In CP binary betting the feed owner decides the outcome, so some trust is required on the side of those who bet.
In this post we can see one example of asset-based betting.
While the approach may seem counter-intuitive, it seems the same amount of trust is required, so the complexity aside, that approach is not inferior to actual binary bets.
Thoughts?
Binary bets are safer. The feed owner can only release funds to one of the two betters.
With the asset approach, funds are trusted with the bookmaker, and he may run away with them.
In either case, transparency is 100%. This applies to any Bitcoin based approach, but assets have another advantage. They allow a 2nd hand market.
TL;DR. Binary bets are safer, but assets have a 2nd hand market. Which to use depends on the use case.
I think that depends on which bet choice you pick. If you’re shooting for a very unlikely outcome that has a 0.1% chance and you get cheated, you’ll lose about the same as in case where you buy a bunch of “event shares” that don’t get bought back.
I agree that it depends on the case. The part that I like the best in “event shares” is that you don’t have to use the betting feature and it cannot be censored either 
Asset Backed bettting is more fun and allows for trading as on a betting exchange.
I just thought of how asset-based betting would be similar to options. Before we had CfD’s but they were XCP based and that didn’t work well.
If “create bet” could include a non-XCP asset, that may be interesting.