Quote from: cryptofrka on May 30, 2024, 12:39:38 PM

Hey fellas, slaman29 tagged me so just chipping in.

My opinion in these situations is always the same - if a bookie takes the bet, they need to honor the bet.
They have many levers to pull - they can suspend markets, limit the bets, ban accounts.., it is their responsibility to protect themselves.

It's incredibly hard to prove match fixing, and I feel it's the wrong way to approach this case. Was Loris Karius bribed in the Champions League final then?
In amateur leagues all kind of bizarre things happen all the time, and yeah - fixed matches are surely more common. But if somebody's killing you with big bets in Finnish amateur leagues it's your job to find a way around it if you still want to offer these markets.

________________________________

Regarding the arbitration - it's my opinion that it needs to be a team of 3-5 people, not a single arbitrator.

The problem is, I doubt that fairlay as a site lost any money on these bets since there are a betting exchange and not a bookie.
Maybe they also act as a bookie but I can't verify that since the site doesn't really give a lot of information when you are not a member.
At a betting exchange you play against other players and not against the house. So the main question here is, why can fairlay keep the money when they didn't lose any. Have the players that bet this game and lost have been compensated for their losses? If not, why is that so?

By the way @fairley, quite sending PMs to users here in this forum trying to lure them to your site, I don't appreciate that and it's rather annoying. Since this is a different bitcointalk account but clearly this person is working for you guys ( official fairlay email address ) I assume it is an official representative.