Image Credit: Shutterstock
- An on-chain review has complicated suspicions that a Polymarket trader profited from unpublished election polls.
- The account recorded about $180,800 in realized profit across two Michigan Senate positions purchased before a poll was published.
- What the trader knew before placing those bets remains in question according to the article.
An on-chain review has complicated suspicions that a Polymarket trader profited from unpublished election polls. The Block linked the bets to dubdubdub2 and traced its wider trading history.
Public Polymarket data confirms substantial earlier bets and purchases worth more than $622,000 on Michigan’s Senate race. What the trader knew before placing those bets remains in question.
Large Senate Bets Landed Before Polls Became Public
Vanderbilt University researchers flagged roughly $191,277 backing Nebraska Republican Pete Ricketts before an Oct. 31 poll showed him ahead. Their findings appeared in a New York Times report alongside the Michigan bets.
Polymarket’s activity records show dubdubdub2 bought approximately $349,135 of shares backing a Democratic Michigan victory at 07:27 UTC on Oct. 31. It then spent about $273,473 betting against a Republican victory at 09:20 UTC. Both purchases supported the same outcome.
The account ultimately recorded about $180,800 in realized profit across those two Michigan positions. Its Nebraska positions generated roughly $77,100, showing why the trades attracted attention.
The Michigan poll was published at 00:53 UTC on Nov. 2, more than a day after those purchases. The Times acknowledged that Michigan polling was still underway when the trader bet. The account then held its positions through the election instead of selling when the polls appeared.
Earlier Bets Were Already Worth Six and Seven Figures
The account’s older activity changes the picture considerably. Its public trading history shows approximately $1.05 million spent backing Zohran Mamdani in New York City’s 2025 mayoral election, plus about $102,500 betting against Andrew Cuomo in the same contest.
The Mamdani position was built through 64 purchases between Sept. 16 and Oct. 21, 2025. Buying began on the day the account joined Polymarket and continued for more than five weeks.
Another position put roughly $130,700 against the San Francisco 49ers winning the 2026 Super Bowl. So, although the Senate bets were large, taking substantial positions was already familiar territory for this account.
Its recorded trading history contains 97 purchases across seven market contracts and no sales. It also records redemptions for the positions, supporting a pattern of waiting for settlement.
The three older positions produced about $147,400 in combined realized profit. With the Senate results included, the account’s public profile now displays approximately $405,300 in lifetime profit.
Possible Kalshi Bets Came After Nebraska’s Poll Release
The Block also traced connected transfers toward Zero Hash, a payment provider Kalshi uses for crypto deposits. Comparing transfer amounts and timing with market activity, it identified approximately $153,000 of possible Nebraska purchases about 10 minutes after the poll became public.
That connection is less certain. Kalshi’s public trade records do not identify individual account holders, and the relevant deposit arrived around 50 minutes before those purchases. The money could have funded other trades.
Polymarket Allows Private Research but Bans Misused Confidential Information
Polymarket’s rules distinguish between an information advantage and misuse of confidential material. They prohibit trading on information obtained in breach of a duty of trust, including tips from someone known to owe that duty.
However, the platform expressly permits traders to commission their own election polls and use the results. It also allows trading based on privately developed models built from public information. Knowing more than other traders does not, by itself, violate those rules.
Polymarket says it monitors unusual trading and can ban wallets, take legal action or refer matters to law enforcement. The company said it detected the trades immediately and was investigating.
Vincent Grégoire, a finance professor at HEC Montréal, described the missing evidence:
“[…] you have to know who was trading and on what information.”
