Polymarket faces credibility questions after controversial rulings on several markets that have cost traders millions.
Venezuela Market Sparked Rules Fight Over “Invasion” Definition
Polymarket ruled that the U.S. did not invade Venezuela despite a military operation involving 150 aircraft from 20 bases that killed 100 people and extracted the country’s head of state.
The market resolution sparked backlash from traders who pointed to Polymarket’s own rules.
The platform’s rules stated the market would resolve “Yes” if the U.S. “commences a military offensive intended to establish control over any portion of Venezuela.”
Trump explicitly said in multiple interviews including The New York Times that “the United States now runs Venezuela” and would continue running the country for years.
The market initially spiked from 2.5 cents to over 50 cents as Trump kept talking, but Polymarket ruled “No,” claiming Trump equivocated on running Venezuela—a statement traders say the platform made up.
A prominent trader posted that Polymarket “decided their fine print rules are going in the trash” and resolved based on vibes rather than written criteria.
The ruling disproportionately benefited traders in Polymarket’s affiliate program.
Epstein Blackmail Market Resolved Opposite Direction
Two weeks earlier on Christmas Eve, Polymarket took the opposite approach.
The platform expired an Epstein blackmail market based on strict rule interpretation, resolving “Yes” based on a single email that never used the word “blackmail.”
The market traded at 4 cents when it was bought to 99 cents and proposed for “Yes” at 7:30 AM on December 24. Polymarket clarified at 2 PM that the document “detailed qualifying blackmail” despite zero news headlines reporting blackmail evidence was found.
The FBI has stated they haven’t found evidence of Epstein blackmailing.
Polymarket’s own rules required either “clear consensus of credible reporting” or a “direct statement,” neither of which existed.
The inconsistency is stark: Polymarket ignored fine print rules on Venezuela to resolve based on vibes, then strictly interpreted fine print on Epstein to find blackmail that no news organization or law enforcement official agrees with.
Why This Matters For Tariff Market Credibility
The Venezuela and Epstein controversies raise questions about whether Polymarket’s 25% odds on Trump’s tariffs reflect genuine market sentiment or potential manipulation through selective rule enforcement.
The Supreme Court did not issue a ruling Friday on Trump’s tariffs, extending uncertainty over the administration’s use of emergency powers.
Traders betting on the tariff outcome face not just legal uncertainty but also platform resolution risk if Polymarket applies inconsistent standards to determine what constitutes a Trump victory or loss.
Image: Shutterstock
Recent Comments