Maduro Bet Controversy: Bubblemaps Pushes Back on Viral WLFI Insider Claims

Bubblemaps pushed back after analysts claimed a “99% match” linking a Maduro bet winner to politically connected wallets.

One trader made over $400,000 on Polymarket by accurately predicting when Maduro would be captured. Viral on-chain posts linked the trader to WLFI.

However, Bubblemaps claims that exchange timing and wallet matches prove nothing.

Polymarket Maduro Bet Controversy

Blockchain analytics firm, Bubblemaps, responded on social media after on-chain analyst Andrew 10 GWEI raised questions about the Polymarket trader who earned roughly $400,000 by correctly betting on the capture of Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro.

Andrew’s analysis indicated that the trader could be linked to Steven Charles Witkoff, who happens to be the co-founder of World Liberty Financial (WLFI), based on funding patterns traced through Coinbase and a set of wallets with ENS and SNS names that resembled “Steven Charles.”

According to Andrew, two largely inactive wallets funded the Polymarket account shortly before the bets were placed, and each received funds from Coinbase and sent them directly to the platform. One wallet received about 252 SOL from Coinbase, while a similar amount of SOL had been deposited into Coinbase roughly a day earlier from another address.

He described this as a “99% match” and said that the timing, naming conventions, and transaction flow raised the possibility of insider access.

Bubblemaps Debunks Link

Bubblemaps, however, rejected that conclusion and said that the logic behind the alleged connection was flawed and being amplified beyond what the data could support. The firm said labeling a single address pattern as a “99% accurate” match was misleading, while noting that thousands of wallets could display similar behavior when filtered by comparable amounts and broad timing windows.

It also dismissed the significance of a one-day gap between deposits and withdrawals at a centralized exchange, arguing that such delays are common and do not indicate coordination or shared ownership.

Bubblemaps further pointed out that the analysis focused only on SOL inflows, even though exchange deposits can be made in other assets such as USDC or ETH. When those assets and equivalent dollar values are included, the firm said multiple additional matches emerge within the same one-day timeframe.

Bubblemaps explained that exchange funding can come from bank transfers, bundled transactions, or funds deposited long before the observed activity, none of which were excluded in the claims circulating online.

“Timing analysis is powerful, but when used poorly it can lead to almost any conclusion. Drama is more tempting than truth. Watch out.”