This bettor wins 92% of resolved bets and is up $250k lifetime. They have traded 26 related events with the same 92% hit rate, suggesting a real sports edge. They bought No at 88%, and the market has already moved to 92% in their direction.

Part of: CA Vélez Sarsfield vs. Gimnasia y Esgrima de La Plata

Will CA Vélez Sarsfield win on 2026-05-10?

9 smart money signals detected, totaling $75,441.

Categories: Sports, Games, Soccer, Argentina Primera División

Notable Trades

92% winner buying No

Sharp sports bettor with a 92% resolved win rate and strong cross-market history bought No at 88%, now already moved to 92%.

This bettor wins 92% of resolved bets and is up $250k lifetime.
They have traded 26 related events with the same 92% hit rate, suggesting a real sports edge.
They bought No at 88%, and the market has already moved to 92% in their direction.

$1,616 on No | Wallet win rate: 94%

Profitable serial sports trader

A very high-volume serial sports trader with positive lifetime P&L bought No at 85¢ into a sharp move that has already reached 90¢.

This bettor has traded nearly 39,000 resolved markets and is up about $546k lifetime.
They bought No at 85¢ and the market has already moved to 90¢ in their direction.
The No side jumped sharply, including a 10.5-point move in about 3 minutes.

$1,013 on No | Wallet win rate: 55%

Profitable serial sports bettor

A highly experienced and profitable serial cross-market bettor bought No on Vélez with supporting pre-event volume spike and price movement.

This bettor has traded 38,580 resolved markets and is up about $572K lifetime.
They bought No at 51¢, and the market has already moved to 55¢ in their direction.
Volume jumped 36x before the match, with a quick 10-point move toward No.

$2,515 on No | Wallet win rate: 55%

Profitable serial sports whale

High-volume serial sports trader with $2.1M lifetime profit made a $22k No bet alongside a sharp pre-event volume spike and rapid move toward No.

This bettor is up $2.1M lifetime across more than 26,000 resolved bets.
They put $22k on No at 51¢, and the market has already moved to 55¢.
Volume spiked 36x before the match, with a rapid price move in the same direction.

$22,133 on No | Wallet win rate: 55%

Profitable serial sports bettor

A highly profitable serial cross-market trader bought Yes on a soccer match amid a major pre-event volume spike, though the position is currently slightly underwater.

This bettor has won 63% of 302 resolved trades and is up $1.77M lifetime.
They are a major cross-market trader with $1.38M flagged across 143 events, suggesting a repeatable sports-betting process.
Market volume spiked 24.5x before the match, adding support to the Yes position despite the price dipping from 49¢ to 45¢.

$1,245 on Yes | Wallet win rate: 63%

95% winner buying No

Surfacing because this is a proven sports bettor with a 95% historical win rate and strong cross-market record buying No with meaningful size.

This bettor has won 95% of 281 resolved positions and is up about $430K lifetime.
They are a serial cross-market sports trader with 388 events tracked and a 95% win record.
The $3.4K buy on No came at 51¢, implying they see Vélez failing to win as mispriced.

$3,362 on No | Wallet win rate: 95%

Profitable serial sports bettor

Sharp serial cross-market bettor with a 78% resolved win rate and $108k profit bought No on Vélez Sarsfield at 51¢.

This bettor wins 78% of resolved trades and is up $108,655 lifetime.
They have traded across 62 events with the same strong 78% hit rate, suggesting a repeatable sports edge.
The No price moved up quickly around the trade, and entry at 51¢ implies a near-even-money copy opportunity.

$2,617 on No | Wallet win rate: 78%

Sharp cluster buying No

Four wallets bought $30.6k of No together, including two high-edge profitable bettors with 95% and 78% win records, amid a sharp pre-game volume spike and price move.

A bettor who wins 95% of resolved positions and is up $430k joined this No side.
Four wallets bought $30.6k of No at 51¢, pushing the market to 55¢.
Volume spiked 24.5x before the match, with multiple serial sports traders aligned on the same outcome.

$30,627 on No

Profitable serial sports trader

Serial cross-market trader with a large profitable history is buying Yes at near-even odds in a reasonably liquid soccer market.

This bettor has a long track record: 302 resolved bets, 63% wins, and about $1.77M in profit.
They have traded across 142 events, suggesting a repeatable sports-betting process rather than a one-off bet.
They put $10.3K on Yes at 49¢, implying they see Vélez as better than a coin flip.

$10,312 on Yes | Wallet win rate: 63%

Top Holders

0xdb22...6478 — Outcome 11067322, $169,999 (63% win rate)
0x7236...ea53 — Outcome 45371134, $1,600 (83% win rate)
0x8f28...ff9a — Outcome 45371134, $1,225 (98% win rate)
0xbe7e...6d00 — Outcome 11067322, $1,200 (48% win rate)
0x0267...7f7e — Outcome 11067322, $1,130 (66% win rate)
0xe471...34c0 — Outcome 11067322, $210
0xf39a...fe47 — Outcome 11067322, $162
0x059d...10e3 — Outcome 11067322, $100
0xf4d5...13ee — Outcome 11067322, $100
0x03ba...beba — Outcome 11067322, $71

Related Theses

Covers 1 related market

Covers 3 related markets

Will CA Vélez Sarsfield win on 2026-05-10?

ResolvedCA Vélez Sarsfield vs. Gimnasia y Esgrima de La Plata$75,441 tracked9 signalsSportsGamesSoccerArgentina Primera División

In the upcoming game, scheduled for May 10, 2026 If CA Vélez Sarsfield wins, this market will resolve to "Yes". Otherwise, this market will resolve to "No". If the game is postponed, this market will remain open until the game has been completed. If the game is canceled entirely, with no make-up game, this market will resolve "No". This market refers only to the outcome within the first 90 minutes of regular play plus stoppage time. The primary resolution source for this market is the official statistics of the event as recognized by the governing body or event organizers. However, if the governing body or event organizers have not published final match statistics within 2 hours after the event's conclusion, a consensus of credible reporting may be used instead.