Hey fellas, considering that I'm one of the guys that tagged Fairlay, I feel it's needed that I drop a few words here. Thanks for the tag @EarnOnVictor.

First of all, I don't really feel there's much risk for an average player to use this platform. Haven't tested it myself, it was invite only, spoke with a few people that did use it.

The tag itself is well explained, Fairlay decided to forfeit winnings that all other bookies settled with some bizarre explanations - 'goalkeeper not trying hard enough'. It's Finnish 3rd tier, the guy can also be hammered from his morning work shift or he could just be drunk as well. Or both - these are amateur players. They play for a sandwich and a beer, these aren't betting markets that you should be able to bet big on.

Other bookies protect themselves with max bets on such games, Fairlay to my knowledge does not, so it is a calculated risk they are taking here to increase commission - if it goes against them, my opinion is that they need to settle the bets.

They linked the investigation article in Finnish and announced the case is settled. I took some time to translate and read it, and basically it comes down to this:

'The goal of the disciplinary procedure is to find out whether all or any of the three clubs mentioned above have committed a violation of the ethical principles of the competition regulations and whether a sanction according to the penalty regulations can be imposed.
There are no known precedents for similar cases. Due to the scope of the material, it is difficult to predict the duration of the disciplinary process.'

Meaning that these clubs are currently just being investigated, no decision has yet been made, but Fairlay already made conclusions about the case that is still under investigation.

To state the obvious - I really do feel that most of these games are manipulated. That is why bookies have limits on them.
Important thing to note - with this precedent, Fairlay could flag 10 more amateur teams whenever they decide to. Futures tournaments in tennis? Hell, half of it is suspicious. I watched some amateur ping-pong that I swear is manipulated - but when and how will you prove it?

It was also unclear whether all bets in this specific case were voided, was the other side of the bet(s) reimbursed for the initial loss etc. When I asked that through PM, the reply I received was 'do you see anyone complaining?' - which is not the answer you want to receive and is a standard template in which they communicate.

____________________________________________

To conclude, I will remove the red when/if I see the following:

• transparency about platform operations - (FAQ or an invitation - I requested one now)
• detailed information on dispute settlement - for this specific case, I need more clarity on how it was handled—which games were flagged, were all winnings from the player confiscated and what the resolution involved for counterparties
• some legal clarity - who told you not to release the funds? This has to be transparent, which legal entity does Fairlay even legally have to abide here?
• evidence-based decision making - Fairlay confiscated funds without substantial evidence (they still haven't got a strong case), meaning that the decision is subjective and without clear rules to rely on which also raises questions about the integrity of the decision-making process
• overall improvement in communication - so far it is 'hey we're Fairlay and we make our own rules - we don't even need to explain them to you'. Not taggable by itself, but communication is key in crypto in the middle of a scam accusation.

____________________________________________

To note - it seems that bitcoin-betting.com might be different from Fairlay.
If I understood correctly, on this new fully decentralized version of the platform, freezing funds wouldn't even be possible and no bets could have been voided?

If that is the case, such version of this platform doesn't deserve the tag but Fairlay account still does. If another thread is opened using a different account, I would not tag it.

____________________________________________

To be honest, I'm really looking forward to seeing decentralized solutions everywhere. They do carry significant risks as well though - and I was not happy with Fairlay's attitude and unwillingness to solve this case in a more friendly manner. I hope they come back to the table with better attitude and some clear rules we can follow so we can put this behind us.