Roland Garros, Qualification ATP: Felix Gill vs Kyrian Jacquet

Platform comparison

Active sub-markets

Market context

Felix Gill and Kyrian Jacquet are scheduled to meet in Roland Garros qualifying, with the latest move being the market’s full shift to Jacquet at 100% implied certainty. That pricing fits the immediate form line: both men came through two qualifying rounds, but Jacquet did it with fewer set losses, beating Lorenzo Giustino and Nerman Fatic in straight-sets before this round, while Gill needed three sets against both Aziz Dougaz and Alex Molcan. In a short-format qualifying match, that extra margin usually matters more than longer-run rankings or career records.

The broader frame is still Jacquet’s clay comfort versus Gill’s more fragile route through the draw. Jacquet has posted a winning record over the past nine years and is 5-2 on clay in 2026, which is the stronger comparative case when markets lean heavily towards one side in qualifying. Gill has shown enough resilience to stay alive, but his path has been less clean, including a tight 7-6 win in his last match, so the current probability reflects how the market is weighting recent set play rather than just headline pedigree. FanDuel’s quick-bets line also has Jacquet favoured for 3-1 outcomes at +230 against Gill’s +330, pointing to a fairly broad market consensus.

The main catalysts now are straightforward: whether the match starts on schedule, whether there is any late change to the order of play, and whether either player withdraws or is forced to retire. Sofascore listed the match for 22 May at 09:00 UTC, and the ATP head-to-head page confirms the pairing, but there is no evidence in the supplied sources of a late venue or weather disruption. If the match is not played, or if it is started and then abandoned without a winner, the settlement rules become decisive rather than the on-court form.

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

At resolution the UMA oracle takes over: a proposer posts the outcome with a bond, any token holder can dispute within two hours. Without dispute the result is accepted and the smart contract distributes USDC instantly.

On Kalshi (CFTC-regulated) resolution runs through their in-house clearing engine in USD. Betfair Exchange settles after match end in the account's local currency. Manifold pays no cash — only its in-platform "mana" currency.

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.

How does resolution work?

Through the UMA Optimistic Oracle on Polygon: a proposer submits the outcome, a two-hour challenge window opens, and USDC payouts settle automatically once the result is final.

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.

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.