Smarkets begins closing successful accounts

Locked
Boing
Posts: 134
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 4:06 pm

james19 wrote:Interesting to see that bookmakersreview.com have downgraded Smarkets rating as a result of this... Clearly people read these boards which is encouraging, as I had no contact with them myself.

http://www.bookmakersreview.com/bookmak ... ters/48018
TBH James, I think you should quit while you are ahead. It's just looking like a cold blooded vendetta against smarkets with some loose edges.

You say you had no contact with SBR but the thread you started on their forum would seem to contradict this statement?

http://forum.sbrforum.com/sportsbooks-i ... ounts.html

Despite your many attempts to show up this company nobody else has come forward with the same complaint. So there is obviously something deeper going on here.

I'm not for or against smarkets as I only just started using them, but its obvious to me there is more to this that is being publically stated by either party
Boing
Posts: 134
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 4:06 pm

Here is my take on the situation.

James was doing something to exploit a flaw/loophole/characteristic in smarkets. They spotted this and told him to stop. He refused so they took the unusual step of closing his account.

He threated to trash them if they did this and cost them more money than they would lose by keeping his account open.

smarkets struggle to publically comment on the real detail because it would expose the flaw. So james is free to trash them knowing he wont get a response.

It's really no different from Betfair telling the clockbeaters to stop a few years ago. They were exploting a flaw in the model and Betfair had to move to stop it. They eventually did this by changing the way the exchange accepted bets. Betfair have probably 'banned' directly or in-directly many types of activity/accounts over the years.
Golfer
Posts: 137
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2011 10:45 pm

I agree with the majority in that there is more to this than meets the eye but price is price, market makers shouldn't offer a price/liquidity they are not willing to run.

James why not use a combination of Betdaq (as suggested) and Pinnacle (who frequently match/beat BF prices once comm is taken into account). You may have a smaller edge but you will be able to churn large amounts of money through.

Make a complaints to the relevant authority (if necessary) and keep us updated if anything changes but I do think you need to move on now as its becoming slightly whiny and repetitive.
spreadbetting
Posts: 3140
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2010 8:06 pm

If there's a flaw in your system you fix it and thank the person finding it, not ban them :D In the exchange world if one person spots a flaw it won't be long before another comes along shortly to exploit it also. Only flaw seems to be smarkets poor judgement of taking the advice of 2/3 market makers with their own agenda rather than allowing the market to find it's own level.

I'd agree with the comments for James to quit whilst ahead though, all this continual bumping of threads without anything new isn't going to change things. Smarkets should have followed the betfair PR method to start with and just said nothing as things like this always blow over. The only people interested are pretty much the only people you don't want on your exchange in the first place :?
haichless
Posts: 125
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2012 5:04 pm

tend to agree with boing,more to this than is being revealed especially as ive asked a number of questions (suggestions)to james in two posts and not received a reply to either.
Although I must say if betfair have been succesful in their move to beat clock beaters you could have fooled me. Trade some non uk football matches and it happens if not regularly,then more often than rarely.
Whilst their market position means they can ignore the protest of those cheated by this, other forums posts would suggest some liquidity is seeping away from betfair because of this issue.
Therefore I am not sure the betfair PR stance of say nothing is as succesful on problems as is suggested, at least smarkets responded in some way to the public as best they could which is preferable to the lousy customer service at betfair.
freddy
Posts: 1132
Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2010 8:22 pm

So as a few people seem to be doubting James story in some way,

Can i ask them what they think would be a good and valid reason for an exchange closing someone account.

Obviously legally they can do what they want
there is no reason that they have to let someone use there services. But that's not what im asking.
Im taking more of on a moral level not just what effects their bottom line.

So all we know for a fact so far is that
Smarkets do close accounts for a variety of reasons.

James has said he's not an Arber

James has said he does not do in play so it's not a clock beating issue or anything like that.

So What else ?
Last edited by freddy on Thu Jan 03, 2013 5:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.
hgodden
Posts: 1759
Joined: Thu Apr 16, 2009 2:13 pm

I haven't read through all 19 pages of this but in answer to your question Freddy I would say it is likely that he may have found a hole in the way that Smarkets market makers were operating and was making a great deal of his profits from that, given that there aren't exactly a great amount of punters on there. It may be that for the sake of their business they had no choice but to get rid of him if his activities were directly targeting the market makers.

Could be wrong of course but if not then wouldn't it just be common sense to stop the guy? If he ends up taking too much from the market makers and they disappear then it could threaten the exchange itself and then he's not going to be able to make anything anyway.

To me it smacks of the problem of having an 'exchange' without a proper ecosystem
haichless
Posts: 125
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2012 5:04 pm

if the problem with the loophole in market makers activities is identified, as it clearly seems to have been, wouldnt it be preferable to fix it by closing the loophole, and retaining the goodwill and much needed liquidity of the punters in question, by just letting them carry on, with the loophole fixed.
They would leave of their own accord if the way they were exploiting a system error for profit was gone, and that was their only way of making money.
Im old enough to know when somethings not right, and james evasiveness and smarkets actions both do not make any sense, given the info thats out their.
james19
Posts: 53
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 7:30 pm

Comment deleted by user
Last edited by james19 on Sun Feb 24, 2013 10:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Shamrock
Posts: 205
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 11:41 am
Location: Perth Wester Australia

Interesting thread. I must say that being in Australia I opened an account to allow in play trading since we no longer have the Daq. I must admit there is no money around when the market goes inplay, so a waste of time I suppose. But the first market I tried was Aussie football on NYE. Two interesting pictures of Smarkets and Betfair side by side on my screens.
The first picture was after 2 mins, Smarkets had still not gone in play.
Picture 2 is after they eventually went in play (almost 6 mins).
If I was a market maker I think I would be pissed off with this big a lag.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
james19
Posts: 53
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 7:30 pm

That's an interesting observation.

To be honest I had never previously encountered a lag in markets going in play, and I can assure you that my trading style had nothing to do with that. All my bets were pre-match and pre-kick off, but still management found reason to complain :roll:

Price is price, but at Smarkets it seems that some prices are not meant to be taken...
james19
Posts: 53
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 7:30 pm

These guys are jokers. I wrote to their support and to their CEO two weeks ago asking if there were any new developments regarding reworking their business model to somehow facilitate winning traders into their nascent ecosystem.

They totally ignored my emails as if to put two fingers in their ears and sing "la la la" - crisis? what crisis?

Obviously everyone starts out in the start up business hoping to be a breath of fresh air and to "do things differently".

It's sad when even start ups start behaving as poorly as the monopolists.
maycontainnuts
Posts: 88
Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2012 5:58 pm

I think you are making this worse for yourself james. You are the only person to have come forward so it was obviously something unusual that you were doing. Betdaq and Betfair seed markets, so that's not unusual. You obviously found a clever exploit, but were caught out.

You probably threatened smarkets with negative publicity if they kicked you off and are delivering on that, but its no longer putting people off. I imagine its just driving interest in smarkets IMHO. I joined after reading your posts and haven't had a problem with them. So it must have been something very specific that you were doing and that activity could not have been described as 'normal'.
Iron
Posts: 6793
Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2009 10:51 pm

Reading between the lines, I suspect that Smarkets aren't long for this world, particularly now that Betdaq have been bought out by Ladbrookes.

Why would anyone use Smarkets rather than Betdaq or Betfair? If you're a causal punter, you're not going to want to go to all of the hassle of switching. And if you're a pro, you're not going to go with a company that will close your account as soon as you begin upsetting the market makers...

Jeff
Locked

Return to “Alternative betting exchanges, Smarkets, Matchbook etc.”