Plovdiv: Tommaso Compagnucci vs Maxim Mrva

Platform comparison

Active sub-markets

Market context

Tommaso Compagnucci and Maxim Mrva are due to contest a first-round match in Plovdiv, and the market only pays out on which player advances. With the crowd at **100% YES**, the implied view is that Mrva is overwhelmingly expected to progress, which matches the published pre-match pricing: Tennis Tonic listed Mrva as the favourite at 1.333 and Compagnucci at 2.96, and noted the pair had not met before on the tour.[1] The ATP head-to-head page can be used programmatically to confirm whether the result is the first completed meeting or whether the fixture state has changed before settlement.[8]

For market-readers using bots or conditional orders, the key historical frame is that this is an *unproven matchup* rather than a rivalry with repeat signals, so the pricing leans heavily on baseline strength and current form rather than direct history.[1][8] That matters because in early-round Challenger markets, the favourite can remain dominant in the contract even when live scores are still shallow; TennisLive’s match feed already shows the contest as in progress, which is the kind of state transition a script should monitor before deciding whether the market is on a straight winner path or drifting towards a void/50-50 outcome if the match is interrupted.[2][3]

The main catalysts are operational rather than narrative: official order-of-play updates, court delays, retirements, and whether the match completes inside the seven-day settlement window. Tennis.com and SofaScore both carried the fixture as a live ATP Challenger Plovdiv match, while FanDuel’s listing placed it for 22 June, giving traders a practical cross-check on whether the event has started on schedule or been pushed back.[4][7][3] In a programmatic workflow, the safest trigger is to watch match-state changes, not headlines: if a winner is recorded, settle to that player; if the match is abandoned or slips beyond the allowed delay without a winner, the contract moves to 50-50 under the stated rules.

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 Polymarket Bot UK, which mirrors the Polymarket order book directly.

Resolution & payout

Polymarket-based markets settle through the UMA Optimistic Oracle on Polygon. A proposer submits the outcome, a two-hour challenge window opens, and unchallenged proposals finalise the resolution. Payouts settle automatically in USDC the moment the result is final — no bookmaker, no delay.

Kalshi-based markets settle in USD via the CFTC-regulated clearinghouse. Betfair Exchange settles in GBP/EUR net of commission. Manifold is play-money and does not pay out real funds.

FAQ

Where can I trade this market with the lowest fees?

On Polymarket Bot UK, 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.

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 Polymarket Bot UK?

Zero. Polymarket Bot UK 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.