Cervia: Andrea Guerrieri vs Max Alcala Gurri

Platform comparison

Active sub-markets

Market context

Andrea Guerrieri and Max Alcala Gurri are listed for an ATP Challenger meeting in Cervia, with the market tied to which player advances. The current crowd-implied probability is 0% YES, which usually reflects either a stale book, a suspended market, or a pricing gap rather than a settled view on the tennis itself. Public score and fixture listings from Flashscore, SofaScore and the ATP Tour head-to-head page all point to the same pairing, while Kalshi’s contract language indicates the relevant outcome is who advances, not just who appears on court.

In comparable Challenger-level markets, pricing often reacts more to whether the match actually gets underway and reaches a result than to broad pre-match reputations. Guerrieri’s recent results on third-party form trackers have been stronger than Alcala Gurri’s in aggregate, which helps explain why a zero-per-cent YES line can be fragile if the market has not updated properly. At this level, abrupt changes are common when a player withdraws, a walkover is announced, or a scheduled start slips beyond the original window.

The key catalyst is whether the Cervia match is officially completed within the settlement period. Traders should watch ATP and live-score updates for any walkover, retirement or rescheduling, and then confirm the scoreline on Flashscore or SofaScore. If the fixture is delayed beyond seven days from the original date without a winner, the contract resolves 50-50; if it begins but is unfinished, the advance condition still matters. In practical terms, the market is leaning on match status more than on pre-match pricing, so the decisive update is likely to come from the tournament schedule rather than from any broader tennis news.

Sources: 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5

Methodology

This page tracks Cervia: Andrea Guerrieri vs Max Alcala Gurri across four political prediction venues. Live odds come from the Polymarket order book (the deepest political prediction-market book). Kalshi is the CFTC-regulated US alternative, Betfair the established UK sports-exchange with politics markets, Manifold the open play-money variant. PolyGram routes every trade through to Polymarket — at 0% fees.

Resolution & payout

For political markets the resolution source is decisive. Polymarket defines a concrete source per contract (e.g. AP, Reuters, official electoral commission) and uses the UMA Optimistic Oracle as the on-chain dispute mechanism. With a clearly defined outcome the USDC payout lands within minutes of the final confirmation.

FAQ

Where can I trade this market with the lowest fees?

On PolyGram, 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.

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.

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.

Do I need to KYC for this market?

Not under $1,500 of lifetime trading volume. Above that threshold, PolyGram triggers a quick verification flow that finishes in minutes.