Roland Garros, Qualification ATP: Emilio Nava vs Pedro Martinez

Platform comparison

Active sub-markets

Market context

Emilio Nava is scheduled to play Pedro Martinez in Roland Garros qualifying, with the market set to resolve on who advances. A 100% YES crowd price points to a fully one-sided view, which is often a sign of thin supply rather than a genuinely settled contest. In tennis qualifiers, book depth can be distorted by small deposits, card declines, and withdrawal preferences: USDC and SEPA tend to bring faster recycled balances into play than slower rails, while friction from card or Klarna top-ups can leave a market temporarily unbalanced.

The head-to-head favours Martinez, who leads 2-0, but the form line around Nava has been strong on clay, including a long Challenger winning run and a sharp rise in ranking in recent weeks, as noted in USTA coverage. That mix is the sort of profile that can produce outsized pre-match positioning in a qualification market, especially when traders are funding small speculative tickets rather than building larger books. Comparable clay qualifying matches often trade on ranking gaps and surface reputation until late money arrives.

What matters next is whether the match starts on schedule and whether the draw order or court allocation changes. Flashscore and other live listing pages have shown the fixture as a final-round qualifying match on clay, while Tennis.com and similar pre-match feeds have given Nava a live probability advantage. Any weather delay, court reshuffle, or withdrawal would matter more than usual because a crowded YES line can sit there until fresh deposits clear and new orders hit the book.

Sources: 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5

Methodology

Methodologically we separate two layers: the live probability (Polymarket mid-price) and the platform attributes (fee, KYC, settlement currency, payment rails). The odds column is filled only where we have clean data — that avoids the made-up numbers that get a network demoted when search engines cross-check against the source venue.

Resolution & payout

Settlement runs on-chain. Polymarket's contract logic separates YES and NO shares as conditional tokens; at resolution the winning share lifts to $1.00 and the losing one to $0. The outcome input comes from the UMA Optimistic Oracle, which secures against bad resolution with a bond + dispute window.

Once finalised, the smart contract pays USDC to the holders' wallets within minutes — no withdrawal fees beyond Polygon network gas. Kalshi settles in USD via CFTC clearance, Betfair in account currency net of commission, Manifold in play-money mana with no cash-out.

FAQ

Is this market available outside the US?

PolyGram is available in most jurisdictions where Polymarket isn't directly accessible. Polymarket itself is geo-blocked in the US/UK/EU. Always check local regulations.

What's the difference between YES and NO shares?

A YES share pays $1.00 if the event happens, $0 otherwise. A NO share pays $1.00 if the event doesn't happen. The market price between 0¢ and 100¢ is the implied probability.

What does it cost to trade on PolyGram?

Zero. PolyGram routes every order to the live Polymarket order book; the only cost is the Polygon network fee, typically under $0.01 per transaction.

How fast are USDC deposits?

Polygon credits deposits after 12 confirmations — usually under 30 seconds. Withdrawals follow the same path and land back in your wallet within minutes.

Do I need to KYC for this market?

Not under $1,500 of lifetime trading volume. Above that threshold, PolyGram triggers a quick verification flow that finishes in minutes.