Geneva Open: Edas Butvilas vs Alexander Bublik

Platform comparison

Active sub-markets

Market context

Edas Butvilas is due to play Alexander Bublik in a Geneva Open singles match, but the crowd price is still at 0% YES, which implies the market has not yet picked up a live contract state. For a programme or bot, the first check is basic status reconciliation: confirm whether the fixture has been started, postponed, or re-listed, then map the market rule set to the official ATP score feed before placing any conditional orders. If the match is not completed by the settlement window, the outcome can still flip to 50-50, so stale odds alone are not enough to infer resolution.

On comparable ATP clay matchups, the market usually tracks Bublik as the stronger name, with recent previews placing him around the 76-81% win range and Butvilas as a clear underdog. That matters because a zero price can be a data-delay artefact rather than a genuine view on the result; in practice, traders often model these spots by combining pre-match moneyline, live-start confirmation and cancellation risk. Butvilas has shown a respectable clay record relative to his ranking, while Bublik remains the higher-profile player and the likely advance candidate if the match takes place as scheduled.

The main catalysts are scheduling updates from Geneva and any ATP live score changes around the Centre Court slot. A recent match preview from Bleacher Nation on 18 May set Bublik at -325 against Butvilas, while SofaScore and ATP match pages show the fixture time as 20 May at 18:00 UTC, so any shift in start time, walkover or completion status would be market-relevant. For traders using automation, the sensible trigger set is: official start confirmation, first point played, retirement notices, and whether the match remains unresolved as the 7-day deadline approaches.

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.

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.