🏅 Top traders

2 jan 2025, isw , ai tool:

ISW map estimate (numeric extraction source for Jan 1, 2026)

AMK Mapping (Jan 1, 2026) lists:

• Donetsk: 80.92%

• Luhansk: 99.80% (X (formerly Twitter))

Controlled area

• Donetsk: 26,517 × 0.8092 = 21,457.5564 km²

• Luhansk: 26,684 × 0.9980 = 26,630.6320 km²

Total controlled in Donbas: 21,457.5564 + 26,630.6320 = 48,088.1884 km²
Percent of Donbas: 48,088.1884 / 53,201 = 90.39%

✅ ISW (via AMK Mapping) Donbas control: 90.39% (X (formerly Twitter))

DeepState (as of Jan 1, 2026 reporting)

DeepState occupation shares:

• Donetsk: 78.1%

• Luhansk: 99.6% (Pravda)

Controlled area

• Donetsk: 26,517 × 0.781 = 20,709.777 km²

• Luhansk: 26,684 × 0.996 = 26,577.264 km²

Total controlled in Donbas: 20,709.777 + 26,577.264 = 47,287.041 km²
Percent of Donbas: 47,287.041 / 53,201 = 88.89%

✅ DeepState-based Donbas control: 88.89% (Pravda)

2 jan 2025 update ( deepstate) with ai tools:

Given

• Total Donbas area: 53,200 km²

• Luhansk Oblast control: 99.6%

• Donetsk Oblast control: 78.1%

To calculate correctly, we must weight by oblast area.

Approximate oblast areas (standard figures):

• Donetsk Oblast: ~26,500 km²

• Luhansk Oblast: ~26,700 km²
  (Together ≈ 53,200 km², which matches your total.)

Step-by-step calculation

Luhansk controlled area
26,700 × 0.996 = 26,593.2 km²

Donetsk controlled area
26,500 × 0.781 = 20,696.5 km²

Total Russian-controlled Donbas area
26,593.2 + 20,696.5 = 47,289.7 km²

Final percentage

47,289.7 ÷ 53,200 ≈ 0.8889

✅ Exact result

👉 Russia controls ~88.9% of the Donbas region (as of early January 2026, using your stated ISW / DeepState figures).

Summary (clean version)

• Luhansk: 99.6%

• Donetsk: 78.1%

• Donbas overall: ~88.9%

After that interesting consultation period, I have decided to proceed with a 50% resolution.

The resolution criteria state:

This market will resolve 50% if, at the close date, at least one resolution source indicates that the Russian Federation or its armed forces control at least 90% of the Donbass region and at least one other resolution source contradicts this assessment.

One resolution source (Reuters) indicates that Russia controls 90% of Donbass. Two resolution sources (DeepState and creamy_caprice) contradict that assessment. See my pinned post for more detail.

A notable objection raised by a NO holder was that "Ukraine has recently pushed back Russian forces quite some distance" in Donbass. I accepted that, if this were true, Reuters' estimate from 28 December might be outdated. It is, however, not true. According to the Ukrainian government-affiliated DeepState map, it is Russia that has advanced in Donbass between the Reuters article and the close date.

Here are my new markets on this topic:

i was under assumption of this rule: "This market will resolve YES if, at the close date, at least one resolution source indicates that the Russian Federation or its armed forces control at least 90% (i.e. 47,880km²) of the Donbass region and no other resolution source contradicts this assessment." when placed my bets yesterday

ISW maps might not contradict that assestment

@MyDreamIsHere2018 yes, and we have one resolution source indicating that Russia controls 90%, and two resolution sources contradicting that assessment. What's the issue exactly?

@a_l_e_x please , tell me, are you able to calculate ISW map areas and how do you treat the disputed areas?

@1bets Disputed areas are, by definition, not under Russian control.

I don't know of any precise way to get an estimate from ISW's interactive map. If you know of one, feel free to suggest it.

But please note that ISW doesn't matter at this point. The resolution criteria clearly say the market resolves to 50% if there's at least one resolution source on either side of the 90% threshold. Reuters (90%) is over the threshold. DeepState (~88.7%) and creamy_caprice (89.68%) are under.

@a_l_e_x Disputed areas, by definition, are territories under contention, where Russia may have partial control or where Russian troops have infiltrated to launch drones or conduct spy operations, sabotages or reconnaissance.

That is exactly why disputed areas represent a form of contested or divided control.

@Areal contested areas are, by definition, not under anyone's control.

@a_l_e_x creamy_caprice isn't 89.68%

Here is the English translation of the entire last message, including December and the average land data shown in the image.

Table (key entries)

• November: 608.13 km²

• December: 517.38 km²

• Average per month: 282 km²

Later period:

• October: 586.57 km²

• November: 506.54 km²

• Average per month: 420 km²

Text below the table

28.12.25 — Rate of advance

Average daily advance of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation in the zone of the Special Military Operation (SMO).
Data updated as of 24–27 December 2025.
Rate of advance: +14.7 km² per day during the period.
Total advance: 58.8 km².

Map: www.creamy-caprice.net

@a_l_e_x chatGPT: Disputed (contested) areas can be considered partly under Russian control only if Russian forces are able to operate there with some degree of freedom (for example, infiltrating, launching drones, conducting reconnaissance or sabotage, or temporarily holding positions).

However, this does not mean full or stable control. In disputed areas:

• Control is fragmented and unstable

• Neither side can enforce exclusive authority

• Presence may be temporary, covert, or localized

So the correct conclusion is:

Disputed areas reflect partial, contested, or intermittent control — not full territorial control by Russia.

@a_l_e_x I personally agree with a 50/50 resolution, considering that Reuters reported a solid 90% achieved.

However, if we think logically, disputed areas might be considered at least 30% under Russian control.

I have seen evidence that Russian forces infiltrate these areas, launch spy drones, and carry out sabotage: activities that Ukrainian forces conduct there as well.

Therefore, these areas are effectively under the kind of control of both sides.

If we include them, the 90% threshold is reached on each map, and the resolution actually approach 100%.

@Areal ...you're looking at the wrong post. Those are estimates of Russia's monthly gains across the whole frontline.

The post I linked earlier says Russia controls 26,623km² (99.77%) of Lugansk Oblast and 21,086km² (79.52%) of Donetsk Oblast. Let's do the maths

26,623 + 21,086 = 47,709

Donbass has a total area of 53,200 square kilometres

47,709 is 89.68% of 53,200

@Areal

If we include them, the 90% threshold is reached on each map, and the resolution actually approach 100%.

Actually, this is not true. Even if you count grey zone as Russian-controlled territory, DeepState would still be under 90%. And creamy_caprice's maps don't even display grey zone.

Deep State, the last update was actually - with huge disputed areas (Nevyznachano - ukr)

December 2025:

ISW Assessed Control of Terrain in Ukraine as of December 31, 2025, 6:00 PM EST

Reuters is probably using ISW map, that isn't updated yet properly, but I believe it's hard to calculate the exact area. ISW map: https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/36a7f6a6f5a9448496de641cf64bd375

Deepstate shows many huge disputed ares (each like 100-200km2). If we assume disputed is 50/50, it will add significant area to Russia (just mathematically)

ISW shows a liitle bit more area is occupied by Russia (and was not updated yet since 30):

Today is a holiday

There are no updates from DeepState yet.

I believe we need to wait at least until the final map updates.

The front is not moving much, except in a few locations.

these few locations just to be clear

Hi @traders. As the market has closed at a probability some distance away from the probability I intend to resolve to, I want to consult you first.

As stated in the resolution criteria:

• The market resolves YES if at least one of the resolution sources indicates that Russia controls at least 90% (47,880km²) of Donbass and no other resolution source disagrees

• The market resolves to 50% if at least one of the resolution sources indicates that Russia controls at least 90% (47,880km²) of Donbass and at least one other resolution source disagrees

• The market otherwise resolves NO

Going through the resolution sources:

• The most recent reporting by Reuters states that "Russia [...] controls 90% of Donbas" (28 December) or "about 90% of Donbas" (29 December)

• The final estimate by creamy_caprice (26 December) is that Russia controls 47,709 sq km of Donbass, which is under the 47,880 sq km threshold and equals 89.68% of the region

• The most recent estimate I can find from ISW was published so long ago (30 August) that it is not useful. Russia Matters, using ISW data, estimates that Russia controls 89% of Donbass (17 December), but this estimate does not come directly from ISW

• Using the ruler tool on DeepState just now, I calculated that Russia controls approximately 47,186 sq km of Donbass, which is about 88.70% of the total area (see screenshot below)

By my count, we have one source (Reuters) indicating that Russia controls at least 90% of Donbass and at least one source (DeepState + creamy_caprice) contradicting that assessment, which means the market must resolve to 50%. But I will hold off resolving for at least 24 hours in case anyone would like to dispute this.

@a_l_e_x Ukraine has recently pushed back Russian forces quite some distance and Reuters' reporting is an estimate (ABOUT 90%). All other calculations point to the control being slightly below 90%.

@djomla if we can establish that Ukraine gained more territory in Donbass than it lost in the time between that Reuters article and the close date, I would be inclined to agree that the Reuters article is outdated. (Likewise, if Russia had a net gain of 171km² in Donbass between 26 Dec and the close date, the same could be said of creamy_caprice's estimate.)

As for the Reuters figure being an estimate, I don't find this disqualifying in itself. For one thing, all of the figures we're using here are estimates and there was never any reason to expect that Reuters would give us two decimal places. The resolution criteria do not ask for absolute certainty, they ask for an indication. A news report saying Russia "controls 90% of Donbas" certainly gives an indication.

If the argument is that Reuters is simply rounding to the nearest number ending in 0, and that "90%" could therefore mean anything between 85% and 94%, I'm satisfied that this is not the case, as Reuters reported multiple times in August (e.g. here) that Russia controlled "about 88%" of Donbass, without rounding up to 90%.

So the only reason I would disqualify the Reuters figure is if it's outdated. You're welcome to present evidence on this point, and I will do some research on it too.

@djomla they only slightly pushed in Pokrovsk.

But totally finished the relocation from Myrnograd.

Also to the South, there are some adjustments, consolidation of the front.

Thus all will add some land to Russia, but make the front line stronger.

The relocation from Myrnograd was a success no looses

@a_l_e_x I believe it is not correct to say, “The only reason I would disqualify the Reuters figure is if it’s outdated.” Even if the data were somewhat outdated, since that time Russia has taken control of Myrnohrad (which, according to ISW maps, was under Ukrainian control about a week ago). Additionally, the Udachne and Siversk fronts have shifted slightly in recent weeks, not in Ukraine’s favor.

Therefore, we actually have stronger reasons to accept the Reuters figures (even if I personally believe they relied on a slight approximation) because overall battlefield developments align with their assessment.

In this case, we should defer to the description provided by a major and reputable outlet like Reuters.

If a strong market standard of description permits reliance on a single authoritative source indicating a 90% likelihood, then we should proceed on that basis.

@MyDreamIsHere2018 actually, I was correct to say that. See this sentence in the resolution criteria:

In determining whether a resolution source indicates or contradicts something, I may consider the recency of its last update.

So yes, I can disqualify the Reuters estimate if – and please note the word "if" – it's outdated.

To be clear, I have not decided that the Reuters estimate is outdated. And I am not saying that it's automatically outdated because of the amount of time that's passed.

As I said in the post you're replying to, I would only consider it outdated if Ukraine had gained more territory than it lost in Donbass since that article was published. As you correctly point out, that appears not to be the case.

@a_l_e_x I would be willing to accept losses or 50/50 if Ukraine manages to gain more territory than it loses. But it highly unlikely .

Every square kilometer now changes hands very slowly, as the drone war has made traditional front lines a thing of the past.

It is often unclear who controls what territory, because soldiers can hide and operate almost solely with drones, with supplies delivered by drones as well.

As a result, Ukrainian soldiers may be surrounded by Russian forces and still fight effectively. The same is true in places like Kupiansk, where surrounded Russian units receive supplies by drones and cannot be eliminated for a long time.

There is no longer a classical front line in this war.