Polymarket Faces Backlash Over $7M Bet: Mistake or Manipulation?

What Happened

A betting market asked whether the U.S. and Ukraine would sign a rare earth metals deal by April 2025. Even though no such deal exists yet, Polymarket unexpectedly closed the question with a positive outcome. As a result, users who incurred losses expressed frustration and raised concerns about the platform’s event evaluation process.

According to crypto analyst Vladimir S., this incident may indicate a “governance attack.” One of the major token holders of UMA Protocol, with substantial voting power, allegedly influenced the oracles responsible for determining the outcome of the prediction.

Polymarket representatives have acknowledged an issue with the result calculation but have not yet determined the exact cause of the problem.

Related: Polymarket Integrates Solana Deposits Amid Solana’s Rise in Web3

However, some observers offer alternative explanations. A user named tenadome claims that there was no deliberate attack, but rather a miscommunication between UMA and Polymarket. According to him, the situation started as a typical dispute process that was proceeding normally, but just two minutes before the deadline, Polymarket declared a discrepancy. 

Nevertheless, most voters who had mistakenly voted “Yes” chose not to change their votes to avoid automatic penalties for incorrect voting.

I personally think Polymarket is far more at fault here for their last-minute clarification because they should have either clarified much earlier into the commit period or not at all, and there's no real explanation for why they didn't clarify earlier except for them just being understaffed and inattentive on the weekend,

tenadome added.

Community Reaction

The incident has sparked significant backlash within the crypto community. Some believe it was an attempt by major players to manipulate the market and profit from the trust of certain participants, while others attribute it to a technical error and negligence, rather than a coordinated attack.

Despite the strong discontent, Polymarket has taken a firm position: no refunds will be issued for this bet, as the incident is not considered a system failure. Platform representatives describe this situation as a learning experience and plan to implement new monitoring systems to prevent similar issues in the future. 

The scandal surrounding the rare earth metals bet demonstrates that no technology is completely immune to errors or guarantees fairness. As interest in decentralized platforms grows, developers will need to focus more on improving governance systems and protecting against such inefficiencies.

Related: Polymarket Predictions Hit 90% Accuracy — 9 Out of 10 Bets Are Correct