Market Update for Week 2022-08-28

Published: 2022-09-05

Subscribe to receive an email every time a new post has been published. You can also email me here.

All of the round data referenced below can be downloaded from here. The data is part of a project that downloads round data periodically and uploads the csv.

Weekly Winners and Losers Leaderboard Now Live

I finally got around to adding weekly winners and losers to the Leaderboard. You can see the weekly winners here and the weekly losers here.

They're really just the biggest winners and losers in the last 7 days from the time it was pulled. So for instance, if you check out weekly winners on Wednesday, it'll show the winners from prior Wednesday to today. I have it set to update once an hour.

You can also access it from Leaderboard and changing the Type dropdown to "Weekly Winners" or "Weekly Losers".


This week gave us an incredible meme featuring Vitalik and his... um... long position in Ethereum ahead of the merge:

Anyway, the merge is expected to be complete sometime between Sept 10 through 20th. All that being said, preparations are being made:

Vitalik is interesting to follow on Twitter but he's unfortunately one of those people that bots target. So any discussion to one of his tweets is overrun with bot spam. If only AI was advanced enough to recognize these sophisticated spammers:


Vitalik had an interesting exchange with Peter McCormack about proof of stake compared to proof of work. McCormack argued proof of stake is essentially the wealthiest people setting the rules for everyone (sound familiar), while proof of work anyone with compute can help secure blocks through mining.

Vitalik's argument is silly as it attempts a gotcha by introducing a time component. Yes, the rich set the rules, but the rich in T+1 may not be the rich in T! See? Spiral, not circular!

Vitalik also gave an interview with Noah Smith. Vitalik was asked about PoS security compared to that of PoW and here's how he responded (emphasis mine):

"Efficiency and security are not separate problems. The question is always: how much security can you buy for every dollar per year that you spend on paying for it? If a system has too little security, you can add security at the cost of printing more coins, and at that point you've regained security by sacrificing on efficiency. There are some deep economic reasons that I go to in this post for why proof of stake can buy something like 20 times more security for the same cost. Basically, participating as a proof of work miner has medium ongoing costs and medium entry costs, but being a proof of stake validator has low ongoing costs and high entry costs. It turns out that how secure you are depends on just the entry costs, as that's what an attacker has to pay to attack. And so you want your consensus system to have low ongoing costs and high entry costs, which PoS is great at. Additionally, there are differences in what options the two give you to respond to an attack: in PoW, you can only respond by changing the PoW algorithm, which effectively burns all existing mining hardware, good and bad, but in PoS you can have the protocol burn the assets of only the attacker , so the attacker pays a lot but the ecosystem quickly recovers."

So the rest of the stakers can get together and punish the attacker, which sounds fine. But that's the trade off. As the stakers have more centralized power, they can maybe reverse some transactions or prevent some people from participating in the network. We already saw this with a number of hard-forks meant to undo money lost due to bugs. But how much longer until you have a blacklist of bad people that aren't allowed on the network? Sounds familiar? Because that's the system we already have that crypto is trying to iterate on.

I still have to go through the rest of the interview and I may comment on it next week.


Volumes are still in the shitter. We only had the 24-hour average pool size get above 20 a few times this week

ETH has been doing relatively well while BTC has not. It may be hype because of the upcoming-merge and it might just be worth it to hold some ETH so if a PoW fork proves even a little popular, you get a nice little dividend.

Winners and Losers

Again, you can see weekly winners here and the weekly losers here.

PlaceAccountGames PlayedWonWinnings Even MoneyAverage bet size
1 0x7cb9fdbec630c7ca582937506f228540fe478a82 188 96.8091 30.9261 2.5332
2 0xe8c584efbd75404d2de8e3f167e6cfff0be156c7 1,17340.2728 74.58050.3907
3 0xd145dab6864cf91c50f187568c9459a161f488f3 554 36.8659 21.2052 0.7545
4 0xb1db167e501829024db26e6c87def0cecc41d567 185 35.2144 15.8619 1.4416
5 0x9804786b67e61eb0855dd076ccd119c3c2ecd6ff 27 25.2210 2.6668 4.9060
6 0xae1825c5ff36d23db8bba7d25d752771e9991d8c 166 21.3564 1.7676 2.7048
7 0xd57051fa3cd71d5607a9650dab726f3313477145 281 20.9363 4.7043 2.4782
8 0x3e5126c8dd68db20246e51bc31cb087a28003d2e 159 19.8973 23.6483 0.7462
9 0x021a0940fa2583ca87dc036719a1865b3b4bd00a 247 19.8899 25.5273 0.5751
100x73960ad470d97c63caefa80dbdea2e9d3dbd72da 92 17.8009 35.6017 0.5000

A really strong performance by our top dog. He's got quite a record with a total of 1,440 games. Although during that time he's only up 50, meaning he was down 40 prior to this week. Not super optimistic for his future...

Similar story with #2. He played a total of 7,624 games and he's up only 64 BNB throughout his life.

Let's see how the losers did...

PlaceAccountGames PlayedWonWinnings Even MoneyAverage bet size
10x5616ee15a593dab14dfcac05055c58f23f560e05 360 -216.9295 -50.3399 3.5520
20xd820b68e7c4e822692a805567f4b57e832730533 706 -73.2774 -27.0066 1.4103
30x7f9f833f28ae5f5afa7a9714c9958cde3ec6f7aa 480 -63.4084 -50.3320 1.2898
40x39205a6b63fb0d405b23ec8fbe736d6444e0f4d4 529 -48.1372 -44.5464 0.7682
50x79eb096e2d3958ca41bd78439b2af2f8802e6821 13 -42.9333 -6.1848 4.6570
60xa10a7ba683d8e5b7dfc5fa0744c15288bdabeba6 145 -39.2359 -13.0588 1.8235
70x5248528d370e90ee6f3aec2676c6513128955e0e 2 -38.4890 -2.0000 19.2445
80x3ee033f2f2117e6e6444144561ea21a953f17561 70 -36.5978 -9.0046 4.9561
90x294186c789bc71fe2cbd36e9ae0aacaa29a86ce6 60 -33.1584 -6.4895 3.5894
100xe509034fa973423c86c509a4029dbdf94bd35373 94 -32.9332 -19.3861 1.5871

Hell of a week for our top dog. Losing 216 BNB in a week is a hell of a feat, even with BNB prices sub-300. It looks like he was trying to do some sentiment analysis and was really bearish and he just kept doubling down.

I don't consider sentiment analysis valuable in this timeframe. It might be useful on a tiny time frame (seconds/few minutes) or much longer (days). But if something bad happened it'll be too late unless it corresponds exactly with a round lock. And you don't get any more money for being more right. For instance, if you bet BEAR and the price drops 10%, you win your bet, same as if it dropped 0.01. So stuff like sentiment analysis, even if possible, is much more valuable when buying/shorting directly.

But our losers might love sentiment analysis, and of course we love our losers, so naturally we should love sentiment analysis as well.

As always, feel free to reach out with questions or comments or want my to highlight anything different on my weekly market recaps. If you like what you read and want to subscribe to receive an email when a new post is published, click here.

Good luck and bet responsibly!