|
Matchfixing is a very serious offence and accusations of matchfixing should not be made lightly. Please avoid making accusations against specific individuals unless you have substantial proof, or until further information is released. (0620 KST) |
Do we have a source for the size and number of the bets? All i saw was the twitter guy saying that the bets had to be yay big to move the line so much, but i didn't see any actual proof of the bets existing beyond X therefore Y.
|
On January 21 2015 17:53 Karis Vas Ryaar wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2015 17:50 Magnet wrote:On January 21 2015 17:45 Canucklehead wrote:On January 21 2015 17:42 Magnet wrote:
This smells like bullshit to be honest. There is only one guy "reporting" this and he had a direct hand in telling the company to cancel the bets. He also says it like it is fact, then later says "If I am wrong then I will apologize".
I can't believe how irresponsible this is. No evidence whatsoever, the guy claims San got paid to throw, no evidence, nothing, and already backpedaling. All the guy did was email pinnacle about the suspicious line movement but he has no influence on the outcome after that. Pinnacle comes to their own decision on their own. Still, suggesting how the company should do business and then "report" a match fix later is very, very irresponsible and shady. None of this adds up, and the guy is all over the situation with nothing more than saying the betting lines were weird in a heavily underdeveloped betting market. If you are making accusations like this, it's because you're absolutely sure. You don't say "Sorry San if I am wrong" two posts after you claim it's all for sure match fixing. It's just a dumb move. If you are really concerned about the betting lines, report it anonymously and wait for things to resolve itself. But with how hard this guy is trying to throw himself out there by linking Artosis, Tasteless etc when it comes to serious allegations is like... okay. Doesn't make sense. Why would he even care in the first place and report it to people that aren't even involved, but are noteworthy in the community? to be fair I don't know the guy but if you're a professional or any kind of gambler and you bet on something and you think it's fixed you probably do everything you can to get your money back. and its not like they shut down betting because he told them to. they looked at the data and agreed.
I don't know him either, but why is he acting as if he is reporting it if he is just betting on it, and linking famous SC2 people that have nothing to do with anything on his tweets? The reasonable thing would be to report it to the company and then wait to see what happens instead of dragging San through the mud on every social outlet he can get his hands on. From reading through everything it kind of seems like this guy doesn't really know what he is talking about, has a big mouth and doesn't seem to care that his accusations could cost somebody their credibility or career. All I'm saying is that he doesn't need to thrust himself into this situation like he's some kind of white knight.
Obviously nobody really knows what is going on, but the fact that San is one of the most intelligent progamers out there and that the SC2 betting market is vastly underdeveloped tells me that it's far more likely to be a fluke than anything else. This guy "reporting" this just bugs me and I hate when people brashly throw around these kinds of accusations, not caring what kind of impact it could have on the player, only because they want their 10 seconds of twitter fame. He flat out said "San accepted money to throw a match". You better have some serious shit to back that up if you are making that kind of claim, which he clearly doesn't have.
|
Hope everything turns out fine in the end
|
So, a betting site thinks it's suspicious that bets go heavily in favour of one player. They allow the bets to stand. If Dark loses, they make serious bank. He wins, so they void all bets. I'm pretty sure the only fraud here is the betting site not paying bets it accepted. If I'd wagered any substantial amount of money I'd be looking to sue them.
but hope you will appreciate that protecting the integrity of eSports is of paramount importance.
And by integrity of esports we mean protecting our own money.
|
On January 21 2015 18:56 Subversive wrote:So, a betting site thinks it's suspicious that bets go heavily in favour of one player. They allow the bets to stand. If Dark loses, they make serious bank. He wins, so they void all bets. I'm pretty sure the only fraud here is the betting site not paying bets it accepted. If I'd wagered any substantial amount of money I'd be looking to sue them. Show nested quote +
but hope you will appreciate that protecting the integrity of eSports is of paramount importance.
And by integrity of esports we mean protecting our own money.
PInnacle takes $150000 dollar bets on big sports all the time, the money they stand to lose on this is pennies to them as max bet is only $500 for esports. They are actually protecting the customers that thought san was a good bet due to the odds being messed up from who ever had inside information on dark.
|
And to you use your words if it comes down to Pinnacle's ('the most respectable sport betting bookies') or San's word, a 24 years old progamer who spends 12 hours a day practicing, earning close to 6 figure or more a year risking his entire career for a mere $2k ? I choose San's word any day.
San earns close to 6 figures a year? Source?
Anyway, for some reason you seem to think that Pinnaclesport is this small little bookmaker that is interested in maximizing short-term earnings at the expense of cheating its customers. From my knowledge of the betting industry, I always perceived Pinnaclesports as the largest (western) bookmaker in the world (I could be wrong here though). But regardless, a loss of a couple of thousands dollar is almost irrelevant relative to its total size.
There is no doubt in my mind that we saw very irregular betting behaviours up to the game, which very well could be related to match fixing. But whether that implies San was involved in match fixing is another debate, and it's why an investigation is needed.
|
On January 21 2015 19:41 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +
And to you use your words if it comes down to Pinnacle's ('the most respectable sport betting bookies') or San's word, a 24 years old progamer who spends 12 hours a day practicing, earning close to 6 figure or more a year risking his entire career for a mere $2k ? I choose San's word any day.
San earns close to 6 figures a year? Source? Anyway, for some reason you seem to think that Pinnaclesport is this small little scammish bookmakers, while it probably is the largest (western) bookmaker in the world, and a loss of a couple of thousands dollar is almost irrelevant relative to its total size.
He did win $58,400 in tournaments, maybe with a small salary and sponsor stuff he might have got close to 6 figures in 2014.
|
On January 21 2015 19:46 Faust852 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2015 19:41 Hider wrote:
And to you use your words if it comes down to Pinnacle's ('the most respectable sport betting bookies') or San's word, a 24 years old progamer who spends 12 hours a day practicing, earning close to 6 figure or more a year risking his entire career for a mere $2k ? I choose San's word any day.
San earns close to 6 figures a year? Source? Anyway, for some reason you seem to think that Pinnaclesport is this small little scammish bookmakers, while it probably is the largest (western) bookmaker in the world, and a loss of a couple of thousands dollar is almost irrelevant relative to its total size. He did win $58,400 in tournaments, maybe with a small salary and sponsor stuff he might have got close to 6 figures in 2014.
That's now how you should look at it in this context. Instead, you should look at future potential earnings for San as that is related to how much he has to benefit from being involved in the match fixing. If his future expected career earnings are relatively low, it increases his risk/reward of being involved in match-fixing, which makes it more likely that a player with a low salary is invovled in matchfixing than someone like Flash.
|
On January 21 2015 19:22 sofknrigged wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2015 18:56 Subversive wrote:So, a betting site thinks it's suspicious that bets go heavily in favour of one player. They allow the bets to stand. If Dark loses, they make serious bank. He wins, so they void all bets. I'm pretty sure the only fraud here is the betting site not paying bets it accepted. If I'd wagered any substantial amount of money I'd be looking to sue them.
but hope you will appreciate that protecting the integrity of eSports is of paramount importance.
And by integrity of esports we mean protecting our own money. PInnacle takes $150000 dollar bets on big sports all the time, the money they stand to lose on this is pennies to them as max bet is only $500 for esports. They are actually protecting the customers that thought san was a good bet due to the odds being messed up from who ever had inside information on dark.
I'm always dubious when someone makes a new account to respond to one comment in a thread with over 500 replies.
If someone bets on San thinking he's a five-to-one dog against Dark because of distorted odds, that's their problem. A bookmaker not paying bets is a bigger one.
|
"The bet placement pattern clearly indicates that the match was not played on a fair basis." is no proof of whatsoever.
San has proven repeatedly that he's the kind of guy who makes silly mistakes exactly when the situation requires it the less, in games that have been even more important than this proleague one.
He has also proven that he can earn his own money by winning.
Until actual proof comes out, I call bullshit.
|
On January 21 2015 20:03 Subversive wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2015 19:22 sofknrigged wrote:On January 21 2015 18:56 Subversive wrote:So, a betting site thinks it's suspicious that bets go heavily in favour of one player. They allow the bets to stand. If Dark loses, they make serious bank. He wins, so they void all bets. I'm pretty sure the only fraud here is the betting site not paying bets it accepted. If I'd wagered any substantial amount of money I'd be looking to sue them.
but hope you will appreciate that protecting the integrity of eSports is of paramount importance.
And by integrity of esports we mean protecting our own money. PInnacle takes $150000 dollar bets on big sports all the time, the money they stand to lose on this is pennies to them as max bet is only $500 for esports. They are actually protecting the customers that thought san was a good bet due to the odds being messed up from who ever had inside information on dark. I'm always dubious when someone makes a new account to respond to one comment in a thread with over 500 replies. If someone bets on San thinking he's a five-to-one dog against Dark because of distorted odds, that's their problem. A bookmaker not paying bets is a bigger one.
From my understanding, another issue is that it's not just one user. Rather, according to the Twoplustwo guy who spotted the irregular betting behaviour in the first place, it's up to $50,000 that has been placed on the bet (as that amount is neccesary to move the line from 1.7 to 1.2). Since there is a limit on how much you can bet (probably what responds to a couple of hundred euros), it indicates that several different users all have been making these types of bets on the same game and on the same player, where the odds makes no sense at all.
San has proven repeatedly that he's the kind of guy who makes silly mistakes exactly when the situation requires it the less, in games that have been even more important than this proleague one.
Pinnaclesports aren't paying a lot of attention to the game itself, but rather the betting behaviour of the game relative to how the odds normally moves.
|
On January 21 2015 20:12 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2015 20:03 Subversive wrote:On January 21 2015 19:22 sofknrigged wrote:On January 21 2015 18:56 Subversive wrote:So, a betting site thinks it's suspicious that bets go heavily in favour of one player. They allow the bets to stand. If Dark loses, they make serious bank. He wins, so they void all bets. I'm pretty sure the only fraud here is the betting site not paying bets it accepted. If I'd wagered any substantial amount of money I'd be looking to sue them.
but hope you will appreciate that protecting the integrity of eSports is of paramount importance.
And by integrity of esports we mean protecting our own money. PInnacle takes $150000 dollar bets on big sports all the time, the money they stand to lose on this is pennies to them as max bet is only $500 for esports. They are actually protecting the customers that thought san was a good bet due to the odds being messed up from who ever had inside information on dark. I'm always dubious when someone makes a new account to respond to one comment in a thread with over 500 replies. If someone bets on San thinking he's a five-to-one dog against Dark because of distorted odds, that's their problem. A bookmaker not paying bets is a bigger one. From my understanding, the larger issue is that it's not just one user. Rather, according to the Twoplustwo guy who spotted the irregular betting behaviour in the first place, it's up to $50,000 that has been placed on the bet (as that amount is neccesary to move the line from 1.7 to 1.2). Since there is a limit on how much you can bet (probably what responds to a couple of hundred euros), it indicates that several different users all have been making these types of bets on the same game and on the same player, where the odds makes no sense at all.
On pinnacle you can make the maximum bet multiple times without having more than 1 account. If the max bet is 200€ you can bet it, then the line moves and you can bet it again.
|
What are all these newly created single post accounts? I'm assuming 1 ip address and not an impartial user.
|
On January 21 2015 20:16 ragax09 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2015 20:12 Hider wrote:On January 21 2015 20:03 Subversive wrote:On January 21 2015 19:22 sofknrigged wrote:On January 21 2015 18:56 Subversive wrote:So, a betting site thinks it's suspicious that bets go heavily in favour of one player. They allow the bets to stand. If Dark loses, they make serious bank. He wins, so they void all bets. I'm pretty sure the only fraud here is the betting site not paying bets it accepted. If I'd wagered any substantial amount of money I'd be looking to sue them.
but hope you will appreciate that protecting the integrity of eSports is of paramount importance.
And by integrity of esports we mean protecting our own money. PInnacle takes $150000 dollar bets on big sports all the time, the money they stand to lose on this is pennies to them as max bet is only $500 for esports. They are actually protecting the customers that thought san was a good bet due to the odds being messed up from who ever had inside information on dark. I'm always dubious when someone makes a new account to respond to one comment in a thread with over 500 replies. If someone bets on San thinking he's a five-to-one dog against Dark because of distorted odds, that's their problem. A bookmaker not paying bets is a bigger one. From my understanding, the larger issue is that it's not just one user. Rather, according to the Twoplustwo guy who spotted the irregular betting behaviour in the first place, it's up to $50,000 that has been placed on the bet (as that amount is neccesary to move the line from 1.7 to 1.2). Since there is a limit on how much you can bet (probably what responds to a couple of hundred euros), it indicates that several different users all have been making these types of bets on the same game and on the same player, where the odds makes no sense at all. On pinnacle you can make the maximum bet multiple times without having more than 1 account. If the max bet is 200€ you can bet it, then the line moves and you can bet it again.
Ah okay, thanks for clearing that up.
|
On January 21 2015 20:22 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2015 20:16 ragax09 wrote:On January 21 2015 20:12 Hider wrote:On January 21 2015 20:03 Subversive wrote:On January 21 2015 19:22 sofknrigged wrote:On January 21 2015 18:56 Subversive wrote:So, a betting site thinks it's suspicious that bets go heavily in favour of one player. They allow the bets to stand. If Dark loses, they make serious bank. He wins, so they void all bets. I'm pretty sure the only fraud here is the betting site not paying bets it accepted. If I'd wagered any substantial amount of money I'd be looking to sue them.
but hope you will appreciate that protecting the integrity of eSports is of paramount importance.
And by integrity of esports we mean protecting our own money. PInnacle takes $150000 dollar bets on big sports all the time, the money they stand to lose on this is pennies to them as max bet is only $500 for esports. They are actually protecting the customers that thought san was a good bet due to the odds being messed up from who ever had inside information on dark. I'm always dubious when someone makes a new account to respond to one comment in a thread with over 500 replies. If someone bets on San thinking he's a five-to-one dog against Dark because of distorted odds, that's their problem. A bookmaker not paying bets is a bigger one. From my understanding, the larger issue is that it's not just one user. Rather, according to the Twoplustwo guy who spotted the irregular betting behaviour in the first place, it's up to $50,000 that has been placed on the bet (as that amount is neccesary to move the line from 1.7 to 1.2). Since there is a limit on how much you can bet (probably what responds to a couple of hundred euros), it indicates that several different users all have been making these types of bets on the same game and on the same player, where the odds makes no sense at all. On pinnacle you can make the maximum bet multiple times without having more than 1 account. If the max bet is 200€ you can bet it, then the line moves and you can bet it again. Ah okay, thanks for clearing that up.
You actually can't do that though. When the maximum rises, you can only add the amount to reach the new maximum on your bet.
So basically, if the maximum is 300 euros (which it is on Pinnacle esports bets iirc), you bet 300. Then the line moves therefore the maximum also moves. Now the new maximum is 325 with lower odds on Dark. You have an option to change your bet to 325 under lower odds - therefore only adding 25 dollars, not 325.
|
On January 21 2015 20:21 Subversive wrote:
What are all these newly created single post accounts? I'm assuming 1 ip address and not an impartial user.
I'm just interested in esports betting so this thread caught my attention and I wanted to give some info on the betting process, didnt bet on the san game though.
@Ammanas: I'm pretty sure i bet the maximum more than once on other sports, never tried it on esport bets though.
|
On January 21 2015 20:27 Ammanas wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2015 20:22 Hider wrote:On January 21 2015 20:16 ragax09 wrote:On January 21 2015 20:12 Hider wrote:On January 21 2015 20:03 Subversive wrote:On January 21 2015 19:22 sofknrigged wrote:On January 21 2015 18:56 Subversive wrote:So, a betting site thinks it's suspicious that bets go heavily in favour of one player. They allow the bets to stand. If Dark loses, they make serious bank. He wins, so they void all bets. I'm pretty sure the only fraud here is the betting site not paying bets it accepted. If I'd wagered any substantial amount of money I'd be looking to sue them.
but hope you will appreciate that protecting the integrity of eSports is of paramount importance.
And by integrity of esports we mean protecting our own money. PInnacle takes $150000 dollar bets on big sports all the time, the money they stand to lose on this is pennies to them as max bet is only $500 for esports. They are actually protecting the customers that thought san was a good bet due to the odds being messed up from who ever had inside information on dark. I'm always dubious when someone makes a new account to respond to one comment in a thread with over 500 replies. If someone bets on San thinking he's a five-to-one dog against Dark because of distorted odds, that's their problem. A bookmaker not paying bets is a bigger one. From my understanding, the larger issue is that it's not just one user. Rather, according to the Twoplustwo guy who spotted the irregular betting behaviour in the first place, it's up to $50,000 that has been placed on the bet (as that amount is neccesary to move the line from 1.7 to 1.2). Since there is a limit on how much you can bet (probably what responds to a couple of hundred euros), it indicates that several different users all have been making these types of bets on the same game and on the same player, where the odds makes no sense at all. On pinnacle you can make the maximum bet multiple times without having more than 1 account. If the max bet is 200€ you can bet it, then the line moves and you can bet it again. Ah okay, thanks for clearing that up. You actually can't do that though. When the maximum rises, you can only add the amount to reach the new maximum on your bet. So basically, if the maximum is 300 euros (which it is on Pinnacle esports bets iirc), you bet 300. Then the line moves therefore the maximum also moves. Now the new maximum is 325 with lower odds on Dark. You have an option to change your bet to 325 under lower odds - therefore only adding 25 dollars, not 325.
So according to your assesment, if $50K was placed on Dark, it must have been from several different users?
|
On January 21 2015 20:31 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2015 20:27 Ammanas wrote:On January 21 2015 20:22 Hider wrote:On January 21 2015 20:16 ragax09 wrote:On January 21 2015 20:12 Hider wrote:On January 21 2015 20:03 Subversive wrote:On January 21 2015 19:22 sofknrigged wrote:On January 21 2015 18:56 Subversive wrote:So, a betting site thinks it's suspicious that bets go heavily in favour of one player. They allow the bets to stand. If Dark loses, they make serious bank. He wins, so they void all bets. I'm pretty sure the only fraud here is the betting site not paying bets it accepted. If I'd wagered any substantial amount of money I'd be looking to sue them.
but hope you will appreciate that protecting the integrity of eSports is of paramount importance.
And by integrity of esports we mean protecting our own money. PInnacle takes $150000 dollar bets on big sports all the time, the money they stand to lose on this is pennies to them as max bet is only $500 for esports. They are actually protecting the customers that thought san was a good bet due to the odds being messed up from who ever had inside information on dark. I'm always dubious when someone makes a new account to respond to one comment in a thread with over 500 replies. If someone bets on San thinking he's a five-to-one dog against Dark because of distorted odds, that's their problem. A bookmaker not paying bets is a bigger one. From my understanding, the larger issue is that it's not just one user. Rather, according to the Twoplustwo guy who spotted the irregular betting behaviour in the first place, it's up to $50,000 that has been placed on the bet (as that amount is neccesary to move the line from 1.7 to 1.2). Since there is a limit on how much you can bet (probably what responds to a couple of hundred euros), it indicates that several different users all have been making these types of bets on the same game and on the same player, where the odds makes no sense at all. On pinnacle you can make the maximum bet multiple times without having more than 1 account. If the max bet is 200€ you can bet it, then the line moves and you can bet it again. Ah okay, thanks for clearing that up. You actually can't do that though. When the maximum rises, you can only add the amount to reach the new maximum on your bet. So basically, if the maximum is 300 euros (which it is on Pinnacle esports bets iirc), you bet 300. Then the line moves therefore the maximum also moves. Now the new maximum is 325 with lower odds on Dark. You have an option to change your bet to 325 under lower odds - therefore only adding 25 dollars, not 325. So according to your assesment, if $50K was placed on Dark, it almust must have been from several different users?
I think so, yes.
|
On January 21 2015 20:03 Subversive wrote:Show nested quote +On January 21 2015 19:22 sofknrigged wrote:On January 21 2015 18:56 Subversive wrote:So, a betting site thinks it's suspicious that bets go heavily in favour of one player. They allow the bets to stand. If Dark loses, they make serious bank. He wins, so they void all bets. I'm pretty sure the only fraud here is the betting site not paying bets it accepted. If I'd wagered any substantial amount of money I'd be looking to sue them.
but hope you will appreciate that protecting the integrity of eSports is of paramount importance.
And by integrity of esports we mean protecting our own money. PInnacle takes $150000 dollar bets on big sports all the time, the money they stand to lose on this is pennies to them as max bet is only $500 for esports. They are actually protecting the customers that thought san was a good bet due to the odds being messed up from who ever had inside information on dark. I'm always dubious when someone makes a new account to respond to one comment in a thread with over 500 replies. If someone bets on San thinking he's a five-to-one dog against Dark because of distorted odds, that's their problem. A bookmaker not paying bets is a bigger one.
Voiding bets means you get your money back.
You don't win, but you also don't lose. It costs Pinnacle money and potentially reputation to do this, so the loser is Pinnacle.
A bookmaker not paying bets when there is a hint that there may be something dodgy going on is standard practice and good for the consumer because it protects them from manipulation to fix the bet.
|
This feels like Sangho 2.0
Of course everyone hate match fixer, especially those who come over from BW era still remember what has savior done to professional BW. But guys, please remember that all of this is just circumstantial evidence, no concrete proof yet that San throw the match.
False accusations can destroy San's future.
I do hope that no match fixing take places, don't want that kind of problems to sc2 since it can also affecting BW scene. I still remember when there was match fixing romours on SOSPA tournaments, really scared me to death.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
