5Dimes keeps deleting my wagers for no real reason

[bubba]

So if the market on a 2 outcome event is -150; +130 and a book has inadvertently posted -111; +130 they should pay whichever side wins? Madness.

Thats not the same as having a 30 way market and expecting a player to differentiate between -110 and -150.

Your example, Im ok witht them cancelling, but really, how often can a book make such drastic error like that? once a year tops? Build better software if not. And yes, Id prefer them paying out even such a wager and booting whoever bets it. An average joe may think just the other line is bad and my side is ok in yopur example. (its obvious either the -111 or the +13o is off but not which side). But i get them cancelling it.

[Barrakuda]

I'm not a fan of rewarding people for effectively spotting a spelling mistake.

Agree 100%!

[PaperTrail07]

I am if they inform the book I also feel that people that find the mistake should be tipped Not saying they deserve it 100%....but they are not taking a shot at the book and stopping others from doing it all while correcting someone else's error....

Agree 100%!

[semibluff]

Thats not the same as having a 30 way market and expecting a player to differentiate between -110 and -150.

Your example, Im ok witht them cancelling, but really, how often can a book make such drastic error like that? once a year tops? Build better software if not. And yes, Id prefer them paying out even such a wager and booting whoever bets it. An average joe may think just the other line is bad and my side is ok in yopur example. (its obvious either the -111 or the +13o is off but not which side). But i get them cancelling it.

I totally agree that it's not the same thing, and I said so earlier in the thread. However, if someone else posts that -111 instead of -150 should never be voided as a bad line under any circumstances I think it's reasonable to quote their post, highlight the section, detail the consequences, and give them a chance to comment on it.

It's not always clear-cut what a bad line is. I could sit here and say 7.5% of win percentage plus 1.9% percent would constitute a reasonable guideline. (IE +100 would be 50%. 7.5% of 50% would be 3.75%. 3.75% + 1.9% would be 5.65%. Posting that +100 outcome anywhere between 44.35%, [+125.4] and 55.65%, [-125.4], would NOT constitute an error). This would only be a basic line and it doesn't fit total book price margins for the 104.5% head-to-head range and the 120%+ multi outcome range. Again, it's only an opinion as to what might be considered an error.

Posting odds errors is unfortunately very easy. It isn't a software issue but a human issue of someone typing a wrong number or a wrong sequence of numbers in boxes. The more numbers you have to input and the bigger they are the more likely you are to have errors. You're not likely to be typing in -110. you're more likely to be typing 909 in Box A and 1000 in Box B.

[PaperTrail07]

Their system should red flag anything in the 1000's IMO.....adding an extra zero "if human error" can just happen to easily.....+400 into +4000....overall they do a solid job and its part of the game......just don't get excited when you see one lol..

I totally agree that it's not the same thing, and I said so earlier in the thread. However, if someone else posts that -111 instead of -150 should never be voided as a bad line under any circumstances I think it's reasonable to quote their post, highlight the section, detail the consequences, and give them a chance to comment on it.

It's not always clear-cut what a bad line is. I could sit here and say 7.5% of win percentage plus 1.9% percent would constitute a reasonable guideline. (IE +100 would be 50%. 7.5% of 50% would be 3.75%. 3.75% + 1.9% would be 5.65%. Posting that +100 outcome anywhere between 44.35%, [+125.4] and 55.65%, [-125.4], would NOT constitute an error). This would only be a basic line and it doesn't fit total book price margins for the 104.5% head-to-head range and the 120%+ multi outcome range. Again, it's only an opinion as to what might be considered an error.

Posting odds errors is unfortunately very easy. It isn't a software issue but a human issue of someone typing a wrong number or a wrong sequence of numbers in boxes. The more numbers you have to input and the bigger they are the more likely you are to have errors. You're not likely to be typing in -110. you're more likely to be typing 909 in Box A and 1000 in Box B.

[bubba]

I totally agree that it's not the same thing, and I said so earlier in the thread. However, if someone else posts that -111 instead of -150 should never be voided as a bad line under any circumstances I think it's reasonable to quote their post, highlight the section, detail the consequences, and give them a chance to comment on it.

It's not always clear-cut what a bad line is. I could sit here and say 7.5% of win percentage plus 1.9% percent would constitute a reasonable guideline. (IE +100 would be 50%. 7.5% of 50% would be 3.75%. 3.75% + 1.9% would be 5.65%. Posting that +100 outcome anywhere between 44.35%, [+125.4] and 55.65%, [-125.4], would NOT constitute an error). This would only be a basic line and it doesn't fit total book price margins for the 104.5% head-to-head range and the 120%+ multi outcome range. Again, it's only an opinion as to what might be considered an error.

Posting odds errors is unfortunately very easy. It isn't a software issue but a human issue of someone typing a wrong number or a wrong sequence of numbers in boxes. The more numbers you have to input and the bigger they are the more likely you are to have errors. You're not likely to be typing in -110. you're more likely to be typing 909 in Box A and 1000 in Box B.

I stand corrected. -150 instead of -111 should never be enough on it's own to constitue a bad line worthy of cancellation. There needs to be other circumstances, and even then I'm extremely uncomfortable with it

[bubba]

I totally agree that it's not the same thing, and I said so earlier in the thread. However, if someone else posts that -111 instead of -150 should never be voided as a bad line under any circumstances I think it's reasonable to quote their post, highlight the section, detail the consequences, and give them a chance to comment on it.

It's not always clear-cut what a bad line is. I could sit here and say 7.5% of win percentage plus 1.9% percent would constitute a reasonable guideline. (IE +100 would be 50%. 7.5% of 50% would be 3.75%. 3.75% + 1.9% would be 5.65%. Posting that +100 outcome anywhere between 44.35%, [+125.4] and 55.65%, [-125.4], would NOT constitute an error). This would only be a basic line and it doesn't fit total book price margins for the 104.5% head-to-head range and the 120%+ multi outcome range. Again, it's only an opinion as to what might be considered an error.

Posting odds errors is unfortunately very easy. It isn't a software issue but a human issue of someone typing a wrong number or a wrong sequence of numbers in boxes. The more numbers you have to input and the bigger they are the more likely you are to have errors. You're not likely to be typing in -110. you're more likely to be typing 909 in Box A and 1000 in Box B.

Create better software. Make it less easy. Some places I rarely iever see a bad line. Some I see multi9le a week.

[semibluff]

Their system should red flag anything in the 1000's IMO.....adding an extra zero "if human error" can just happen to easily.....+400 into +4000....overall they do a solid job and its part of the game......just don't get excited when you see one lol..

That would flag the majority of errors since most events are 2 or 3 outcome events where win percentages are between 10% and 90%. Flagging a zero too many or too few wouldn't work where their are odds longer than +900. To be honest there's a better software solution that could be applied. If would be pretty easy for the software writers to add an input line at the top of the event where the operator inputs the expected profit margin percent for the whole event and a margin for error. For example if it was a 2 outcome event the default margin would be 104.76% with a 0.7% margin for error. That would flag up a -112; -112 line or a -108; -108 line as being outside the operating parameters. The margin would be machine checked when the event was changed from pending to open. If the operator attempted to go live with a line outside parameters it would be automatically blocked. Obviously on a multi-outcome event the percentage and margin would have to be substantially bigger. It's a pain in the backside but it's doable. It might mean temporarily closing the event when manual changes needed to be made and I don't know how to deal with auto-changes from live betting algorithms/rechecking every fixed time interval...but it would be a start.

[Optional]

If I owned 5dimes, I'd code up a routine that scans all markets and calculates the over-round every 15 mins or so. And just send an alert for anything out of normal range.

I am no more than an amateur coder but could probably do it just using their public live lines feed within a day or so.

I am if they inform the book I also feel that people that find the mistake should be tipped Not saying they deserve it 100%....but they are not taking a shot at the book and stopping others from doing it all while correcting someone else's error....

It's crazy that every accurate report is not given a reward.

Another easy way to help find them in time.

[scottgodson1985]

jj again gtfo outta here u broke loser.

[bubba]

If I owned 5dimes, I'd code up a routine that scans all markets and calculates the over-round every 15 mins or so. And just send an alert for anything out of normal range.

I am no more than an amateur coder but could probably do it just using their public live lines feed within a day or so.




It's crazy that every accurate report is not given a reward.

Another easy way to help find them in time.

Betjamica used to toss a freeplay my way every time like clockwork for every error pointed out. 25$ at a time. Probably got 25-50 ofvthose. Freeplay and a thank you every time. Goes q long way.

[JoeCool20]

So if the market on a 2 outcome event is -150; +130 and a book has inadvertently posted -111; +130 they should pay whichever side wins? Madness.

No, since there is NOTHING that the player can do about it, then they should cheat all the winners out of their money

by calling it a "bad line" and then keep/steal all the losers money.

All the way up until they had cheated/stolen every dollar of every players deposit!

Since you are siding with the S-book when THEY are the one's who made the mistake

and then cheated the player, would that make you happy?

[PaperTrail07]

1000's of free workers scanning every line for an error.....seems legit

If I owned 5dimes, I'd code up a routine that scans all markets and calculates the over-round every 15 mins or so. And just send an alert for anything out of normal range.

I am no more than an amateur coder but could probably do it just using their public live lines feed within a day or so.




It's crazy that every accurate report is not given a reward.

Another easy way to help find them in time.

[Barrakuda]

I am if they inform the book I also feel that people that find the mistake should be tipped Not saying they deserve it 100%....but they are not taking a shot at the book and stopping others from doing it all while correcting someone else's error....

Ideally, yes. In practice, however, some books will flag you as sharp for reporting a bad line. Yes, I have seen it happen.

[PaperTrail07]

You cant win LOL...

Ideally, yes. In practice, however, some books will flag you as sharp for reporting a bad line. Yes, I have seen it happen.

[Wohlford]

All these bets should be action and 5Dimes should re-evaluate their internal processes. A ticket is a contract.