Smarkets took 33483 EUR from my account

**SBR Forum** · 03-28-16, 07:42 AM

Hi lukaszs,

Thanks for sharing with the board. How off-market was each bet? Can you share the wagering tickets?

**dealer wins** · 03-28-16, 10:05 AM

As Smarkets is a betting exchange, surely it doesnt matter if the odds were wrong by any amount?

Their rules state clearly that bets once matched cannot be voided due to pricing/input errors?

It is obvious that one of their insiders or market makers screwed up and they are happy to go against their own rules, which in my book makes them rogue.

**lukaszs** · 03-28-16, 10:21 AM

Originally posted by SBR Forum

Hi lukaszs,

Thanks for sharing with the board. How off-market was each bet? Can you share the wagering tickets?

Hi,
Each offer was a client's mistake in the same way. For example I matched 1.4 lay draw offer when average market price was over 3.00. So each bet was significatly off-market.But bets from 10th of March were settled and paid by them. Those from 19th of March were voided. All of bets were out of line in the same way.

Smarkets betting markets are full of lay trap offers over 100.00 where average market price is significantly lower.They accept these offers. I had to pay for every single mistake in the exchanges. Smarkets is an exchange, not a bookmaker and it doesn't matter if odds are 1.01 or 100. That's why I feel treated in an unfair way.

So for example I layed draw priced 1.39-1.41 and then hedged my profits by backing draw priced 3.3-3.5. There were a lot of bets in each of mentioned markets. I have the screenshots. I could share them with you but I'm not sure if public forum is a good place to do it.

**lukaszs** · 03-28-16, 11:03 AM

Please look at the attached immages. I hope resolution is good enough too see details.
1003.jpg is a summary of market from 10th of March ( market settled 12th of March, everything went ok)
1903.jpg is a summary of markets from 19th of March (markets settled but money debited after that)

Attached Files

**SBR Forum** · 03-28-16, 11:20 AM

Originally posted by dealer wins

As Smarkets is a betting exchange, surely it doesnt matter if the odds were wrong by any amount?

Their rules state clearly that bets once matched cannot be voided due to pricing/input errors?

It is obvious that one of their insiders or market makers screwed up and they are happy to go against their own rules, which in my book makes them rogue.

Dealer wins,

It is tough to speculate from what what's been shared so far. We've reached out to Smarkets for comment.

Playing the hypothetical game, it is also possible that there is a suspicion of a pattern of abuse, or a way of moving funds between accounts by putting up offers too ridiculous to be true or wagered on by others, for instance. It looks like this was more than just a one-off, so we really need more data and for both sides to provide as much information as possible.

OP, in case Smarkets cannot match up your forum post to your account handle, please submit a complaint form with your account number.

**lukaszs** · 03-28-16, 12:02 PM

SBR Forum,
Thank you for quick reply.

I just filled a complain form. I want to make sure that Smarkets doesn't act against their own rules. Their reasoning (price out of line and good or bad faith) didn't convince me at all. If they are Exchange they should act like a Exchange.The rules from their T&C need to apply equally to everyone.

**Optional** · 03-28-16, 03:34 PM

I have spoken to another Smarkets arber recently who is worried about the issue too.

From speaking to him it appears either one or more of their market maker's scripts has been acting up or the Pinny feed they use to set their offers has caused issues.

Basically there has been a bunch of instances of the odds being reversed on markets in recent weeks and after someone started a thread about it on Arbusers every Tom, Dick and Harry has been trying to exploit it.

I told this guy I agreed it appears against the Smarkets terms but if he was going to target obvious errors like that as a playing strategy I was sure they would invoke the term that you are not playing in good faith and close the account.

Not sure of the right and wrong... Smarkets cant work if the market makers are allowed to be bled to death from obvious errors.

**lukaszs** · 03-28-16, 04:23 PM

Originally posted by Optional

Smarkets cant work if the market makers are allowed to be bled to death from obvious errors.

And who will care about me if I match horribly highpriced lay order that market makers offer? Can I request to void bets? Please look at Smarkets betting markets. They are full of trap offers. Is placing such orders in the market playing in good faith?
Even if market maker did these betting mistakes, we should be both treated in the same way because we both are clients for Smarkets.

**Optional** · 03-28-16, 04:40 PM

Originally posted by lukaszs

And who will care about me if I match horribly highpriced lay order that market makers offer? Can I request to void bets? Please look at Smarkets betting markets. They are full of trap offers. Is placing such orders in the market playing in good faith?
Even if market maker did these betting mistakes, we should be both treated in the same way because we both are clients for Smarkets.

Obviously we all agree on that, rules should be rules for all. You need to read the rest of my post to put that one line in proper context though.

I hope you end up getting paid but honestly, if you choose to slam a big bet down on what is very obviously an error, personally I am not going to feel very sorry for you if you don't either.

You chose to take an obvious risk, now you are watching the dice roll to see how it plays out.

Good luck to you with it

**dealer wins** · 03-28-16, 06:37 PM

Re The pinnacle aspect, Matchbook copy Pinnacle lines for some sports but their market makers dont put their cash up until the Pinny line has matured for a while and hence avoid inverted and incorrect odds.

If the Smarket guys did put up incorrect odds due to copying an early Pinny incorrect line then TOUGH, the bets should stand!

**Grivas_Digeni** · 03-28-16, 11:48 PM

If Pinnacle gives an early basketball side +11 instead of -11 and gets some action before the error is discovered, would you expect to be paid on your +11? If not, why would you expect to be paid having +200 instead of -200 on a similar error?

How long was each of the incorrect smarkets lines available for betting? A few seconds or several hours? Is there a chance they suspected chip dumping/money moving between accounts?

**Optional** · 03-29-16, 12:07 AM

Originally posted by Grivas_Digeni

If Pinnacle gives an early basketball side +11 instead of -11 and gets some action before the error is discovered, would you expect to be paid on your +11? If not, why would you expect to be paid having +200 instead of -200 on a similar error?

How long was each of the incorrect smarkets lines available for betting? A few seconds or several hours? Is there a chance they suspected chip dumping/money moving between accounts?

it's not quite the same as taking a shot at Pinny. At an exchange everyone is supposed to be equal.

His complaint is that if he made an error reading the Pinny lines and accidentally took 30k worth of bets at silly odds, then Smarkets would not help him, so why should they help the person on the other side of his wager this time.

If they are not going to pay him they really should be able to give a proper answer to that.

**lukaszs** · 03-29-16, 01:19 AM

Originally posted by Grivas_Digeni

How long was each of the incorrect smarkets lines available for betting? A few seconds or several hours? Is there a chance they suspected chip dumping/money moving between accounts?

We are talking about seconds.

I'm not sure if there was some problem with copying odds from Pinnacle' searly markets. Some lines were matured (I matched bets the same day that game was played).

**hooo** · 03-29-16, 03:48 AM

you placed bets in play? or after the events finnished and their markets failed to close?

**lukaszs** · 03-29-16, 03:53 AM

Originally posted by hooo

you placed bets in play? or after the events finnished and their markets failed to close?

All bets were placed before starting of the games.

**hooo** · 03-29-16, 04:11 AM

before the game? such disreptancies in odds? lay 1.4? back 3 a couple minutes later?

was this just at the point of turning into in-play or why such gaps?

**lukaszs** · 03-29-16, 04:28 AM

Originally posted by hooo

before the game? such disreptancies in odds? lay 1.4? back 3 a couple minutes later?

was this just at the point of turning into in-play or why such gaps?

The incidents happened few hours and even 2 days before games. Some Smarket's client put this order into the market (lay 1.4 when average market price was over 3.0)
And you asked why.. We should ask this client who did it. If I put wrong order in the market and this order is matched then nobody will ask me about reasons. It's a nature of exchanges that market determines prices.

**hooo** · 03-29-16, 04:35 AM

i agree

two days lol, that's a long time

and such differences in odds, that bot screwed up big time. i mean if the price is 3, how can it offer 1.4? at first i though those were remnants from previous trades and sometimes prices don't move until fully matched, i am sure you know the situation, but if this was going on so much prior to the game, then i don't see it as possibility

somebody made a mistake, and if it was really A USER that layed at 1.4 then there is absolutely no reason for a void

and if it was mistake by a bot then the company who made the bot should be held responsible

this is like banks and tax payers giving them money .... socializing the losses .... what are you asking for a bail out, smarkets?

if your programmers made a mistake, hold THEM RESPONSIBLE not us

**lukaszs** · 03-29-16, 05:31 AM

In reference to SBR article about my case I want to be precise as much as possible. Smarkets sent me an email that my account is suspended and bets from these 4 markets will be voided. It was before starts of the games. But in that moment 2 of 4 markets were hedged by me already in Smarkets and I had guaranteed profits there (all green situations). In two others markets I was in perfect situation to green up my trades as well. Their system settled bets from all 4 markets correctly, money was credited to my Smarkets account and then they manually voided my trades. After that they reopened my account.

**dpeti** · 03-29-16, 08:40 AM

Befair offered a "wrong" market some years ago.
They offered half time total as full time total on 1 basketball match.

Total was about 100 points. I made a mistake did not noticed that this was full time and not half time.

Other bettor "offered" a price about 2.5 on Under , so I placed a bet on Under 100 @ 2.5 . (arbitrage on half time )

After i realized that this was full time not half time i asked betfair to void/cancel my bet , but they refused it.

Betfair said that it would be not fair with the other bettor. (It was a trap , not good faith but betfair insist. )

I think smarket void your bets because there was no other player/bettor on the other side, it was smarket itself, and they wont let anybody to go away with their money it there was a bug in their system.

(fairlay does the same to cover its position by placing the same bet on pinnacle sports, earlier i noticed it when i placed a bet on fairlay, pinnacle odds immidiatley decreased as i placed my bet directly on pinnacle )

**Pareto** · 03-29-16, 08:51 AM

Betfair have in the past also voided bets when a bot have gone crazy and offered weird odds.

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2012/mar/24/betfair-punters-voler-la-vedette

Punters hoping to force Betfair to pay out millions in the Voler La Vedette case have been rebuffed by the Independent Betting Adjudication Service

**dpeti** · 03-29-16, 08:58 AM

Originally posted by Pareto

Betfair have in the past also voided bets when a bot have gone crazy and offered weird odds.

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/201...ler-la-vedette

May case was in 2012 too. I placed my bet on full time total under 66.5 (ncaa)

Betfair:
>
> After consulting with our market operations team they have confirmed that they have no intentions of voiding bets on this market.
>
> I can appreciate that this decision will be frustrating, however, the market is valid and all bets placed on this market will stand.
>
> I apologise that we cannot facilitate your request on this occasion.

**SBR Forum** · 03-29-16, 09:45 AM

Smarkets has made comment to SBR.

"We are aware of the posts that have been made on SBR and are in communication with the customer in question. We can say that it is only in extreme circumstances, where obvious and significant mistakes are exploited in bad faith, may bets be investigated and voided."

Smarkets has said that they will cooperate fully if the player decides to pursue his complaint with the Malta Gaming Authority, but has declined to discuss the case further with us, which is their right.

**lukaszs** · 03-29-16, 11:03 AM

I was expecting something more than declining to discuss case further with SBR. I was hope to find out all these extreme circumstances from their statement.
The stament is very short but as you see the only reasons for them to void my bets are betting mistakes(I still don't know who made this mistake) and bad faith. Good and bad faith: these expressions are not adequate in combination with betting exchage. If they use bad faith expression in my case, how do they call highpriced lay or lowpriced back orders which the market makers put on the market?

**dpeti** · 03-29-16, 11:41 AM

Originally posted by lukaszs

I was expecting something more than declining to discuss case further with SBR. I was hope to find out all these extreme circumstances from their statement.
The stament is very short but as you see the only reasons for them to void my bets are betting mistakes(I still don't know who made this mistake) and bad faith. Good and bad faith: these expressions are not adequate in combination with betting exchage. If they use bad faith expression in my case, how do they call highpriced lay or lowpriced back orders which the market makers put on the market?

betfair:

Suppose tennis match score at the moment : 6:4 5:4 (total already over 18.5) but you can still place bets on total under 18.5 on the offered price, most cases this price is 100 or more. (The outcome already decided it will be over 18.5 )
What is this if not bad faith from the bettor who offers a price 100 on an already decided market (total 18.5)?
But your bet never will be voided if you place it on under 18.5.

If betfair does not void these kind of bets then i think smarkets also should not void bets saying bad faith.

**dealer wins** · 03-29-16, 12:13 PM

Sorry I am 100% with the player on this, as voiding the bets contradicts Smarkets own rules, is unethical and rouge behaviour.

The problem is with the person, bot or Smarkets offering out of line odds, simple as that.

If the OPs bets had lost I can GUARANTEE they would not be voided 100%.

**Foxx** · 03-29-16, 01:41 PM

Originally posted by dpeti

I think smarket void your bets because there was no other player/bettor on the other side, it was smarket itself, and they wont let anybody to go away with their money it there was a bug in their ststem

Yep, spot on.

**dealer wins** · 03-29-16, 02:32 PM

Lesson here is to avoid Smarkets.

**pjesnik24** · 03-29-16, 03:57 PM

they should pay the bets or close the exchange and open a sportsbook

**neofen** · 03-29-16, 04:09 PM

What smarkets actually says is that if you are coming on an exchange and want to win then you have bad faith lol. Its like saying Germany is evil because they did not let Honduras to win the world cup.

**Foxx** · 03-29-16, 04:41 PM

Originally posted by lukaszs

If they use bad faith expression in my case, how do they call highpriced lay or lowpriced back orders which the market makers put on the market?

They call it a double standard.

Myself, I have been on the right side and wrong side of plenty of exchange betting oopsies. I always chalk it up to assumed risk of participating on an exchange. As for rogue bots, bots can give you an immense edge. The flip side of that is sometimes they go rogue and you can lose your shirt. If you use bots and are going to reap the rewards, you need to accept the losses when they go rogue. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

**tradeout** · 03-29-16, 06:27 PM

Originally posted by dealer wins

If the OPs bets had lost I can GUARANTEE they would not be voided 100%.

The OP's bets could not lose. He exploited the loophole - layed a bet at ridiculously low odds and, as soon as smarkets readjusted the odds, he 'greened out' Notice how OP didn't 'arb' those bets at a different exchange or sportsbook, cause that would be a risk, while 'greening out' was risk free.

Not siding with anyone, just stating the obvious

**Foosball Champ** · 03-29-16, 07:37 PM

I am sorry. this is a huge black eye for Smarkets. they are completely in the wrong here. if you don't see it that way then you just aren't paying attention.

**Optional** · 03-29-16, 08:13 PM

Originally posted by neofen

What smarkets actually says is that if you are coming on an exchange and want to win then you have bad faith lol. Its like saying Germany is evil because they did not let Honduras to win the world cup.

Targeting a technical error to exploit, rather than using the exchange to gamble, is what could be called acting in bad faith.

Taking the wrong odds here and there when you see them on an exchange is not betting in bad faith. Chasing errors as your primary purpose for using Smarkets is.

But as they have not said that is the case, I'd have to assume the OP is just a regular arber chasing the best bet/lays wherever they appear.