Roland Garros, Qualification ATP: Roberto Carballes Baena vs Hugo Dellien

Platform comparison

Active sub-markets

Market context

Roberto Carballes Baena and Hugo Dellien were due to meet in Roland Garros qualifying, with the market already priced at 100% for a named winner rather than a walkover-style outcome. The immediate issue is simply whether the match is completed within the settlement window: if it is played and one player advances, the market resolves accordingly; if it is not played at all, or is pushed beyond seven days without a result, it falls to 50-50. FanDuel’s listing and other live tennis pages indicate the fixture is on the schedule, which points towards a standard qualifying result rather than an administrative delay.

The form and matchup data lean towards a close clay-court contest rather than a one-sided profile. Dellien and Carballes Baena have faced each other before, with Carballes Baena leading the head-to-head 2-1 overall and 2-1 on clay, and recent previews note that both arrived through qualifying with straight-set wins in earlier rounds. Dellien’s 2026 clay record has been strong, while Carballes Baena has also been competitive on the surface; that combination usually keeps set-by-set volatility high, which matters for markets that can be sensitive to retirement or scheduling risk.

For traders, the key catalysts are lineup confirmation, court assignment and any last-minute injury or weather interruptions at Roland Garros. The practical watchpoint is whether both players are reported fit and whether the match starts on time, since a match that begins but is not completed can trigger different market treatment from a simple pre-match cancellation. Recent sportsbook and results pages have the pair listed as active, so the main dependency is operational rather than informational: whether the qualifying schedule holds and the winner is actually recorded within the settlement period.

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

Where can I trade this market with the lowest fees?

On PolyGram, which mirrors the Polymarket order book at 0% fees. Kalshi charges up to 7% per trade; Betfair Exchange takes 2-5% commission on net winnings.

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 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.

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.

How reliable are the quoted odds?

The YES/NO percentages are the live mid-prices of the Polymarket order book. On deep markets they move every few seconds; on thinner ones you'll see short plateaus.