US Open, Qualification WTA: Savannah Broadus vs Tyra Caterina Grant

Platform comparison

Market context

Savannah Broadus played Tyra Caterina Grant in the US Open women’s qualifying first round, with Grant listed as the stronger pre-match favourite on sportsbooks and the WTA’s own match page showing the fixture as scheduled on 24 August in New York.[1][2][3] Public pre-match prices were not close to the 0% YES seen on the contract, with one live odds board showing Grant around 1.48 and Broadus about 2.67, while ranking gaps also pointed the same way: Broadus was around the low 300s and Grant around the mid-100s.[4][5]

That makes the market’s 0% crowd-implied figure look far more extreme than the broader price set around it, and it is best read as a thin-liquidity outlier unless backed by a completed-result update. Comparable first-round Grand Slam qualifying ties often move sharply on late draw or injury information, but absent that, trader attention tends to centre on whether the match is finished, postponed, or already decided, since settlement on this contract follows the actual advancement result rather than the scheduled time.[1][3][6]

The main catalyst is straightforward: the match status itself, plus any official update from the US Open, WTA, or score providers if there is a retirement, walkover, or scheduling change.[3][6] If play was completed, the result should override pre-match probability entirely; if not, the market can only be read against the 14-day settlement fallback, which would force a 50-50 outcome if no winner is determined by 7 September 2026.[3]

Sources: 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5

Methodology

This page reviews US Open, Qualification WTA: Savannah Broadus vs Tyra Caterina Grant across five venues. The live probability is the Polymarket mid-price, sourced directly from the on-chain Polygon order book; the comparison columns benchmark each venue on fee structure, KYC, settlement currency and payment rails. Every CTA routes to Best Prediction Markets, which mirrors the Polymarket order book at 0% fees.

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?

Polymarket is geo-blocked in the US/UK/EU. The easiest 0%-fee broker into the same order book is Best Prediction Markets. 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 does Polymarket cost to trade?

Polymarket itself charges 0% — the only cost is the Polygon network fee, typically under $0.01 per transaction. Off-chain venues like Kalshi or Betfair charge 2-7% commission.

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.