Groupe Amaury, the owner of France Football and organizer of the Ballon d’Or, announced that a complaint is being filed concerning a series of Polymarket bets that predicted the exact order of the award’s top five finishers before the ceremony on October 26.
Betting activity identified
French outlet Upside reported that twelve Polymarket accounts, created between October 1 and October 20, placed a total of $264,000 on markets backing the same order: Harry Kane first, Kylian Mbappé second, Lamine Yamal third, Rodri fourth and Lionel Messi fifth. Seven of the accounts placed no other bets, and six made their first wagers within 15 minutes of account creation.
Financial flows
Upside traced approximately $309,000 deposited into the twelve accounts and about $500,000 withdrawn after the results were announced. The first withdrawal occurred 19 minutes after the rankings were made public, and $374,000 left the platform within three hours. One account, originally identified as kraben006 and later renamed Edgarblade, received its initial funds from Deblock, a French financial app that can identify its customers to authorities. Other accounts were funded through platforms that verify user identities, including Binance, Kraken, KuCoin and Revolut.
Organiser’s response
In a statement, Groupe Amaury said the complaint addresses “allegations of leaks of the results and potentially fraudulent bets” and that investigations are underway to verify the facts and determine any responsibility. Belgian daily La Dernière Heure reported that the complaint was to be filed on a Monday morning, and that France Football has involved police and opened an internal inquiry. No prosecutor has publicly confirmed a complaint, and Polymarket has not commented on the matter.
Context and prior regulatory actions
France’s national gaming regulator ordered internet providers to block access to Polymarket in July, though the location of the bettors remains unclear. Since March, Polymarket’s rules prohibit trading on confidential information obtained in breach of a duty of trust. Similar insider‑betting cases have reached courts in other jurisdictions.
