Forums
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
djx1969.
09 Sep 15 02:45
Joined:
Date Joined: 08 Jan 02
| Topic/replies: 1,260 | Blogger: djx1969.'s blog
Do the right thing and VOID ALL BETS  total total Disgrace and report them both

Post your reply

Text Format: Table: Smilies:
Forum does not support HTML
Insert Photo
Cancel
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 24
By:
jin_kazz
When: 10 Sep 15 11:00
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v7acD4q0lp0
By:
n88uk
When: 10 Sep 15 12:53
Not going to happen. As has been said. The one time they did this, they got hung out to dry when the investigation come back clearing the players of any wrongdoing.
By:
Senyatta
When: 10 Sep 15 18:07
was there much matched on this here? or would most of the bets have been placed in asian bookies? any word on backers have all bets remained settled correctly? the guy who won was almost unbackable. how could anyone back him at 1.3 when he was 2/1 before the off and a set down. even if i knew it was fixed i still couldn't back at that price.
By:
aaronh
When: 10 Sep 15 18:15
500k+ i think matched
By:
aaronh
When: 10 Sep 15 18:16
. how could anyone back him at 1.3 when he was 2/1 before the off and a set down

because the match was crooked
By:
Senyatta
When: 10 Sep 15 18:33
thats a lot for a mickey mouse game during the us open isnt it. so it appears the uk books only realised when the odds went crazy on here. most likely the fixers placed the bets in asia but someone got greedy and came here. probably would have got away with it had they not come on here
By:
mouse trap
When: 10 Sep 15 20:31
over 680K was matched and the details are here - http://www.sportdw.com/2015/09/fix-tennis-nicolas-kicker.html
By:
DStyle
When: 10 Sep 15 22:06
it is not betfair's business to investigate possibly fixed tennis matches and police the integrity of tennis.

it is the utterly hopeless and pathetically ineffectual TIU's job to take money from the ATP to pretend to do this.

they have an MoU with betfair so that betfair can share data with them.
By:
n88uk
When: 10 Sep 15 22:52

Sep 10, 2015 -- 6:33PM, Senyatta wrote:


thats a lot for a mickey mouse game during the us open isnt it. so it appears the uk books only realised when the odds went crazy on here. most likely the fixers placed the bets in asia but someone got greedy and came here. probably would have got away with it had they not come on here


They will get away with it anyway.

By:
tyco161
When: 10 Sep 15 23:18
So in the end the bookies offering fixed odds got done big time. Surely its in the bookies interest to stop this sort of thing? Why would betfair (the exchange) really care. All they are doing is providing a platform... they (BF) are not losing any money. But the high street and Asian bookies are. They should be the ones really causing a stink.
By:
n88uk
When: 10 Sep 15 23:23
Normally most bookies suspend matches like this. I don't know why 365 continued to offer it tbh.
By:
DStyle
When: 10 Sep 15 23:43
now there's a good question.

perhaps the answer is to be found when you ask why they were pricing it up the same as betfair...
By:
tyco161
When: 11 Sep 15 00:18
Fair call DStyle, but surely its not the in play that the bookies get stung on, its those in the know that put money on before the match starts? So bookies get stung big time I would think? Maybe some bookies not even sure they got stung on this one...
By:
jin_kazz
When: 11 Sep 15 00:29
btw, they're acting the same with fixed football. they just lowering the odds.
By:
DStyle
When: 11 Sep 15 00:30
actually no. the whole lose the set go a break down in the 2nd is all about the fixers trying to get the shortest possible odds in play.

the problem is that the true liquidity in these markets is utterly utterly dire, by which i mean how many people are involved and who is prepared to take a normal gambling risk.

it looks good, sure, but that's a fill or kill bot/semi-bot which runs on every market, and sometimes i wonder whether it's really even that interested in getting "genuinely matched".

so when you consider that one party is the predominant counterparty for every else in these markets, particularly from the beginning of a match, it must become startlingly obvious to them that something is amiss very quickly.

there was about 150k matched after the first 4 games when it abundantly obvious what was going on.
By:
DStyle
When: 11 Sep 15 00:31
(i know lapentti didn't go a break down in the second, but it's the boilerplate for all of these fixes)
By:
DStyle
When: 11 Sep 15 00:33
my guess is that the early lapentti break got those in the know crapping themselves and desperate to get on. the cascade of greed alerted the market making bot pronto and from there on in, he stopped pricing it up normally.
By:
tyco161
When: 11 Sep 15 00:48
Cheers for your reasoned response DStyle. I do know if I was fixing I would do it so much differently and not let anyone know but its probably a syndicate type thing with a lot of external factors pressures on the players amongst others...
By:
winningthought
When: 11 Sep 15 01:01
dstyle said: 'it looks good, sure, but that's a fill or kill bot/semi-bot which runs on every market, and sometimes i wonder whether it's really even that interested in getting "genuinely matched".'

Yep, in low liquidity/interest matches the bot actually drive people away.  They must look at the market and say "whats the effing point?". And this is with pictures. I remember when I was a young pup trading off a scoreboard on a Monday or Tuesday on some tier 4 tourney and matching many tens of thousands. Try match the bot these days for a couple of K, and you will only get matched if you are way out of line. It is purely a out-of-the-money scalper with uncanny 'intuition'.

In the age of 'big data' you can bet your last dollar market participants info is shared with 'partners'.
By:
DStyle
When: 11 Sep 15 11:13
i think the issue is concurrency winningthought.

in the "good old days", there was often solid liquidity on a random tier iv match because it was maybe one of two of three matches being played at that time. As such there was a sufficient pool of traders, courtsiders and gamblers prepared to take a real risk, as well as leaving money up for longer than 3 seconds after the conclusion of the point - which is often the case for the fill or kill bot.

Now we have challenger, qualies, challenger qualies, and ITF matches there is just far too much on at once, so the available pool of "real" gamblers and traders are spread incredibly thinly on these second tier matches.

It was something that was obvious for a long time and why we got and continue to get the perennial complaints about grand slam r1 liquidity.
By:
winningthought
When: 11 Sep 15 19:22
I think that is definately a big factor, along with PC and the betfair ban in certain countries. Henceforth, The Glut Factor. Ironically, I get matched far more readily in the first round of the slams then I would in some of smaller tourneys all week.

Anyway, I still maintain the bot is ultimately a detriment to liquidity, but to what extent I do not know.
By:
Senyatta
When: 11 Sep 15 21:35
great article. fair play to the blogger. if i was lapentti i would have deliberately started to miss.
By:
aaronh
When: 21 Jun 18 06:49

Sep 10, 2015 -- 12:53PM, n88uk wrote:


Not going to happen. As has been said. The one time they did this, they got hung out to dry when the investigation come back clearing the players of any wrongdoing.


The curse is so real

By:
Help2
When: 23 Jun 18 16:37
kicker have been banned right?
sort by:
Show
per page

Post your reply

Text Format: Table: Smilies:
Forum does not support HTML
Insert Photo
Cancel
‹ back to topics
www.betfair.com