Tunisia vs. Japan - Exact Score

Platform comparison

Active sub-markets

Market context

Tunisia’s World Cup meeting with Japan is being priced as a long shot for an exact score, with the market’s 3% implied probability suggesting traders see a very narrow path to a specific 90-minute outcome. That low figure sits comfortably with the broader match picture: Japan were listed as the stronger side in pre-match odds, with ESPN showing Japan around -190 on the moneyline and Tunisia at +600, while the draw was about +310[2]. Reuters also noted Tunisia had opened with a 5-1 defeat to Sweden, whereas Japan drew 2-2 with the Netherlands, a results profile that points to Japan having the more stable baseline heading into the fixture[5].

Historical comparables also lean towards caution on exact-score markets. Japan have won three of the four recorded meetings between the sides, including a 2-0 friendly win in October 2023, while Tunisia’s lone win in that sequence was a 3-0 victory in June 2022[1][9]. FIFA described Japan as “a more confident team” in its match-centre preview, which aligns with the market logic that exact-score contracts are usually more volatile than simple win/draw/lose bets and are often dominated by a handful of common scores such as 1-0, 2-0, 2-1, and 1-1 rather than the full list of outcomes[4].

The main catalysts are therefore pre-kickoff team news, starting line-ups, and any late changes to the venue or schedule, because the contract resolves only on the score after 90 minutes plus stoppage time, excluding extra time and penalties. Reuters reported the match was notable as FIFA’s 1,000th World Cup game, but the trading relevance is more about whether Tunisia can tighten up after their opening loss and whether Japan can convert their stronger recent form into a routine win rather than a high-scoring contest[5]. If the market has not fully reflected the moneyline gap, any sharp move in exact-score pricing should come from updates to team selection rather than from the headline fixture itself[2][4].

Sources: 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5

Methodology

This page is a comparison snapshot: one live quote (Polymarket), four reference venues with their key attributes, and a single execution path — every trade button routes to Best Prediction Markets, which mirrors the Polymarket order book directly.

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

Is this market available outside the US?

Best Prediction Markets 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'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 Best Prediction Markets?

Zero. Best Prediction Markets 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.