5dimes lowering odds after game

[bubba]

Yeah I don't think you are bashing. Just trying to understand.


As long as I have been doing this job, fair industry practice among offshores is that errors spotted before an event should be cancelled and the player advised so they can rebet if they choose.

If after the event then the book has to still payout but revalue the bet to "correct" odds.

This really has appeared to result in the fairest outcomes most of the time when issues come up.


As far as the other side must be given something too. It's more complicated than that in practice.

1) If it's an obvious error, there usually is no-one, or almost no-one, betting the other side.

2)Books don't always do market wide adjustments. They can often just pick out those that have hit bad lines in the past and re-adjust those accounts manually. In order to "pay the other side" there, they would have to them penalize all the other players who won as well.

3) If it's a bad line that occurs in a multi-runner market, how do you go about adjusting all the other runners fairly?


As long as the book is genuinely fair when exercising the rule, then this works fairly for both books and us honest players.

And it's not like you hear of too many people complaining about re-grades over the years.

I have been wagering offshore for i dunno 15 years or longer. I have probably had hundreds of wagers cancelled by "bad lines". I happen to bet a ton of props which makes a "bad line" even harder to define. Anyway, I have had 100+ wagers cancelled before the event started. A few cancelled during the event (unacceptable). Not 1 wager I have ever placed has been "re-adjusted" to market odds after the wager. At least not to my knowledge.

I think the 1st thing we gotta do is define bad line. If these lines were +20,000 instead of +200, im ok with readjusting even weeks later. if these lines were +280 instead of +200, i find it to be thievery. This bad line rule should only be for obvious errors. And when i say obvious, i mean blatantly obvious. too many books rated A through F will cancel lines that should never be cancelled in the 1st place.

[Barrakuda]

Its actually advantageous to the player. Its a good gesture by the book doing this. I read so in this thread.

Clearly. I certainly don't mean to question SBR's motives. LOL.

SBR's playbook is about as predictable as Mike McCoy's:

Poster posts legitimately concerning incident about a sponsor book.
[Checks annual income at risk by denigrating said book].
Sees >= 6 figures.
Waits a few days.
Posts a very generic response saying they have looked into the incident and all is well.
Ignores all future questions about said response.
Enlists Optional to chime in that it's actually not all that unusual for an A+ book to engage in [F behavior].
Waits indefinitely (months, if necessary) until the thread finally burns out, even though every single poster disagrees with the book and SBR.

I mean, it works, in a way. Sad, though.

[Barrakuda]

And it's not like you hear of too many people complaining about re-grades over the years.

That's because no reputable book does it. And certainly not two weeks after the fact.

You're in protect-at-all-costs mode, and it's painful.

[Optional]

That's because no reputable book does it. And certainly not two weeks after the fact.

You're in protect-at-all-costs mode, and it's painful.

Not really.

I'm just refusing to make assumptions about the bets involved.

I get that it looks weird. But also think the OP would have explained more if it he was clearly wronged. So am just being open minded. Same as I try to be with most players who look sus at first too.

[cincinnatikid513]

i'm curious what sport he was betting on was it a major sport or some obscure stuff like darts european volleyball

[moojoo]

If i bet at -300 at 5D and all other books give -200,should they pay me difference?

[sadekmeister]

Here's some more details.
Yes, I'm an arber. My account went through a couple levels of limitations and since the beginning of November my bets are also delayed before accepting. Lately I had extremely good run at 5dimes and been requesting withdrawals 2 times per month since some time to reduce my exposure there. Latest withdrawal request triggered additional account review and resulted with these adjustments in my balance (they didn't inform me straightly about that, just sent mail with message similar to that you can read in the topic).
All bets adjusted were on obscure markets: Japan Basketball, Rugby Friendlies, Finnish Volleyball, AHL, French Basketball 2nd Division, Polish Volleyball, Brazil Volleyball.
Odds were changed this way:
1,909 -> 1,571
1,571 -> 1,476
3,2 -> 2,8
1,952 -> 1,8
1,606 -> 1,526
1,869 -> 1,357 (don't know how they calculated this one)
3,1 -> 2,85
4 -> 3,5
One bet was also described as backward line, but it wasn't for sure backward - they just had handi set on other line than Pinnacle, but ok - I could understand voiding it.
The problem with so small markets like these is that often only couple of bookmakers offer it and it's hard to define that mythical "fair market price", especially when one big bet can drop the line massively because of low limits.
Now I'm wondering if I'd stick only to bigger markets, they'd play fair and stop these kind of shady tricks.

[lonnie55]

Odds were changed this way:
1,909 -> 1,571
1,571 -> 1,476
3,2 -> 2,8
1,952 -> 1,8
1,606 -> 1,526
1,869 -> 1,357 (don't know how they calculated this one)
3,1 -> 2,85
4 -> 3,5
.

so no obvious errors, what a joke

The problem with so small markets like these is that often only couple of bookmakers offer it and it's hard to define that mythical "fair market price", especially when one big bet can drop the line massively because of low limits.

yeah, you're right but most markets even the smallest ones have at least 5-10 books offering odds nowadays. so the fair way to judge about your bet is to compare your price with the average price on the market at the point you placed your bet. it's not a big thing actually. if your price is not an obvious error the bet must stand.

[Shifty]

Thanks for the update. You are 100% right. 5 Dimes screwed you. Those markets are so thin their "fair market price" argument is way too subjective. You book a bet, you pay the bet.

[Grumsi]

Here's some more details.
Yes, I'm an arber. My account went through a couple levels of limitations and since the beginning of November my bets are also delayed before accepting. Lately I had extremely good run at 5dimes and been requesting withdrawals 2 times per month since some time to reduce my exposure there. Latest withdrawal request triggered additional account review and resulted with these adjustments in my balance (they didn't inform me straightly about that, just sent mail with message similar to that you can read in the topic).
All bets adjusted were on obscure markets: Japan Basketball, Rugby Friendlies, Finnish Volleyball, AHL, French Basketball 2nd Division, Polish Volleyball, Brazil Volleyball.
Odds were changed this way:
1,909 -> 1,571
1,571 -> 1,476
3,2 -> 2,8
1,952 -> 1,8
1,606 -> 1,526
1,869 -> 1,357 (don't know how they calculated this one)
3,1 -> 2,85
4 -> 3,5
One bet was also described as backward line, but it wasn't for sure backward - they just had handi set on other line than Pinnacle, but ok - I could understand voiding it.
The problem with so small markets like these is that often only couple of bookmakers offer it and it's hard to define that mythical "fair market price", especially when one big bet can drop the line massively because of low limits.
Now I'm wondering if I'd stick only to bigger markets, they'd play fair and stop these kind of shady tricks.

100% proof of criminal activity. No bad lines, just plain thievery.

We will have to stand up against those sort of thievery and demand higher standards in protecting us (the players), or this will become the future normative for books. Everyone who knows what I am saying they should withdraw money from 5Dimes now and never look back, we have to play at books that have much much higher standards than this. This was a "F rated" book criminal actions and we should find a way for 5Dimes to pay for this.

What else can we do?

[moojoo]

What a asshole book,cant believe this sh#t really happening. How the hell are they A+ with that attitude?

[lonnie55]

What a asshole book,cant believe this sh#t really happening. How the hell are they A+ with that attitude?

[Vadym]

Here's some more details.
Yes, I'm an arber. My account went through a couple levels of limitations and since the beginning of November my bets are also delayed before accepting. Lately I had extremely good run at 5dimes and been requesting withdrawals 2 times per month since some time to reduce my exposure there. Latest withdrawal request triggered additional account review and resulted with these adjustments in my balance (they didn't inform me straightly about that, just sent mail with message similar to that you can read in the topic).
All bets adjusted were on obscure markets: Japan Basketball, Rugby Friendlies, Finnish Volleyball, AHL, French Basketball 2nd Division, Polish Volleyball, Brazil Volleyball.
Odds were changed this way:
1,909 -> 1,571
1,571 -> 1,476
3,2 -> 2,8
1,952 -> 1,8
1,606 -> 1,526
1,869 -> 1,357 (don't know how they calculated this one)
3,1 -> 2,85
4 -> 3,5
One bet was also described as backward line, but it wasn't for sure backward - they just had handi set on other line than Pinnacle, but ok - I could understand voiding it.
The problem with so small markets like these is that often only couple of bookmakers offer it and it's hard to define that mythical "fair market price", especially when one big bet can drop the line massively because of low limits.
Now I'm wondering if I'd stick only to bigger markets, they'd play fair and stop these kind of shady tricks.

If this is true I am sure SBR will help you to return your money back. And I hope 5d will give more information about this case, otherwise it's 1xbet level of business.

[KVB]

Here's some more details.
Yes, I'm an arber. My account went through a couple levels of limitations and since the beginning of November my bets are also delayed before accepting. Lately I had extremely good run at 5dimes and been requesting withdrawals 2 times per month since some time to reduce my exposure there. Latest withdrawal request triggered additional account review and resulted with these adjustments in my balance (they didn't inform me straightly about that, just sent mail with message similar to that you can read in the topic).
All bets adjusted were on obscure markets: Japan Basketball, Rugby Friendlies, Finnish Volleyball, AHL, French Basketball 2nd Division, Polish Volleyball, Brazil Volleyball.
Odds were changed this way:
1,909 -> 1,571
1,571 -> 1,476
3,2 -> 2,8
1,952 -> 1,8
1,606 -> 1,526
1,869 -> 1,357 (don't know how they calculated this one)
3,1 -> 2,85
4 -> 3,5
One bet was also described as backward line, but it wasn't for sure backward - they just had handi set on other line than Pinnacle, but ok - I could understand voiding it.
The problem with so small markets like these is that often only couple of bookmakers offer it and it's hard to define that mythical "fair market price", especially when one big bet can drop the line massively because of low limits.
Now I'm wondering if I'd stick only to bigger markets, they'd play fair and stop these kind of shady tricks.

Thanks for posting, these were the kinds of questions folks wanted answered.

Did you file an SBR complaint?

[lonnie55]

JJ you missed this thread

[KVB]

...One question I didn't see...were these adjustments triggered when the player made a withdrawal request? Perhaps there was a specific account review and these adjustments only applied to this player after the fact.

I thought this might be the case.

This is interesting thread. I wonder if the book would add to its written rules just how they determine fair market prices, especially on markets like these.

Just what type of consensus or what set of books are they "averaging" to determine the fair market, again especially with these bets.

Buy writing rules like the book has, they now have an obligation to define "fair market"...I would think.

[Wohlford]

Any updates on 5Dimes' blatant and petty thievery?

[lonnie55]

Any updates on 5Dimes' blatant and petty thievery?

see #72

[KVB]

Not really.

I'm just refusing to make assumptions about the bets involved.

I get that it looks weird. But also think the OP would have explained more if it he was clearly wronged. So am just being open minded. Same as I try to be with most players who look sus at first too.

This really isn't much to turn into an argument so I'm not really trying to argue, also, I think you are in a frame of mind like us that something is amiss.

But, I think you are making assumptions (granted, not about the bets involved). You are in the industry on a side that would see this if it occurs, so I must be wrong, but I still challenge the notion that this is a common practice of any kind.

Like I said, you would see it or hear about it more than me given your position, but be realistic and really assess just how many times you've seen this occur.

Is that screenshot legit, is that what happened? Because, especially due to the dates involved, something is not common.

Something like this could lead to at least an informal consensus to what we can define as the fair market at any given time.

This incident, triggered by a withdrawal request and not another type of review, deserves much more discussion.

Don't you think?

[Optional]

Not at all KVB.

And I don't think it's worth discussing it AT ALL with people who seem so keen to attack me personally or would scream a -110 to -175 bad line is obvious pure theft.

Let them yell into the void as long as they like.

Ya feel me?

[KVB]

Not at all KVB.

And I don't think it's worth discussing it AT ALL with people who seem so keen to attack me personally or would scream a -110 to -175 bad line is obvious pure theft.

Let them yell into the void as long as they like.

Ya feel me?

Yeah, I fell you there.

But I don't necessarily mean your discussion, I just mean a discussion in general in the industry.

For some of those games, 5 D is one of the most widely available books to even carry a line, I think. Maybe Asian books have more volume on them.

Regardless, I wonder what they were using as a basis for a fair market.

Maybe it's time to define a fair market, even if the definition varies based on the sport or type of bet.

Players could possibly view what would be fair, even before placing the bet.

Not that many would...lol.

But if I were venturing into those markets with my business, even if limits are low, I would want to know who the credible or accountable line maker or book is, even if it's many.

All we see here is a book saying they are not responsible for credibility or accountability when it comes to the line they hang, and a rule written that makes it clear that is the case.

I've always wondered, when the public parking lot has a sign that says "not responsible for items lost or stolen from vehicle."

I've always wondered if that was a green light for the parking attendant to steal from cars without liability...

[Optional]

I get the theoretical problem KVB.

After years and years and years of the exact same rule, I don't see a problem though.

I said before I trust 5Dimes to make good decisions.

That's pretty much my position here.

Do I know why this guy was pegged out for this? No. But it meets their rules and it's only a few bucks so is hardly life changing so like I said before, I am not too worried about this case or the issue in general.

[KVB]

Yeah, and the withdrawal triggering the account review does help explain the two weeks.

They should police the markets a little better to pick up on these things when or near when they happen. You would think that account reviews digging up some issues would imply there are many more issues not found.

That's about all I can suggest at this point.

Do you think the other sides of the bets, other accounts, were also adjusted, once they discovered the discrepancies?

[Optional]

I went into a bit of detail about the "other side must be adjusted" thing on previous page.

[bubba]

I get the theoretical problem KVB.

After years and years and years of the exact same rule, I don't see a problem though.

I said before I trust 5Dimes to make good decisions.

That's pretty much my position here.

Do I know why this guy was pegged out for this? No. But it meets their rules and it's only a few bucks so is hardly life changing so like I said before, I am not too worried about this case or the issue in general.

In all there years, have they ever done this before? I highly doubt every time they miss a "bad line" after a game they are adjusting the odds. In fact i know they arent doing it every time. So at best, this rule is being applied inconsistently.

And its a horrible , horrible rule. Imagine going to vegas or nj sportsbook with a ticket saying the payout for a wager is $200. They say sorry, bad line. ticket is only worth 185. Only tell you this after the game. there would be outrage and rightfully so.

[Optional]

I can see that point Bubba.

Obviously book it, pay it, is the best way to go. That's not going to happen with offshores though so we have to be realistic.

[bubba]

I can see that point Bubba.

Obviously book it, pay it, is the best way to go. That's not going to happen with offshores though so we have to be realistic.

We shouldnt live in a world where books are nickeling and diming there customers 2 weeks after the fact on lines that are not obviously wrong. I dont understand the markets mentioned here well enough to know what went down, so I am just looking at this from a distance. Its wrong(with the info i have). But i feel it may have actually never happened before and may never happen again. And there is slightly more to this story.

But the idea that 5dimes wouldjust ban a customer they think takes shots on them in obscure markets, instead of retroactively taking 100 dollars from him weeks later? Is that so far fetched?

I can see this rule being applied weeks later on a blatantly obvious bad line. +500 instead of -200. sure. +10,000 instead of +1000? if u must i guess. but -140 instead of -170? thats kinda scary. And I like 5dimes, and feel they do a lot of good but with the facts i see here, this feels really questionable.

[bubba]

honestly, I think its ok for any book to adjust odds before, durring, or after the game starts. But, when placing wagers, I want it noted in big bold letters that the better cant miss. These odds are subject to change before, during or even after event is paid out. At managements discretion of what fair market odds are.


Or put a similar message next to every wager placed. I wouldnt wager a penny at a book that does this, but I think its a fair thing to do.

[relaaxx]

always considered 5dimes the best book for US players. the sportsbooks make all the rules. we have to live with it. you don't like their rules go somewhere else. if they can just do this 2 weeks later the rules suck. we should just leave. hello Heritage.

[Barrakuda]

This [clawing back instead of banning] is a new policy, one that just so happens to coincide with the passing of one of key people at the book. This is significant information, as we have no idea who is managing 5D now or what their new unwritten policies will be.

The "Hey, it's offshore, so I'm not that worried about it" attitude from the rep. of an industry watchdog is lazy. At best.

[Alfa1234]

honestly, I think its ok for any book to adjust odds before, durring, or after the game starts. But, when placing wagers, I want it noted in big bold letters that the better cant miss. These odds are subject to change before, during or even after event is paid out. At managements discretion of what fair market odds are.


Or put a similar message next to every wager placed. I wouldnt wager a penny at a book that does this, but I think its a fair thing to do.

That would be absolutely insane. It would make it impossible to be profitable for any client. Sharp or otherwise. What is the fun in modelling a game, beating the price and then have the book adjust that price again after the game? It would 100% destroy the industry.

I would love to see which games these were. I am under the impression there was probably a fairly big line move, which often happens in these type of basketball games. 5Dimes probably was a little behind (asleep at the wheel) when adjusting the odds and then retroactively did so anyway. I believe that behaviour should be condemned to the fullest, as said before, it opens the floodgates. They are not blatantly wrong odds, they were only slightly adjusted for the most part.

As long as it's not a clear line error (offering +350 instead of +150), but a line where they were simply too slow to adjust odds, the bet should always, always stand and there should not even be a discussion about it IMHO. Imagine WillHill booking Man Utd VS say Wolverhampton tomorrow. Say Wolverhampton is at +600. Then during warmup, 2 key Man Utd players are injured and the Wolverhampton price drops to +400. Do you think those thousands of English punters would accept it if Willhill would simply drop their payout for every ticket booked? No, neither would IBAS and neither should any offshore client. It would be robbery, plain and simple. Or do you even think for 1 second they would also increase the payout for every Man Utd ticket booked? Nope, they wouldn't...and even if they did, by how much? They could add a few ticks to their margin every time. As I said, it opens the floodgates to every form of cheating for books. Doesn't matter if it's a small market or not.

[shari91]

This [clawing back instead of banning] is a new policy, one that just so happens to coincide with the passing of one of key people at the book. This is significant information, as we have no idea who is managing 5D now or what their new unwritten policies will be.

The "Hey, it's offshore, so I'm not that worried about it" attitude from the rep. of an industry watchdog is lazy. At best.

The rule has been listed on their site from at least June 27, 2014 - that's the random date I checked on the Wayback Machine https://web.archive.org/web/20140627.../sb_rules.html - so it's not a new policy from at least that date and is what SBR stated in the original post edit. Whether it's a case of the amounts being so small that no one would bother to start a thread in the past or not I honestly can't say but I highly doubt that anyone at 5Dimes would be making major policy changes right now. I genuinely suspect their mind is on other things than trying to suddenly grab a few bucks. Just my opinion though.

[Alfa1234]

The rule has been listed on their site from at least June 27, 2014 - that's the random date I checked on the Wayback Machine https://web.archive.org/web/20140627.../sb_rules.html - so it's not a new policy from at least that date and is what SBR stated in the original post edit. Whether it's a case of the amounts being so small that no one would bother to start a thread in the past or not I honestly can't say but I highly doubt that anyone at 5Dimes would be making major policy changes right now. I genuinely suspect their mind is on other things than trying to suddenly grab a few bucks. Just my opinion though.

"If a wager with an erroneous line is not voided before the game/play begins, Management reserves the right to remedy the odds to a fair market price which would have been available at the time the wager was placed. This price remedy may be applied during or after an event. Only the odds will be corrected on an erroneous line. The risk amount, applicable spread and total will always remain unchanged. A player will never benefit from betting on a clear erroneous line. Repeat offenders will not be tolerated."

That's the rule from their site. Again, this was most likely not an "erroneous line", but 5dimes being asleep at the wheel. Nothing erroneous about them being too slow to adjust their odds. I reïterate my example above, would you say the Wolverhampton line was erroneous if someone placed a bet on them right before 5Dimes managed to drop those odds? So every steam move should be adjusted from now on? Come on...there is nothing erroneous if a line "was" correct a few minutes or an hour before placing it but simply failed to be adjusted quickly enough after new information or a line movement happened.

I just got a great business idea...I'm going to start offering +110 lines on the spread...take millions in bets and then after the game adjust the line to the "fair market odds" on whatever the winning side was! Woohooo!!! Richess comin' my way! See where I'm going here?

[shari91]

"If a wager with an erroneous line is not voided before the game/play begins, Management reserves the right to remedy the odds to a fair market price which would have been available at the time the wager was placed. This price remedy may be applied during or after an event. Only the odds will be corrected on an erroneous line. The risk amount, applicable spread and total will always remain unchanged. A player will never benefit from betting on a clear erroneous line. Repeat offenders will not be tolerated."

That's the rule from their site. Again, this was most likely not an "erroneous line", but 5dimes being asleep at the wheel. Nothing erroneous about them being too slow to adjust their odds. I reïterate my example above, would you say the Wolverhampton line was erroneous if someone placed a bet on them right before 5Dimes managed to drop those odds? So every steam move should be adjusted from now on? Come on...there is nothing erroneous if a line "was" correct a few minutes or an hour before placing it but simply failed to be adjusted quickly enough after new information or a line movement happened.

I just got a great business idea...I'm going to start offering +110 lines on the spread...take millions in bets and then after the game adjust the line to the "fair market odds" on whatever the winning side was! Woohooo!!! Richess comin' my way! See where I'm going here?

Alfa, unless we missed it in this thread - which is always a possibility with me! - we don't know what these bets were on. I don't know what triggered these bets to be regraded and it seems like I'm wading through a lot of what ifs and anger in here but not a lot of actual facts. Do I believe a steam move made right before a line change should be adjusted? Definitely no but I have no clue if that's the case here and I do stand by what I said in that I do not believe 5Dimes would suddenly start trying to grab what is essentially pennies to them off of clients out of the blue. Some may disagree with my belief in that and that's cool and why this forum is such a great place to bounce ideas off of each other. If we had more facts about what was bet, what was said, etc then I'd feel more confident with my opinion either way but I stand by they're not worried about trying to scam $12 or whatever at the moment. No way.

[bubba]

For better or worse it sounds like Sbr's stance on the issue is "we give 5dimes the benefit of the doubt that they did the right thing here"