To oczywiste, kto jest zwycięzcą.

Here to works like it / this / that in a general statement. In Polish, sentences like To ważne, To ciekawe, To oczywiste are very common and mean It’s important, It’s interesting, It’s obvious.

So To oczywiste is basically It’s obvious.

Because oczywiste agrees with to, which is treated as neuter singular in this kind of structure.

The adjective oczywisty has these basic forms:

• oczywisty — masculine
• oczywista — feminine
• oczywiste — neuter

So:

• To jest oczywiste = It is obvious

Yes, you can think of it that way. Polish often omits jest (is) in short present-tense statements of this type.

So both are possible:

• To oczywiste.
• To jest oczywiste.

The version without jest is very natural and common. The version with jest can sound a little more explicit or emphatic.

Because kto jest zwycięzcą is a subordinate clause, and Polish normally separates subordinate clauses with a comma.

So the structure is:

• To oczywiste,
  • kto jest zwycięzcą

This comma is standard Polish punctuation.

Because this part means who the winner is, which is an indirect question, not a regular that-clause.

Compare:

• To oczywiste, kto jest zwycięzcą. = It’s obvious who the winner is.
• To oczywiste, że on jest zwycięzcą. = It’s obvious that he is the winner.

So kto is used when the clause itself expresses who the person is.

Because after jest, the predicate noun is very often in the instrumental case in Polish.

So:

• dictionary form: zwycięzca = winner
• instrumental singular: zwycięzcą

That is why we say:

• On jest zwycięzcą. = He is the winner.
• Kto jest zwycięzcą? = Who is the winner?

Because some Polish masculine personal nouns end in -a. This is a normal pattern.

Other examples:

• mężczyzna = man
• kolega = male friend / colleague
• poeta = poet

So even though zwycięzca ends in -a, it is not automatically feminine. It is a masculine personal noun pattern.

Polish has no articles, so it does not have separate words for a and the.

Whether English should use a winner or the winner depends on the context. In this sentence, the natural meaning is the winner, because the clause is about identifying a specific person:

• kto jest zwycięzcą = who the winner is

So the definiteness is understood from the situation, not from an article.

Yes, Polish word order is fairly flexible, but the given sentence is the most neutral and natural order.

• To oczywiste, kto jest zwycięzcą.

You may see other orders in special contexts for emphasis, but they can sound more marked or literary. For a learner, the given version is the best standard pattern to use.

It is basically neutral standard Polish. It works well in both speech and writing.

It sounds a little more polished than a very casual sentence like:

• Wiadomo, kto wygrał. = It’s obvious who won.

But To oczywiste, kto jest zwycięzcą is completely normal and natural Polish.