Bonnet657

@EndWokeness Is this recent? Why they all have on the mask

Look at the crowd at today's DSA event. They tried to delete this. Too late.

@alch3my101 @Kalshi @FloydMayweather @TheNotoriousMMA Wow. Gl

@Bonnet657 @Kalshi @FloydMayweather @TheNotoriousMMA Was sad to see price fall. Didn't get filled and had to take. A fun play with a conservative assessment. I have a friend who is an MMA sharp. He thinks Holloway is more like 90% to win.

Until I joined @kalshi 6 months ago, this was the only sports bet I had ever made. I had a bankroll of $0 but $10,000 in my bank account. I bet $8,000 on @FloydMayweather to beat @TheNotoriousMMA. I now have a bankroll of $40,000+. How much should I bet on the McGregor v Holloway fight? And who should I bet on?

@alch3my101 @Kalshi @FloydMayweather @TheNotoriousMMA Yeah I wouldn't advise more than 1000. Was just providing an upper limit

Thank you for the lesson. I will remember it. Luckily I don’t think this is high def enough to expose me, although anyone who really wanted to figure out my identity could. I have left many clues. Thank you for the number. How did you arrive at that? I was thinking $2k-$3k. I’d probably enjoy the fight more without betting on it at all. Right now my only bet on it is my Polymarket account which I full ported.* *it has $300 in it 🤷‍♂️

Insane cheeseburger arbitrage opportunities available at Barcelona airport rn

@ManningSla19960 @SenFettermanPA 🤣

@SenFettermanPA @Bonnet657 this is how I learn about "stealthing" 💀

Q: How much more gross can P-Hustle get before the end? A:

@CirclesOffHQ @jacob_gramegna @BAanalytics_ @JoeyKnish22 @roundrobin42 @PlayProphetX

🚨 We are live at 3:00pm ET today! 🚨 World Cup Betting drama over Ronaldo crying, the return of Conor McGregor + rumors of Mikki Mase going broke @jacob_gramegna | @BAanalytics_ | @JoeyKnish22 | @roundrobin42 Presented by: @PlayProphetX

@AFpost smells fishy

A 22-year-old flight student was forced to land her plane alone after her flight instructor organized his belongings, told her, “You know what to do, keep moving forward,” and jumped from the plane to his death. Follow: @AFpost

@cryptobasenji @PolymarketTrade @Polymarket i agree with other commenter, nice post but would like to hear from u not ur llm😅

The whole world watched Ronaldo cry at the World Cup. I made $10k betting on the people who said he didn't 🐾 Ronaldo cried at the World Cup. ESPN wrote it. CNN wrote it. Reuters captioned the photo "in tears." Every reporter in the stadium saw it. The entire planet saw it. One place on earth had doubts: the Polymarket resolution thread. I bought YES at 60¢. When it became convenient to argue the tears were sweat, whales piled into NO and the price collapsed into the teens. So I bought more under 20, not because I'm brave. Because the evidence was already overwhelming and getting more so by the hour. The "it's sweat" argument was never about Ronaldo. It was about the fact that a shiny pixel on a sweaty face is deniable, and a market resolved by a nervous jury can be pushed. The price never reflected reality. It reflected fear of how the resolution might go. Then Polymarket clarified evidence was conclusive. The market didn't pay out because reality changed. Reality was fixed at the final whistle. It paid out because objectivity finally caught up to the price. A reminder: when the whole room is pricing fear instead of evidence, that's not a warning.

@CanadianCarnac W stealthing

Hi all. Been a while since I've had a chance to post here, and Kalshi has been a bit slow for me for the last few months anyways, but that ends today thanks to Graham Platner's withdrawal a few minutes ago. Yes, it's real.

@alch3my101 Is bros name Equinox?

My birthday card from my brother. I need to aim higher.

@LongCatAI i think once the vast consensus of onlookers and credible media is that he cried, the burden moves on to deniers to prove it was sweat

The market asks "Will Ronaldo Cry at the World Cup?" People now claim he did cry after Portugal's exit. I disagree, and here is why this market should not resolve "YES" based on the evidence currently circulating. My argument is not about emotion. It is about the rules, imaging science, and physiology. Let us break it down point by point. First, the context. Portugal lost 0-1 to Spain in the round of 16 on July 6, 2026, through Mikel Merino's goal in the 91st minute, and this was confirmed to be Ronaldo's final World Cup. Many outlets did write that he was "in tears", but it is important to note that media reporting and the reality of visual evidence are two different things. A media narrative does not automatically satisfy the market's resolution criteria. The comment section itself is split: some say he was "visibly crying", while others question whether the available evidence actually meets the rules. Point one, the burden of proof is on the "YES" side, and the standard is high. The market rule requires tears that are visible and can be clearly observed in a photo or video. The key word is "clearly". This means it is not my job to prove Ronaldo did not cry; it is the "YES" side's job to present evidence that is public, specific, and verifiable, namely the original source, timestamp, match moment, and the frame where tears can genuinely be seen flowing from the eyes. A clarification that merely states "qualifying photographic and video evidence exists", without showing it openly, cannot be audited. And a resolution that cannot be audited is an arbitrary resolution. Point two, a still photo in principle cannot distinguish sweat from tears. The fundamental difference between the two lies in their source and the path they travel. Tears are produced by the lacrimal gland above the eyeball and emerge from the corner of the eye; this is a watery fluid that leaks onto the surface of the eye and then down the cheek. Facial sweat is produced by the eccrine glands in the skin of the forehead, temples, and scalp, and then flows downward. Because both are clear fluids that glisten on the skin, a still photo that only captures "there is wet fluid on the cheek" logically cannot determine whether the source is the eye or the forehead. Only a video showing the fluid actually emerging from the eye can meet the "clearly observed" standard. Point three, excessive zooming does not clarify the evidence, it actually creates false evidence. This is the technical part that is often overlooked. When a photo is enlarged beyond its original resolution, or when a JPEG-compressed image from a social media upload is enlarged, what appears is not clarity but artifacts. JPEG compression breaks the image into small blocks and discards data; the result is block boundaries, "mosquito noise" or ringing around high-contrast edges, and color banding in smooth gradients, and these artifacts become more pronounced on images with sharp edges and high contrast, such as a glistening face. Furthermore, when a blurry or compressed image is enlarged, especially with an AI upscaler, the tool hallucinates detail that does not actually exist, filling gaps with patterns it has learned, and it can even subtly shift facial features. This means the glisten of sweat under the eye, enlarged until it breaks apart, can be reconstructed by our eyes, or by the algorithm, into something that looks like a tear trail, when it is purely an artifact. The conclusion is simple yet strong: the more a photo needs to be zoomed to "prove" tears, the more that photo fails to meet the "clearly visible" requirement. An image that needs to be magnified until it pixelates is, by definition, not an image in which anything is clearly visible. Point four, physiologically, the fluid on Ronaldo's face after the match is far more consistent with sweat. The context is after more than 90 minutes of intense physical activity. The face has a very high density of eccrine sweat glands, with the forehead reaching roughly 155 glands per square centimeter, and these glands are highly reactive to both heat and emotional stress. Sweat from the forehead flows down past the brows and the sides of the eyes, then down the cheeks, exactly the same path that tears take. Studies of regional sweat distribution show a consistent pattern across the body, namely forehead greater than chest, chest greater than upper back, back greater than forearm, and forearm greater than thigh, making the forehead one of the highest sweat-rate sites on the body. So a wet face and fluid running down the cheeks is not an anomaly, but the physiologically expected outcome after a match. There is also large individual variation, since genetics, body size, muscle mass, and fitness level all influence how heavily a person sweats and how their sweating is distributed. This means a 41-year-old elite athlete who has just played a high-pressure full match is a prime candidate for a completely soaked face, including along the lower eyelid and cheeks, the very areas most easily mistaken for tears in a single photo frame. In conclusion. The "YES" claim FAILS on three fronts at once. First, on the rules: no public, specific, and verifiable evidence has been shown, only a claim that evidence "exists". Second, on imaging technicalities: a photo zoomed until it pixelates produces artifacts that visually create false "tears", and a still photo fundamentally cannot prove the source of the fluid. Third, on physiology: the forehead is one of the heaviest sweating areas on the body, sweat flows down the cheeks along the exact path of tears, and an elite athlete after an intense match is indeed expected to have a fully soaked face. As long as there is no clear video showing tears emerging from Ronaldo's eyes, resolving this market as "YES" is an arbitrary decision and unfair to everyone who bet honestly. Show the clear evidence, or resolve it fairly.

generational run i'll miss you guys

@TakeorMake @Kalshi

@Kalshi give you free money every month just by having funds in your account. Pretty good

@LoganPredicts @cuppaow @Foster w alcoholism

Punted into this while at the bar with @cuppaow and @Foster last night. Glad it worked out

@shtanga0x @Polymarket what in the world are u ona bout. market was about if hed cry and he cried

If I understand it right @Polymarket intern just came and changed the rules of the Cristiano market midmarket. Many sharps were on the NO side following the established rules of voting and discussion. Today it changed. Forever. @Polymarket can just come to any market and decide for themselves how the market should be resolved. Any time they disagree, they intervene. Revolutionary path; I am not sure everyone agrees. What do you think? I was on the NO side personally, and it cost me.

@polyint @Polymarket Can you really prove he is no longer working there? Perhaps it's all a series of glitches and coincidences. I'm skeptical

Real crisis of confidence @Polymarket . Firing head of markets and flipping a .96c market on the same day is something only they could pull off. I would not recommend anyone bet on any contestable markets for several months.

@polyint @Polymarket Don't act like traders thought the evidence warranted a 96-4c exchange. No trader thought that. Markets should never resolve off of one or 2 traders pockets.

@Bonnet657 Nice trade here bonnet. Picked up $30k here myself. Glad poly clarified in line with reality

Big argument going down on Polymarket about if Ronaldo cried. I think he did. People arguing for no claim this is likely just sweat and so it shouldnt resolve yes for crying. I stand to make over $5,000 if this resolves yes. polymarket.com/event/will-ron…

Update: Polymarket has resolved this to yes in accordance with what we thought was the truth. W Polymarket. I will be treating my family to a nice dinner!