Cancelled NHL futures bets @ 5Dimes

[DontTailMe]

Let me just say that I find the idea that 5Dimes had a "technical issue" which caused the line to go in the wrong direction when OP bet it to be laughable. This is a core function of their site that seems to work just fine 99.9% of the time.

See below. OP said he saw the odds at higher values on successive days. He did not say that he watched the odds go up as he placed successive bets. In fact, he says the exact opposite of this. He clearly states that he bet a line down from +3500 to +1800 (BTW, this kind of movement is not at all abnormal if you have a marked account and are betting on futures at 5Dimes).

It's much more likely that other forces were causing the line to move in between OP's betting sessions. One of those forces could have been human error.

Bet it initially at 1700 + 1800. day or 2 later saw it at 2500-2700 and bet it again. day after that it moved to 3500 and bet it a few more times until it was back down around 1850 or so. Didn't bet it again after that and then got emails the following day all of my bets made in that 3 day time frame were cancelled.

[spicyyyyy]

yes, i aspire to never be held responsible for my mistakes also.

wish i could plaster this on the forehead of every person defending books that cancel bets after negligence.

[spicyyyyy]

I love how all of this is over future bets on a team that hasn't won the cup in 53 years, just fired their coach, sit outside of the playoffs and have no defense whatsoever.

))))))

[spicyyyyy]

Let me just say that I find the idea that 5Dimes had a "technical issue" which caused the line to go in the wrong direction when OP bet it to be laughable. This is a core function of their site that seems to work just fine 99.9% of the time.
See below. OP said he saw the odds at higher values on successive days. He did not say that he watched the odds go up as he placed successive bets. In fact, he says the exact opposite of this. He clearly states that he bet a line down from +3500 to +1800 (BTW, this kind of movement is not at all abnormal if you have a marked account and are betting on futures at 5Dimes).

It's much more likely that other forces were causing the line to move in between OP's betting sessions. One of those forces could have been human error.

but sir, "mistakes" tho....lol joke

[Shifty]

Sadly 5 Dimes is turning into a book that can't be trusted. Definitely not bad lines. You'll find differences like that every day. Maybe they got hit a few times more than they wanted. Then their linesman woke up.

[ace7550]

It would be nice to hear from SBR on this. There has been quite a bit of threads about 5D lately and all of them have been negative. There is another thread about how they freeroll their client's bitcoin deposits:

https://www.sportsbookreview.com/forum/sportsbooks-industry/3576922-5d-skims-144-my-3000-deposit-today.html

They haven't done anything exceptionally bad, but they are no longer behaving like an A+ book. They are ranked the same as Heritage, BetOnline, Bookmaker. They shouldn't be. Maybe at one time they were but not anymore. I think an A- rating would be more appropriate.
How many negative experiences does it take to downgrade a book?

[milwaukee mike]

Let me just say that I find the idea that 5Dimes had a "technical issue" which caused the line to go in the wrong direction when OP bet it to be laughable. This is a core function of their site that seems to work just fine 99.9% of the time.

See below. OP said he saw the odds at higher values on successive days. He did not say that he watched the odds go up as he placed successive bets. In fact, he says the exact opposite of this. He clearly states that he bet a line down from +3500 to +1800 (BTW, this kind of movement is not at all abnormal if you have a marked account and are betting on futures at 5Dimes).

It's much more likely that other forces were causing the line to move in between OP's betting sessions. One of those forces could have been human error.

what in the world could've caused the line to go up to +3500? someone sharp (marked account as you said) would've had to keep max betting the NO up to -5500 lol

i've seen it with my own eyes multiple times at 5dimes, so it's certainly not "laughable" to think that their line movement software was flipped... heck, just look at their alternate lines on any given day and you'll eventually see some +450 that should be -450

[semibluff]

Let me just say that I find the idea that 5Dimes had a "technical issue" which caused the line to go in the wrong direction when OP bet it to be laughable. This is a core function of their site that seems to work just fine 99.9% of the time...

I don't know why this would be laughable. SBR posts accurate lines 99.9% of the time. However, SBR has a clear and obvious error on its Classic Odds page for Bet365 on NFL games 'post kickoff'. Every single post kickoff NFL line for Bet365 is wrong on that platform. The Bet365 line is correct on the NEW SBR odds page. Moreover the posted Bet365 closing price changes many, many times in the hours after kickoff. SBR is coping data from page to another and there's an error in the copy address coding. Why is it so inconceivable that 5Dimes has a similar problem?

That said this issue pops up far too often with 5Dimes. They ought to be on top of it by now.

[DontTailMe]

what in the world could've caused the line to go up to +3500? someone sharp (marked account as you said) would've had to keep max betting the NO up to -5500 lol

i've seen it with my own eyes multiple times at 5dimes, so it's certainly not "laughable" to think that their line movement software was flipped... heck, just look at their alternate lines on any given day and you'll eventually see some +450 that should be -450

This is not very hard to do at 5Dimes. Their prop/future lines react dramatically to sharp betting action.

[milwaukee mike]

This is not very hard to do at 5Dimes. Their prop/future lines react dramatically to sharp betting action.

yes but given these 2 choices

1) someone actually wanted to max bet that toronto would NOT be the champs multiple times up to -5500, and nobody else bet the other side on the way up other than OP... and 5dimes just randomly cancelled OP's bets because they felt like it lolol
2) the software had the same glitch that many of us have seen multiple times, and 5dimes cancelled OP's bets because the line movement was flipped

i think that #2 is at least 99%

[Poisec]

If they really voided a bet at +2500 that "should have been" at +1700 then it's a dirty move from them IMO. It's not like they will lose a lot of money with such bet anyway.

[SnakesPicks]

They should have just honored the bets. No way Toronto is going to win the cup.

[milwaukee mike]

If they really voided a bet at +2500 that "should have been" at +1700 then it's a dirty move from them IMO. It's not like they will lose a lot of money with such bet anyway.

they probably wouldn't have cancelled a stand-alone bet... but $3000 at an average of +3000? if a fair no-juice line is +1700 then they just lost around $1500 by accepting those based on a glitch

[semibluff]

they probably wouldn't have cancelled a stand-alone bet... but $3000 at an average of +3000? if a fair no-juice line is +1700 then they just lost around $1500 by accepting those based on a glitch

$3000 at +3000 would be like taking the $3000 at +1700 and then giving the customer $1290 to bet at +1700, (or the book hedging $1290 at another book to cover the extra potential loss). It's not cost free. +3000 would be normally be a clear and obvious error.

+2500 could be a clear and obvious error. On the other hand it could be within an acceptable odds range. It depends on the specific circumstances. If the odds range offered by other books was +1200 to +1700 then +2200 and upwards would generally be considered a bad line. If the line offered by other books was +1700 to +2200 then +2800 would probably be thought of as the maximum price range. Without context or 5Dimes showing the odds for those outcomes were incorrectly taken from another event line then a decision to void bets would be questionable. I certainly wouldn't be happy if it was my bet that was voided.

[DontTailMe]

$3000 at +3000 would be like taking the $3000 at +1700 and then giving the customer $1290 to bet at +1700, (or the book hedging $1290 at another book to cover the extra potential loss). It's not cost free. +3000 would be normally be a clear and obvious error.

+2500 could be a clear and obvious error. On the other hand it could be within an acceptable odds range. It depends on the specific circumstances. If the odds range offered by other books was +1200 to +1700 then +2200 and upwards would generally be considered a bad line. If the line offered by other books was +1700 to +2200 then +2800 would probably be thought of as the maximum price range. Without context or 5Dimes showing the odds for those outcomes were incorrectly taken from another event line then a decision to void bets would be questionable. I certainly wouldn't be happy if it was my bet that was voided.

See, I even disagree with the bolded. The difference between +1700 and +2200 is 1.2% worth of implied probability. The difference looks large because of the format of American odds, but it's really not, especially for futures where "true" probability is very uncertain and wide odds ranges can be found all the time.

Also, you're saying the range of odds at "other books" is +1200 to +1700. But 5Dimes is part of the betting ecosystem, so you could just as easily say the range is +1200 to +2200. 5Dimes isn't some huge outlier in this example.

[milwaukee mike]

See, I even disagree with the bolded. The difference between +1700 and +2200 is 1.2% worth of implied probability. The difference looks large because of the format of American odds, but it's really not, especially for futures where "true" probability is very uncertaina nd wide odds ranges can be found all the time.

Also, you're saying the range of odds at "other books" is +1200 to +1700. But 5Dimes is part of the betting ecosystem, so you could just as easily say the range is +1200 to +2200. 5Dimes isn't some huge outlier in this example.

totally agree

it wasn't the difference of odds, it was what caused the line to move the wrong direction imho

if the line moved because of bets on the other side then 5dimes would have no reason to cancel, they would be covered on each side and would be making the juice

[semibluff]

See, I even disagree with the bolded. The difference between +1700 and +2200 is 1.2% worth of implied probability. The difference looks large because of the format of American odds, but it's really not, especially for futures where "true" probability is very uncertaina nd wide odds ranges can be found all the time.

Also, you're saying the range of odds at "other books" is +1200 to +1700. But 5Dimes is part of the betting ecosystem, so you could just as easily say the range is +1200 to +2200. 5Dimes isn't some huge outlier in this example.

It's not about the difference in implied probability. It's about how far removed a price is on a basic price chart. There's no hard and fast rule but a general guideline is 2 steps beyond the best possible price is likely as far as any book would accept an error. If the price range is from 6/5 to 6/4 then you can make a case for 13/8 and 7/4 not being a clear error. You're not going to be paid at 15/8. If the price range is from 60/1 to 125/1 you can argue about 150/1 and 175/1. On a very lucky day you might get 200/1. I don't see a book honouring 250/1 and that's a price differential of just 0.4% on the top price. Just my opinion.

[DontTailMe]

Implied probability is very important because it can demonstrate that a book is measuring "obvious errors" by an impossible standard.