# LEDGER RECAP — Friday, April 24, 2026 ### "Grading the Portfolio" --- **HOST (Alex Mercer):** Welcome to the Ledger Recap. I'm Alex Mercer, and across from me is Marcus Webb. Marcus, we've got a full slate to get through today—hockey, baseball, basketball, player props. We're grading the portfolio, refining the algorithm. Let's look at the tape. **ANALYST (Marcus Webb):** Let's do it. Lot of moving pieces this week. Some clean wins, some frustrating near-misses, and at least one position where we need to have a real conversation about conviction. Alex Mercer: Before we dive in—quick reminder for the desk on how we track. We operate in prediction market units. If we buy a contract at 60 cents, we're risking 0.60 units to win 0.40. Pure risk-based accounting. The price *is* the implied probability. Keep that in mind as we walk through the numbers. --- ## 📊 THE SCORECARD Alex Mercer: Alright. The scorecard. This session: 17 wins, 11 losses, 1 push. Twenty-nine positions. Net result— Marcus Webb: Plus 5.8 units. Alex Mercer: Plus 5.8. And on the year, we're sitting at 382 and 315, plus 25.4 units overall. Marcus, first reaction? Marcus Webb: Honestly? The win rate is solid. 17-for-29 is nearly 59%. But 5.8 units on 29 positions... we need to talk about our sizing relative to our conviction. Because some of these wins were at 19, 30, 31 cents. We were buying real edge at low prices and not pressing it hard enough. Alex Mercer: We'll get into that. Let's go to the film room. --- ## 🎬 THE FILM ROOM ### POSITION 1: PHILADELPHIA FLYERS — THE PENNSYLVANIA SWEEP Alex Mercer: Let's start with the Battle of Pennsylvania. We had two positions in this series—and they tell completely different stories. Game 2, we took Pittsburgh to win outright at 57 cents. That's a 57% implied probability on the Penguins. Result? Marcus Webb: Flyers win 3-nothing. Shutout. We lost 0.29 units. And look—that one stings, but it's not a bad thesis loss. The Penguins are an aging core. Their power play has been broken for two weeks. The Flyers' defensive structure has been suffocating, and without a functional man-advantage, Pittsburgh has no secondary scoring to lean on. The chain here is simple: aging roster plus broken power play equals no margin for error, and the Flyers took full advantage. Alex Mercer: Bad beat or bad thesis? Marcus Webb: Borderline. I'd call it a thesis that aged poorly *within the series*. After that Game 2 shutout, the signal was clear. And then— Alex Mercer: Game 3. We pivoted. Marcus Webb: We pivoted *hard*. Philadelphia wins by over 1.5 goals at 31 cents. That's a 31% implied probability. Flyers win 5-2. We cleared plus 1.03 units on that contract. Alex Mercer: Best single-position return of the session. Marcus Webb: And that's the market advantage on full display. After Game 2, the Flyers' dominance was obvious. The market still had that line at 31 cents—meaning the crowd was only 31% confident they'd win by two-plus. We saw the defensive resurgence, we saw Pittsburgh's power play was still broken, and we bought that contract at a discount. That's what repricing looks like in real time. Alex Mercer: Now—aggressive alpha review. We won plus 1.03. Should we have gone bigger? Marcus Webb: Yes. If our conviction was high enough to take the position, our sizing should have reflected that. At 31 cents, we're risking 0.31 to win 0.69. A two-unit position there is plus 1.38 on the win. We left roughly 0.35 units on the table by not pressing. That's the calibration lesson. --- ### POSITION 2: SAL STEWART HOME RUN — THE ROOKIE EDGE Alex Mercer: Alright, let's talk about the Reds-Rays game, because we had two positions in the same game going in opposite directions. Walk me through it. Marcus Webb: So we had Tampa Bay to win outright at 48 cents—that's a near coin-flip implied probability. And on the same game, we had Sal Stewart to hit one or more home runs at 19 cents. The Rays win the game, we lose 0.48 units. Stewart goes deep, we win 0.41 units. Alex Mercer: The rookie bailed us out. Marcus Webb: He did more than that. Stewart hits a two-run shot off Jesse Scholtens in the first inning, finishes 2-for-4 with a double. That's his eighth homer of the season. And here's the thing—the market had that contract at 19 cents. 19% implied probability on a guy who's averaging nearly a home run every four games this month. Alex Mercer: So the market was mispriced. Marcus Webb: Significantly. And here's *why* it was mispriced—Stewart's breakout is recent. His chase rate improvement only became statistically significant in the last few weeks. The market was still pricing him like the 2025 version, the guy with the question marks. We were pricing the 2026 version. That information gap is where the edge lives. Alex Mercer: Aggressive alpha review—19 cents, we win. Were we too conservative? Marcus Webb: At 19 cents, you're risking 0.19 to win 0.81. If our read on Stewart was genuinely high conviction—and it should have been given the trajectory data—we could have doubled the position. Missed alpha: roughly 0.41 units. We bought the right contract. We just didn't buy enough of it. --- ### POSITION 3: JAMES HARDEN — THE BAD BEAT THAT WASN'T A BEAT Alex Mercer: Okay. The single biggest loss of the session. James Harden, 20-plus points in Game 3 against Toronto. We bought at 56 cents. He finishes with 18. We lose 1.14 units. Marcus. Marcus Webb: This one's on us. And I want to be precise about *why*. Harden shot 5-of-13 from the field, 3-of-10 from three. The Raptors had Barrett and Barnes combining for 66 points, and their defensive scheme was designed to funnel everything through Harden's weaknesses—force him into mid-range pull-ups, deny him the three-point line, make him work in the paint where he's least comfortable. The Raptors turned this into a physical grind, and Harden's usage dropped as the game got away from Cleveland in the third quarter. Alex Mercer: So the thesis was—Harden scores 20-plus in a playoff game. That's a reasonable assumption at 56 cents. Marcus Webb: It is. But here's the systemic failure in our analysis: we didn't account for the Raptors' specific defensive adjustments after Game 2. They had a week of film on Harden. They knew exactly how to limit his shot creation. We priced the contract based on Harden's baseline scoring average and didn't weight the opponent's defensive scheme heavily enough. That's a process error. Alex Mercer: And the cash-out lesson here? Marcus Webb: This is important. At some point in that game—let's say end of the third quarter, Cleveland is down 20, Harden has 14 points—that contract is trading somewhere around 15 cents. We could have sold. Recovered maybe 0.15 units instead of losing the full 0.56. In a traditional format, you're locked in. In a prediction market, you can trade out. We didn't. That's a discipline failure as much as a thesis failure. --- ### POSITION 4: THE DALLAS-MINNESOTA SPLIT Alex Mercer: Hold on—before we leave the film room, we have to talk about the Dallas-Minnesota split. Because this one is genuinely instructive. Marcus Webb: Right. So in Game 3, we had two positions in the same game. Minnesota to win outright at 54 cents, *and* Minnesota to win by over 1.5 goals at 33 cents. Dallas wins 4-3. The outright win position loses 0.27 units. The margin position— Alex Mercer: Wins plus 1.00 units. Because Dallas won by two. Marcus Webb: Which is— look, the math worked out, but the logic is worth examining. We were essentially hedging ourselves within the same game. The outright position and the margin position can't both be fully correct at the same time. If we believed in a multi-goal margin, the margin contract at 33 cents was the cleaner, higher-value position. The outright at 54 cents was redundant and actually diluted our net return. Alex Mercer: Net on the game was plus 0.73 units. If we'd only taken the margin position— Marcus Webb: Plus 1.00 flat. We lost 0.27 units of alpha by doubling up inefficiently. Lesson: when you have conviction on a margin, *take the margin*. Don't layer a redundant outright position on top of it. --- ## 📚 STRATEGIC EVOLUTION Alex Mercer: Alright. What did we learn for the playbook this week? Marcus Webb: Three things. First—rookie and emerging player props are systematically underpriced when the breakout is recent. The market updates slowly. Stewart at 19 cents is the proof of concept. We need to be buying those contracts earlier and in larger size. Alex Mercer: Second? Marcus Webb: Conviction-to-aggression calibration. We went 17-for-29. We made 5.8 units. That's a positive session, but if you look at the contracts we won at 19, 30, 31, 33, 34 cents—those are high-value contracts where we had real edge. Our sizing didn't reflect our conviction. When the implied probability is low and our research says it should be higher, we need to be more aggressive. Not reckless—*aggressive*. There's a difference. Alex Mercer: And third? Marcus Webb: Defensive scheme context for player props. The Harden loss is the lesson. Before buying a scoring prop in a playoff series, we need to ask: what are the opponent's specific defensive adjustments? What does their film say about this player? Playoff basketball is a chess match. Regular season scoring averages don't travel cleanly into the postseason without that context layer. Alex Mercer: So the new rule is: playoff props require scheme analysis, not just volume analysis. Marcus Webb: Exactly. Baseline numbers are the floor. Defensive scheme is the ceiling. We need both. --- ## 🎯 QUICK HITS Alex Mercer: Before we close out—a few positions worth flagging. Aaron Judge, home run at 24 cents. Loss, minus 0.12 units. The narrative hook here matters: Judge is reportedly playing through a minor flexor strain. That's a power-limiting injury. We knew this going in, or we should have. A 24-cent implied probability on a compromised power hitter is not the edge it looks like on paper. Marcus Webb: Agreed. That one's on the injury intelligence. If the information is public, we need to be pricing it in. Same category as the Harden scheme issue—contextual factors that should have adjusted our entry price or kept us out entirely. Alex Mercer: On the positive side—SGA, 30-plus points at 51 cents. He drops 37. Clean win, plus 0.49 units. Maxey, 25-plus points at 59 cents with Embiid out. He scores 29. Plus 0.41 units. Both of those are cases where the market underestimated the primary scoring option when the supporting cast was diminished or absent. Marcus Webb: That's a pattern worth codifying. When a team's secondary scorer is elevated to primary option due to injury, the market is slow to reprice their scoring ceiling upward. We've now seen it with Maxey twice this postseason. That's a repeatable edge. Alex Mercer: Add it to the playbook. Alright—overall session grade? Marcus Webb: B-plus on results, B-minus on process. We identified real edge. We just didn't press it hard enough when we had it. Alex Mercer: That's the standard we hold ourselves to. Before we go, remember—everything we discuss here is a retrospective analysis of our own positions in prediction markets. We're grading our process, not giving you a roadmap. Marcus Webb: Do your own research. Understand the contracts you're entering. Know your exit points before you buy. Alex Mercer: Opinions expressed are for informational purposes only. Bet responsibly. --- **