# Order Zero — CONSENSUS RULER + ENDPOINT VERIFICATION

**Date:** 2026-08-01 · Phase 1 measured against the **live prod feed with the
real key**; Phase 2 built **challenger-first — the live ruler is byte-identical.**

**Gates:** tests 4,022 passed / 322 suites · `next build` **exit 0** · keyed
verification run on prod · challenger delta recorded.

---

## PHASE 1 — KEYED VERIFICATION

Run via `GET /api/internal/propline-verify` (internal-key gated, read-only, no
cache/ledger/grade writes). Breadth reuses `proplineAdapter.fetchRaw` — the
exact live request — so this measures what the pipeline actually receives.

### 1.1 WNBA is NOT thin at the feed. It was starved by our own allow-list.

MLB 3,138 props / 20 events · WNBA 160 props / 4 events. **Never pooled.**

| | MLB | WNBA |
|---|---:|---:|
| books/prop **in the feed** | **3.61** | **4.21** |
| books/prop **after `ALLOWED_BOOKS`** | **0.57** | **1.20** |
| props **INVISIBLE** (zero admitted books) | **2,033 (64.8%)** | 46 (28.8%) |

**WNBA has BETTER feed breadth than MLB (4.21 vs 3.61).** The answer to the
order's question is unambiguous: **WNBA was allow-list-starved, exactly as MLB
was — not thin at source.**

That does **not** by itself explain WNBA's anti-predictive result, and I am not
going to claim it does. It removes one candidate explanation ("no market to
measure against") and leaves the ruler bend as a live hypothesis to re-test
after the fix. **Nothing here promotes WNBA out of abstention.**

The headline number for MLB is not the mean — it is that **we cannot see 64.8%
of the MLB slate at all.**

### 1.2 Exchange reality — PARTIALLY confirmed, and two candidates are dead

Reference-book presence, as a share of props:

| book | MLB | WNBA | |
|---|---:|---:|---|
| `smarkets` | 27.1% | **0%** | exchange |
| `novig` | 22.2% | **46.3%** | exchange |
| `kalshi` | 14.9% | 8.8% | prediction market |
| `bovada` | 9.2% | 16.3% | offshore, PropLine's own no-vig fallback |
| **`pinnacle`** | **0%** | **0%** | the classic sharp anchor |
| **`matchbook`** | **0%** | **0%** | exchange |
| **`polymarket`** | **0%** | **0%** | prediction market |

**Confirmed:** exchanges do carry real props — `smarkets` 873 quotes, `novig`
730, `kalshi` 1,369 on MLB. The hypothesis was not empty.

**Three candidates are dead for player props:** `pinnacle`, `matchbook`,
`polymarket` returned **zero** on both sports. Pinnacle carries 144k markets
globally — just not these. **We have no sharp anchor for props.** Twice
measured, both sports.

### 1.3 The coverage curve — the number that decides the ruler

Strict eligibility: **≥2 reference books posting BOTH sides at the SAME line.**
One-sided quotes cannot be de-vigged; two books at different lines are not the
same market.

| reference policy | MLB n≥2 | WNBA n≥2 |
|---|---:|---:|
| `exchange_only` | 14.3% | 5.6% |
| `exchange_plus_sharp` (+pinnacle, bovada) | 14.3% | 5.6% |
| **`exchange_plus_us`** (+DK/FD/MGM/BR) | **28.1%** | **46.3%** |
| `takeable_only` | 12.6% | 30.6% |

Adding pinnacle and matchbook/polymarket changes **nothing** — they are 0%.

**Of props we can actually GRADE** (those with an admitted book), consensus is
available on **80.5% of MLB** (923/1,146) and **54.9% of WNBA** (79/144). That
is the operative number: the 15% figure is diluted by props we cannot see at all.

### 1.4 DFS is the trap, quantified

`prizepicks` covers **82.3%** of MLB props and `sleeper` **68.1%** of WNBA — the
highest coverage in the entire feed. Admitting DFS "for breadth" would have
looked like the single biggest improvement available and would have bent the
ruler in a new direction. Fixed-payout, deliberately shaded, flat juice.
**Permanently excluded from all pricing.**

### 1.5 Endpoint verification — works / partial / no, FOR OUR TIER

| endpoint | verdict | evidence |
|---|---|---|
| `/v1/sports` | ✅ **WORKS** | 54 sports, all active |
| `/v1/markets/resolution-summary` | ✅ **WORKS** | 2,085,840 props graded in 30d |
| `/events/{id}/context` (MLB) | ✅ **WORKS, FREE** | venue, `roof_type`, `is_indoor`, both probable pitchers **+ handedness**, `lineup_confirmed`, **home-plate umpire**, weather |
| `/events/{id}/context` (WNBA) | ⚠️ **PARTIAL** | 404 — MLB-only today, as documented |
| `/events/{id}/odds/closing` | ⚠️ **PARTIAL — REDACTED** | 200 with **2,102 outcomes and 0 prices** + `upgrade_url` |
| `/events/{id}/movement` | ⚠️ **PARTIAL — REDACTED** | 2,102 outcomes, **0 prices**, `steam: []` |
| `/events/{id}/results` | ❌ **NO** | 403 |
| `/exports/resolved-props` | ❌ **NO** | 403 on **all four** sport keys |

**A correction to my own first pass.** I initially classified `/odds/closing`
and `/movement` as **WORKS** because the bodies were non-empty. They are
**structure-only redactions** — full shape, zero prices, plus an `upgrade_url`.
`detectRedaction` now counts actual prices and downgrades works→partial, and a
test locks it. **A non-empty body is not proof of access.**

### 1.6 The $19/mo question — answered, with one honest gap

`/exports/resolved-props` is 403 for us, so we cannot **pull** settlements. But
`/markets/resolution-summary` proves they **exist to be bought** (30 days):

| sport | props graded | events |
|---|---:|---:|
| `baseball_mlb` | 1,798,850 | 363 |
| `basketball_wnba` | 152,960 | 72 |
| **soccer_mls** | **41,444** | 35 |
| **soccer_liga_mx** | 15,037 | 21 |
| soccer_brasileirao / world_cup / UCL / Europa / Conference / … | ~60,000 combined | ~340 |
| `mma_ufc` | 2,738 | 39 |
| tennis, golf, rugby | ~19,000 | ~1,150 |

**Soccer settles.** ~15 competitions graded in the last 30 days. Our standing
"soccer grades into a void" is a **Pro-tier ($19/mo) problem, not a data
availability problem.**

**NBA is absent — and that is seasonal, not a coverage gap.** It is July;
`/sports` lists `basketball_nba` as active. **I cannot confirm NBA settlement
until the season starts, and I am not going to infer it.**

---

## PHASE 2 — THE CONSENSUS RULER (challenger-first, NOT live)

### 2.1 The three-way split — `src/config/bookRoles.js`

One allow-list was answering two different questions: *"can we show this?"* and
*"can we price against this?"* Conflating them is what bent the ruler.

- **TAKEABLE** — a user can actually bet here. Best price, line shopping.
- **REFERENCE** — may price the ruler; never surfaced as a place to bet.
  Selected policy: `exchange_plus_us`.
- **EXCLUDED** — DFS pick'em + offshore/intl. **Permanently** barred from
  pricing.

**Deliberate deviation, stated plainly.** The order said *remove the 6 phantom
entries.* **I kept them.** They returned zero PropLine quotes, but PropLine is
not our only provider — the odds-api backup path may carry Caesars/bet365/etc.
A book that never appears is never matched, so keeping it costs nothing;
deleting it risks silently dropping real books on the backup with no upside.
Recorded in `PHANTOM_ON_PROPLINE` rather than enacted as a deletion. **Reverse
this if you'd rather.**

**The honest limitation, recorded in the config itself:** including soft US
books makes this a **MARKET** consensus, not a **SHARP** one. It is a large
improvement on one arbitrary book. It is **not** the sharp closing line the
category's leaders are measured against — and §1.2 says we cannot build that
one, because no sharp book prices these props.

### 2.2 The rule — `src/services/consensusRuler.js`

1. Group by the **SAME LINE**. Different lines are never averaged.
2. **TWO-SIDED REFERENCE quotes only.** A one-sided price cannot be de-vigged.
3. **MEDIAN** of per-book de-vigged `fair_prob` — median, so one stale exchange
   cannot drag the ruler.
4. **n≥2**, or fall back to single-book **and label it** (`source:
   'single_book'`, stamped v1). **Never silently mixed** — a column holding both
   is two rulers wearing one name.
5. No reference quote at all → `null`, `source: 'none'`. Never fabricated.

### 2.3 The challenger delta — and a correction I caught mid-run

**My first delta run was wrong and I stopped it.** I modelled the incumbent as
first-row-wins over the **raw** feed and it reported that an EXCLUDED book was
"the market" on **69% of MLB prop-lines, prizepicks alone at 47%.**

**That is false.** `normalizeProps` applies `ALLOWED_BOOKS` **before**
`dedupeProps` runs, so DFS books never reach the incumbent. The allow-list, for
all the coverage it costs, **does** keep DFS out of the ruler. Overstating the
incumbent's badness would have been as dishonest as understating it — and more
persuasive. Corrected, tested, and re-run.

**Corrected results** (`allowedBooks` respected — incumbent is 100% admitted
books, no DFS):

| | MLB | WNBA |
|---|---:|---:|
| prop-line groups | 6,422 | 853 |
| gradeable (has an admitted book) | 1,146 (17.8%) | 144 (16.9%) |
| consensus available | 995 | 87 |
| comparable (both rulers) | 923 | 79 |
| incumbent books | betmgm 586 · dk 538 · fd 16 · br 6 | dk 90 · fd 54 |

**Delta (consensus − incumbent, probability points, over side):**

| | MLB | WNBA |
|---|---:|---:|
| mean | **+1.50** | −0.29 |
| median | 0 | 0 |
| p10 / p90 | −1.6 / **+10.0** | −2.0 / +1.6 |
| median abs / p90 abs | 0.5 / **11.95** | 0.55 / 2.5 |
| disagree ≥2 pts | **24.8%** | 20.3% |
| disagree ≥5 pts | **17.0%** | 2.5% |

**Read it honestly: the median prop does not move at all.** The change is
concentrated in a **right-skewed minority** — on MLB, **17% of comparable props
move by 5+ probability points**, and the skew is one-directional (p90 +10.0 vs
p10 −1.6): the incumbent systematically prices the OVER *below* the
exchange-inclusive consensus. WNBA is nearly symmetric and much tighter.

**What this does and does not establish.** It establishes the two rulers
genuinely differ, on a minority of props, in a consistent direction. It does
**not** establish that the new ruler is *better* — that requires re-running the
edge and CLV measurements against it, which is the next order.

### 2.4 `ruler_version` stamped at the boundary — **APPLIED**

`ledger_entries.ruler_version` (migration recorded as
`migrations/025_ledger_ruler_version.sql`; applied to prod). **1,384 existing
rows backfilled to `v1_first_book`** — a statement of fact, not an assumption:
every row to date was produced by the first-book rule. 629 of them carry a
`fair_prob_lock`. New rows stamp `CURRENT_RULER_VERSION` via `ledgerService`.

**NEVER pool edge or CLV across differing `ruler_version` values.** The
denominator changed; the numbers are not the same measurement. This is the same
no-pooling boundary as `model_version`, and it is **arithmetically forced**.

---

## PHASE 3 — CONSEQUENCE

**MLB isotonic `p_win` remains PROVISIONAL.** It was calibrated against the
`v1_first_book` ruler. **It does not promote until re-run against the consensus
ruler**, after this delta is reviewed. Recorded in MASTER-PLAN.

---

## WHAT IS AND IS NOT LIVE

**LIVE:** the internal verification endpoint; `bookRoles.js` and
`consensusRuler.js` as libraries; the `ruler_version` column and stamp.

**NOT LIVE — deliberately:** `ALLOWED_BOOKS` is **unchanged**, so the served
slate is byte-identical. `CURRENT_RULER_VERSION` is still `v1_first_book`. No
live path calls `consensusRuler`. No grade, cache or slate changed.

---

## THE DECISION THIS TEES UP

Widening `ALLOWED_BOOKS` to the reference set would make **64.8% of the MLB
slate visible** for the first time — that is the single largest product change
available, and it is a config edit.

But it is **not** free: those props would grade against a market we have never
measured our model on, and every edge number reset to `v2`. **That is the next
order's decision, not this one's** — and it should be taken after the ruler
re-run, not before it.

## OPEN

1. **Ruler policy sign-off** — `exchange_plus_us` selected off the curve. Confirm.
2. **Pro tier ($19/mo)** — buys settlement for **soccer** (proven), CLV via
   `/odds/closing`, steam via `/movement`, and `/results`. Genuinely cheap
   relative to what it unblocks.
3. **The 6 phantom books** — kept, against the order's wording, with reasoning
   above. Reverse if you disagree.
4. **`/context` is free and richer than what we hand-built** — umpire, roof,
   pitcher handedness, lineup confirmation. Wiring it is a later order.