Loading
Daily market read
Certainty reflects how much of this market we measured, not how good the market is.
Some quality checks score low, so the rating is held at its floor even though the price is easy to trade and the data is fresh.
Use only as a review target. Current-card issues must clear before this price is used as evidence.
The diligence packet carries the memo language, audit chain, and the Markdown, PDF, and JSON exports for this market.
Open the diligence packetWhy this rating
Composite 51 · Do not cite
Measurement certainty
Low
1 measured · 3 modeled · 2 not assessed
Certainty reflects how much of this market we measured, not how good the market is.
No full-provenance CME signal is linked to this condition in the current ledger window; absence of a signal is not proof of coherence.
Resolution rules
Rules as stated by Polymarket, reproduced verbatim. Convexly has not independently reviewed them and does not endorse them; the rating's resolution-reliability pillar treats rule text as present but not independently reviewed.
This market refers to the tennis match between Bernard Tomic and Masamichi Imamura in the Zhangjiagang, originally scheduled for August 30, 2026 at 10:00PM ET. This market will resolve to 'Bernard Tomic' if Bernard Tomic advances against Masamichi Imamura. This market will resolve to 'Masamichi Imamura' if Masamichi Imamura advances against Bernard Tomic. If the match is canceled (not played at all), ends in a tie, or a winner has not been determined by September 13, 2026, 11:59 PM ET (14 days after the scheduled start), this market will resolve to 50-50. If the match begins but is not completed, and one player advances due to the opponent's retirement, default, or disqualification, this market will resolve to the player who advances. If the match ends in a walkover (player withdraws before the start and the other advances automatically), this market will resolve to 50-50. The primary resolution source will be official information from the ATP Tour. A consensus of credible reporting may also be used.
Experimental rating caveat
Market Trust Cards are experimental market-quality diagnostics, not compliance certifications or validated credit ratings.
What travels with this read
Market Trust is a canary preview: verdict cutpoints are operator-set, and each read is a dated, descriptive diagnostic of market quality, not a prediction of the outcome and not a claim about what the probability should be. A prospective calibration test is filed and matures on resolved outcomes.
Sign in to see recent trades our collectors observed here: side, size, price, and time for every recorded fill.
Create a free accountNone of the wallets in Convexly's provably-complete set has been observed trading this market. That is a statement about this set's observed footprint, not about who trades here.
Check any Polymarket wallet →Quote it verbatim. The number and how the set was chosen travel together; the method is frozen and the per-wallet table is public.
Convexly rates this polymarket market "Zhangjiagang: Bernard Tomic vs Masamichi Imamura" as Do not cite, as of 2026-09-01 (UTC).
Per Convexly Market Trust, the polymarket market "Zhangjiagang: Bernard Tomic vs Masamichi Imamura" is rated Do not cite as of 2026-09-01T03:45:11.684Z (UTC). The rating describes whether the quoted market price was a clean enough data object to cite at that timestamp. This citation is market diligence, not investment advice, not a trading instruction, not a forecast, and not proof that the market probability is correct. Daily read: https://www.convexly.app/markets/atp-tomic-imamura-2026-08-30
Canonical URL: https://www.convexly.app/markets/atp-tomic-imamura-2026-08-30
Boundary of this page
This daily read is market diligence, not investment advice, not a claim of absolute truth, and not proof that any trader should buy or sell. It answers whether this market price had enough substrate to cite, monitor, discount, or ignore at the as-of timestamp, with receipts attached in the diligence packet.
Executability scored as worse-of(spread, depth) from a single orderbook snapshot; the two were merged from the former liquidity + depth pillars to stop double-counting one correlated source.
Resolution source and rule text are present but not independently reviewed.
Participant flow inputs exist but do not meet identity-coverage floors; descriptive only.
One or more screen indicators flagged at a low level. A reason to look, not a finding about anyone.
3 linked artifacts; 0 missing hashes; 0 stale/failing sources.
How it adds up: composite = Σ(score × weight) / Σ(weight) across measured + heuristic pillars only. Pending and data-rights-blocked pillars are excluded from both numerator and denominator. Total contributing weight = 70.0.
Caveat: 2 pillars not assessed yet; the score will recompute as the substrate fills in.
Convexly is independent and is not affiliated with or endorsed by Polymarket or Manifold. Wallet and market data are derived from publicly available venue sources.
© Convexly 2026