On-chain data and reports from The Block challenge claims that a prominent Polymarket whale engaged in insider trading ahead of The New York Times Senate polls, revealing instead a pattern of directional wagers by an established account that had recently absorbed heavy losses.
The controversy began on November 6, when The New York Times detailed transactions placed on Polymarket just moments before the publication of its own Siena College tracking numbers for the United States Senate elections, journalducoin.com reported.
Data from Vanderbilt and The Block
Researchers at Vanderbilt University flagged a wager of $191,277 placed primarily in the early hours of October 31 on the victory of Senator Pete Ricketts in Nebraska. Exactly one hour later, at 5:05 a.m. New York time, a Times/Siena survey placed the incumbent six points ahead. That position returned a profit of more than $77,000.
A second deployment involved $622,608 committed to Michigan before a poll favored Democrat Abdul El-Sayed, netting over $180,000. Brett Goldstein, who co-directs predictive market research at Vanderbilt’s national security institute, stated that the timing involved a series of circumstances difficult to attribute to coincidence. The New York Times noted it could not determine whether the trader held non-public information.
The Trader Named dubdubdub2
The Block identified the wallet behind the trades as “dubdubdub2.” The account carried an extensive transaction history rather than belonging to an anonymous newcomer.
Records show the entity previously wagered roughly $1.05 million on Zohran Mamdani during the 2025 New York mayoral race. The same wallet lost $783,000 on Hyperliquid during the 26 hours leading up to its election bets. Observers noted that this financial trajectory differs sharply from the profile of a secure insider.
| State | Wager Amount (USD) | Timing | Profit (USD) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nebraska | $191,277 | October 31 | $77,000+ |
| Michigan | $622,608 | October 31 | $180,000+ |
Experts View Michigan Position as Directional Speculation
The Michigan position was executed entirely on October 31 through two distinct splits: $349,135 on a Democratic victory outcome, alongside $273,473 against a Republican win. Two academic experts pointed toward straightforward directional speculation as the primary driver.
Rajiv Sethi, an economics professor at Barnard College, viewed the activity as standard directional betting. Vincent Grégoire of HEC Montréal identified no clear evidence of wrongdoing in the transaction flow. Meanwhile, The Block disputed a separate figure cited by the Times regarding WLFI token purchases from the same wallet, reducing the estimated share from one-third down to roughly six percent of October 2024 sales.
Polymarket stated that it flagged the transactions immediately and launched an internal review. Rival platform Kalshi declined to comment on the matter, though The Block estimated that separate trades totaling $153,000 occurred on Kalshi within ten minutes of the Nebraska poll release.
The broader regulatory environment remains tense for prediction platforms. In April, the U.S. Department of Justice indicted a soldier over $409,881 in Polymarket wagers tied to classified briefings. The Commodity Futures Trading Commission secured $172,000 in August from a former White House teleprompter operator regarding Kalshi bets.
With the Michigan market handling roughly $7.9 million overall through election day, Polymarket faces mounting pressure to demonstrate the integrity of its odds.
