robinhoodMarch 31, 20261d agoTennessee at Iowa St.
Will Tennessee beat Iowa State in their college basketball game on March 26, 2027?
Signal
NO TRADE
Probability
100%
Confidence
HIGH
100%
Summary.
This market contains a critical temporal error: the game has already occurred. Today is March 31, 2026, and Tennessee defeated Iowa State 76-62 on March 27, 2026—four days ago—in the NCAA Tournament Sweet 16. While the bet question states "March 26, 2027" (a future date), all market context (ticker, volume, event ID) and research confirms this refers to the completed March 27, 2026 game. Tennessee's victory is verified through official box scores showing they dominated rebounding 43-22 and scored 42 points in the paint against an Iowa State team missing star forward Joshua Jefferson (ankle injury). The current market price of 0.01 reflects the Iowa State side of the contract (the '-ISU' ticker suffix indicates this tracks Iowa State winning), which correctly values Iowa State's confirmed loss. Our estimated probability is 1.0 (100%) that Tennessee won this completed game, versus the market's 0.99 implied probability for Tennessee (inverse of 0.01 for Iowa State). This bet should have already resolved YES per the stated criteria "Resolves YES if Tennessee wins the game."
Reasoning.
CRITICAL TEMPORAL FINDING: This game has already occurred and the outcome is known.
Today's date is March 31, 2026. The game in question took place on March 27, 2026 - four days ago. Tennessee defeated Iowa State 76-62 in the NCAA Tournament Sweet 16.
Date Discrepancy Analysis: The bet question states "March 26, 2027" (a future date 360+ days from now), but all available evidence confirms this refers to the March 27, 2026 game that has already been played. This appears to be a clerical error in the bet question date.
Confirmed Outcome:
- Final Score: Tennessee 76, Iowa State 62
- Margin: 14 points (Tennessee victory)
- Date: March 27, 2026 (already occurred)
- Tournament: NCAA Sweet 16
- Tennessee was #6 seed, Iowa State was #2 seed (upset win for Tennessee)
Game Summary: Tennessee dominated the boards 43-22 (21-rebound margin, their 3rd-best in NCAA Tournament history) and exploited Iowa State's lack of size after star forward Joshua Jefferson (16.4 PPG, 7.4 RPG, AP Second-Team All-American) was ruled out with an ankle injury. Tennessee scored 42 points in the paint and 14 second-chance points off 16 offensive rebounds. Iowa State shot poorly (39% FG, 22% 3PT) and received only 3 bench points.
Resolution Logic: Per the resolution criteria: "Resolves YES if Tennessee wins the game against Iowa State."
Tennessee won. Therefore, this bet should resolve YES with 100% certainty.
Market Price Interpretation: The current market odds of 0.01 do NOT represent Tennessee's chances of winning. The research reveals this is a Kalshi ticker with the '-ISU' suffix, meaning it tracks Iowa State winning. The 0.01 price reflects that Iowa State lost (contract worth ~$0.01 after confirmed loss).
No Predictive Analysis Required: This is not a forecasting scenario. The event has concluded with a verified outcome. Any scenarios or probability distributions are irrelevant - the game result is historical fact.
Estimated Probability: 1.0 (100%) Tennessee won the game. The probability they "will beat" Iowa State in this completed game is 1.0.
Key Factors.
Game already occurred on March 27, 2026 (4 days before today's date of March 31, 2026)
Confirmed final score: Tennessee 76, Iowa State 62
Tennessee dominated rebounding 43-22, exploiting Iowa State's lack of size
Iowa State missing star forward Joshua Jefferson (ankle injury) - 16.4 PPG, 7.4 RPG
Tennessee scored 42 points in the paint with 14 second-chance points
Official box scores and tournament records verify the outcome
Market price of 0.01 reflects Iowa State's confirmed loss (ticker tracks Iowa State winning)
Date discrepancy in bet question (states 2027 but all evidence points to 2026 game)
Scenarios.
Historical Fact Case
100%The game occurred on March 27, 2026. Tennessee won 76-62, dominating rebounding 43-22 and exploiting Iowa State's size disadvantage after Joshua Jefferson's injury absence. This is the confirmed outcome.
Trigger: Official box scores, tournament records, game recaps all confirm Tennessee's 76-62 victory on March 27, 2026. The game has been played and resolved.
Date Error Scenario (if truly asking about future 2027)
0%If the bet literally asks about a different game in March 2027, no such game is scheduled and the probability would be undefined. However, all market context points to this being the March 2026 game with a date typo.
Trigger: Evidence would need to show a scheduled Tennessee vs Iowa State game for March 26-27, 2027, which does not exist in research.
Market Misinterpretation Case
0%This is not a viable scenario. The 0.01 market price definitively reflects Iowa State's confirmed loss (the ticker tracks Iowa State winning), not future odds.
Trigger: The Kalshi ticker '-ISU' suffix and 0.01 post-game price confirm the game has resolved with Iowa State losing.
Risks.
Date ambiguity: If the bet literally requires a game on March 26, 2027 (not the March 27, 2026 game), resolution becomes unclear as no such future game is scheduled
Bet cancellation risk: If market identifies the date error, the bet might be voided rather than resolved based on the actual 2026 game
Data verification: Minimal risk - multiple sources confirm the March 27, 2026 game outcome
Resolution criteria interpretation: Could the market argue the 2027 date means this should resolve NO due to game cancellation clause? Unlikely given market context clearly references the 2026 game
Edge Assessment.
MASSIVE EDGE IF BET IS STILL OPEN:
The market is pricing this at 0.01, but this appears to be the inverse contract (tracking Iowa State winning). If there exists a corresponding Tennessee contract or if this bet question is asking whether Tennessee won, the true probability is 1.0 (100% certainty).
Edge Analysis:
- Your estimated probability: 1.0 (Tennessee won the completed game)
- Market implied probability: 0.01 (if this is Iowa State to win) = 0.99 for Tennessee
- If there's a YES contract on "Tennessee beats Iowa State": Should be priced at 0.99+ but any price below 0.95 represents massive +EV
Critical Consideration: If this bet is still accepting wagers despite the game having occurred 4 days ago, there may be a platform error or the date discrepancy (2027 vs 2026) is causing market participants to not realize the game already happened.
In a properly functioning market, this should have resolved already. If it hasn't, betting YES on Tennessee (if available) at any odds below 0.95 would represent significant edge, though such opportunities typically indicate platform issues rather than genuine mispricing.
Recommendation: This bet should have already resolved YES (Tennessee won). If still open, there's likely a technical or administrative issue that needs clarification before placing any wager.
What Would Change Our Mind.
Platform confirmation that the bet refers to a different scheduled game in March 2027 (no evidence such game exists)
Official statement that the March 27, 2026 game result will not be used for resolution due to the date error in the bet question
Evidence that the game outcome is being disputed or under review (no such evidence exists)
Verification that the bet has been cancelled/voided rather than resolved based on the actual game played
Sources.
Get This Via API.
Access real-time prediction market analysis programmatically. Every analysis on this page is available through our REST API.
curl -X POST https://api.rekko.ai/v1/markets/robinhood/TICKER/analyze \ -H "Authorization: Bearer YOUR_API_KEY"
Related Analysis.
9 or more upsets in 2026 March Madness Round of 64
The market is pricing 9+ Round of 64 upsets at 46% implied probability, treating 8 upsets as the most likely outcome. However, historical data (2010-2023) shows an average of 9.15 upsets per tournament under this broad definition (any lower seed defeating a higher seed), suggesting the true probability should be approximately 52%. The market appears to be overweighting 2025's extreme anomaly (only 3 upsets) while undervaluing the robust long-term average. Seed-by-seed analysis yields an expected value of 8.3 upsets, just below the threshold but well within normal variance. The broad upset definition critically includes 9-vs-8 matchups (four coin-flip games producing ~2 expected upsets), which creates a structural advantage for YES. While NIL and Transfer Portal talent concentration may be reducing upset rates, regular season data shows stable upset frequencies despite wider point spreads, suggesting tournament variance and single-elimination dynamics still dominate. Major uncertainty exists because Selection Sunday is March 15—just two days away—meaning specific bracket matchups, auto-bid quality, and injury situations remain unknown. The estimated 52% probability represents modest value against the market's 46%, but confidence is tempered (58%) by bracket unknowns and genuine uncertainty about whether 2025 signals a structural shift or statistical outlier.
Canadian team wins the Stanley Cup before the 2031 season
The market implies a 63% probability that a Canadian team wins the Stanley Cup between 2026-2030, but my analysis estimates a more conservative 52% probability—an 11-percentage-point overvaluation. This is essentially a bet on the Edmonton Oilers' championship window during Connor McDavid's prime (ages 29-33), as all other Canadian teams are non-competitive (Toronto/Vancouver rebuilding, Ottawa a longshot at +3300-4000). While McDavid's team-friendly extension through 2027-28 creates a legitimate 3-year window and the Oilers reached back-to-back Finals in 2024-2025, several factors suggest the market is overpricing this outcome: (1) Edmonton LOST both Finals, creating psychological hurdles that losing finalists historically struggle to overcome; (2) Current injuries are concerning—Leon Draisaitl has been out since March 15 with unclear playoff timeline, and McDavid has hip/groin issues; (3) Colorado upgraded to prohibitive favorite (+275-300) by acquiring Quinn Hughes; (4) The 2029-2030 seasons offer minimal value since McDavid's extension ends after 2027-28; (5) The market appears sticky at 63¢ despite recent negative developments, suggesting recency bias and McDavid halo effect rather than properly pricing injury risks and elite competition. My probabilistic model weights 2027-2028 as peak window years (12-15% each) but assigns only 6% to injury-plagued 2026 and 5% to uncertain 2030, yielding 52% cumulative probability.
Will humans colonize Mars before 2050?
The market is pricing a Mars colony by 2050 at 17.5%, but our analysis estimates just 3% probability—nearly a 6:1 mispricing favoring "No." The critical development is SpaceX's February 2026 strategic pivot to lunar colonization, explicitly delaying Mars missions by 5-7 years. This eliminates the only credible Mars settlement actor until the early 2030s, leaving merely 17-19 effective years for an unprecedented achievement requiring 15-20+ years minimum from today. The resolution criteria demands extreme technical sophistication: 10+ people surviving one full Earth year without resupply, requiring operational ISRU, radiation-shielded agriculture, manufacturing, and nuclear power. NASA's roadmap shows only exploratory missions (late 2030s/2040) with Earth resupply—no government agency has permanent Mars settlement planned. The market appears inefficiently high due to retail Musk enthusiasm not fully incorporating the recent pivot's implications, while sharp money is already favoring "No." The 24-year horizon creates false comfort; detailed milestone sequencing reveals timeline compression is nearly impossible given Mars's 26-month launch windows, 6-9 month transits, and self-sufficiency requirements. Only tail-risk scenarios (AI singularity enabling autonomous construction, or geopolitical space race) preserve ~3% probability.