money. Commenters point out that payout odds, fees, timing, liquidity, and correlated “black swan” risks largely erase any naive edge, suggesting the platform is reasonably efficient and that blindly betting “nothing ever happens” is akin to picking up pennies in front of a steamroller. The conversation broadens into whether prediction markets function more like casinos or useful information aggregators, touching on gambling addiction, regulatory gaps, insider advantage, and the ethics of monetizing real-world events.
Bot concept and scope
- Bot automatically buys “No” on Polymarket non‑sports markets, based on the observation that ~73% of markets resolve to “No.”
- Described by the author as a meme project with no risk management and no claimed returns; also useful as a template for writing custom bots.
- Excludes sports partly because of platform plumbing (some sports markets are internally Yes/No in non‑obvious ways).
Profitability and math debate
- Many commenters stress that “73% of markets resolve No” does not imply profit; pricing and payouts matter.
- Example: if “No” resolves correctly 83% of the time but pays too little, the strategy still loses.
- Some report backtests and small live trials: modest or no profits in practice, especially once resolution timing and opportunity cost are accounted for.
- Others claim they’ve seen positive edge (e.g., always selling overpriced longshots), but note high variance and limited capacity.
Market efficiency, biases, and crowding
- Discussion of whether prediction markets are reasonably efficient: insiders and sophisticated traders tend to arbitrage away simple edges.
- Known bias: dramatic/long‑shot “Yes” outcomes often overpriced because they’re more fun, suggesting some structural edge on “No.”
- Any systematic edge is expected to shrink once widely publicized; open‑sourcing a working strategy would help price it away.
Risk, variance, and “pennies before steamroller”
- Several compare the approach to selling options or “picking up pennies in front of a steamroller”: many small wins, occasional big losses.
- Counterpoint: downside is capped per bet and can be managed with position sizing (e.g., Kelly‑style), but correlation between events and thin liquidity make real‑world implementation tricky.
Data and backtesting
- Data quality is a challenge; realistic backtests need full order books and accurate resolution times.
- A large Polymarket dataset on Hugging Face is referenced for research and strategy testing.
Prediction markets, ethics, and regulation
- Strong debate over whether these platforms are just unregulated casinos exploiting gamblers or valuable tools revealing insider and expert beliefs.
- Concerns raised about manipulation, house behavior (fees, disputes), and moral issues (e.g., markets on wars, assassinations, leaders losing power).
- US access and KYC rules are murky; some mention official US entry paths, others mention crypto and VPN workarounds.