Roland Garros, Qualification ATP: Emilio Nava vs Pedro Martinez

Platform comparison

Active sub-markets

Market context

The match has been completed in Paris, with Emilio Nava beating Pedro Martinez 6-3, 6-3 on Court 7 in Roland Garros qualifying. That means the practical question for the market is no longer form or scheduling, but whether the result is already effectively locked in by the official completion and any post-match administrative issues. With the crowd price sitting at 100% YES, the live setup has been fully consistent with a straight-through Nava advance rather than a disputed or abandoned contest.

The historical frame points the same way: these two had met twice before and Martinez led the head-to-head 2-0, including a tight clay-court win in Valencia in October 2024. That earlier result mattered only insofar as it showed Martinez could handle Nava on clay, but it did not prevent Nava from overturning the match-up in Paris. Pre-match ratings were broadly split in Nava’s favour, with several listings placing him as the more likely winner despite Martinez’s clay pedigree.

What mattered most today was the qualifying schedule and whether the match was actually played to completion within the settlement window. Roland Garros and score providers both showed the fixture as a completed qualifying tie, which removes the main ambiguity for market settlement. The only remaining dependencies are routine: confirmation that no abnormal correction or official voiding appears in the tournament record, and that the result stands in the governing feeds used by the market.

Sources: 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5

Methodology

We track Roland Garros, Qualification ATP: Emilio Nava vs Pedro Martinez on the five venues with material liquidity for prediction markets. Live odds come from the Polymarket Polygon order book — the only source that ships real-time data under an open licence. For Kalshi, Betfair and Manifold we list platform attributes (fee, KYC, settlement, payment) instead of fabricated odds, because their APIs use non-comparable contract definitions.

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.

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 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 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.