Boston vs Chicago WS
Markets
Every market on this event, moneyline first. Select one to compare it across platforms in the side panel.
| Outcome | Result | Volume | Azuro | Gemini | Kalshi | Limitless | Novig | Polymarket | Polymarket US |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Boston Red Sox Winner | Won | $857.2K | — | — | — | — | — | ||
Red Sox wins by over 4.5 runs | Lost | $20.4K | — | — | — | — | — | — | |
Red Sox wins by over 5.5 runs | Lost | $12.6K | — | — | — | — | — | — | |
Red Sox wins by over 6.5 runs | Lost | $25.8K | — | — | — | — | — | — | |
Chicago White Sox | Lost | $1.2M | — | — | — | — | — |
AI-generated summary, may be inaccurate.
Boston and the Chicago White Sox meet at Fenway Park on July 7, with prediction markets treating this as one of the tightest games on the MLB slate. The headline moneyline market on Kalshi and Polymarket resolves to whichever team wins the game outright, while a large web of Kalshi sub-markets covers run totals, inning splits, run-line spreads, and individual player props for hitters like Ceddanne Rafaela, Wilyer Abreu, Colson Montgomery and Miguel Vargas, plus strikeout and outs-recorded lines for White Sox starter Noah Schultz. Boston sits as the narrow favourite at a 52.6% consensus, priced 52.0% on Kalshi and 52.6% on Polymarket — a cross-platform spread of just 0.6 points and effectively a coin flip. The run environment is expected to be modest: the total runs market prices over 2.5 runs at 89.0%, over 6.5 at 62.0%, and over 8.5 at only 44.0%, implying a projected total near 7. Chicago is given a 68.0% chance to score at least two runs, and Boston 55.0% to clear 3.5. Spread markets lean Red Sox, with Boston -1.5 at 38.0% versus Chicago -1.5 at 45.0% for the White Sox winning by more than 1.5, reflecting Chicago's status as the road underdog with slightly more blowout equity if they win. Player props skew toward Boston's lineup, with Rafaela at 69.0% for two-plus bases and Abreu at 68.0% for a hit. Across platforms, pricing is remarkably tight — Boston is favoured, but only just.
Discussion (0)
Log in to join the discussion.
No comments yet — start the discussion.