Granby: Daniel Milavsky vs Duncan Chan

Platform comparison

Market context

Daniel Milavsky faces Duncan Chan in a Granby Challenger match originally slated for 13 July 2026, with the contest now carrying a 100% implied probability that Milavsky will advance. Initial odds favoured Milavsky at 1.50 against Chan’s 2.375, aligning with Tennis Tonic’s prediction that he wins in three sets [1]. This near-certainty mirrors historical patterns in lower-tier Challenger events where one player’s superior recent form or surface adaptation creates a decisive edge, often pushing crowd-implied probabilities to extremes before the match begins.

Traders should monitor official ATP Challenger tour updates for any postponement beyond the seven-day settlement window or cancellation notices, as these would trigger a 50-50 resolution. With the match date now two days past its original schedule, the primary catalyst is confirmation of play or a formal delay announcement from tournament officials. No recent news source has reported a cancellation, but the delay itself introduces uncertainty that platforms like Kalshi or Betfair might price differently than Polymarket, depending on their fee structures and KYC thresholds.

Polymarket’s decimal odds format expresses this 100% probability as a single point, whereas Kalshi and Smarkets often use implied probability percentages that can reveal subtle divergences in risk assessment. Books diverge notably on fee treatment: Polymarket typically charges no trading fees but may impose withdrawal costs, while Betfair and Smarkets apply commission on winnings, affecting net returns even on near-certain outcomes. For this specific market, the 100% YES price suggests minimal arbitrage opportunity across platforms, though fee differences could still impact final payouts for large positions.

Sources: 1

Methodology

This page compares Granby: Daniel Milavsky vs Duncan Chan specifically across Polymarket, Kalshi, Betfair Exchange and Smarkets. The live probability is the Polymarket mid; the comparison columns summarise each venue's fee structure, KYC, settlement currency and payment rails. Every CTA routes to Robinhood Prediction Markets, which mirrors the Polymarket order book at 0% fees.

Resolution & payout

Polymarket settles via UMA Optimistic Oracle on Polygon. A proposer posts the outcome with a bond, the two-hour window runs, then the smart contract pays USDC.

Kalshi settles USD through the CFTC-regulated clearinghouse — the cleanest variant, with heavier KYC. Betfair Exchange settles in account currency (GBP/EUR), net of 2-5% commission. Smarkets follows the same model as Betfair with a lower default 2% commission.

FAQ

Polymarket vs Kalshi — which is better?

Depends on your location. Kalshi is CFTC-regulated, US-only with full KYC. Polymarket is global, on-chain, no KYC up to $1,500. Polymarket has ~10x higher liquidity but higher regulatory risk.

What does Polymarket cost vs Kalshi?

Polymarket: 0% fees, only Polygon network costs (~$0.01/trade). Kalshi: up to 7% per trade plus spread. For high-frequency traders, Polymarket is dramatically cheaper.

Which platform has the deepest liquidity?

Polymarket — by a wide margin. Top markets reach $50-500M volume, Kalshi ~$200M cumulative, Betfair similar. Deeper liquidity means your trade moves the quote less.

Is Betfair a Polymarket alternative?

Only partially. Betfair Exchange is UK-focused with a sports-betting emphasis; they have politics markets but with thinner liquidity than Polymarket. Settlement in GBP/EUR, 2-5% commission on winnings.

What about Smarkets as an alternative?

Smarkets is a UK betting exchange with a lower default commission (2%) than Betfair. Liquidity on political markets is below Polymarket, comparable to Kalshi. Geo-blocked in many jurisdictions.