Next scheduled rescrape ... never
Version 1
Last scraped
Edited on 25/06/2025, 18:31:42 UTC
I edited my post. Had 2nd thoughts on discussing but since you asked.
1. Value betting= CLV (closing line Value) not arbitrage.
2. All 5 of your reps were wrong. They said the odds provider makes the final decision.
3. You only got a headache because you were unaware of the meaning of CLV. You should have stopped when they showed no proof of arbitrage.
4. I know what those player analysis sheets are that you are talking about. Once again it said Value or CLV. It didn’t say arbitrage from the provider and you know it.
5. There is no middle ground. XYes made up another story and changed from Value to Arb.
[image snip]
1. Value betting= CLV (closing line Value) not arbitrage.
2. All 5 of your reps were wrong. They said the odds provider makes the final decision.
3. You only got a headache because you were unaware of the meaning of CLV. You should have stopped when they showed no proof of arbitrage.
4. I know what those player analysis sheets are that you are talking about. Once again it said Value or CLV. It didn’t say arbitrage from the provider and you know it.
5. There is no middle ground. XYes made up another story and changed from Value to Arb.
[image snip]
No, it says "arbitrage bet", not CLV, no other thing. Specifically "arbitrage bet".
And here's one more interesting thing: I only glanced at OP's image on the opening post to see his three bets, as [honest to any divine being here] I was too shocked that the casino asked for verbal consent, I thought it's way too excessive. And when my contact showed me the evidence, I was only glancing at it too... well, I read, but I didn't commit it to my memory, as I don't want to deliberately store private information of players I'm "bridging", I'm here just to get to the bottom of cases and resolutions, not being nosy.
Only earlier today when I try to understand where that 20 USD number come from, that I peeked at OP's opening post again and re-read his betting history, and mull over the facts and possible middle-ground. I made that post, inquiring the possibility of arbing due to the uneven wager, and then leave for RL.
Only much later after that "earlier today", very much later after I make that post, that I realized I can confirm myself, so I look into the name of the bet OP provided here and the evidence given to me by my contact, and they matched. So yeah, that bet is what flag him. No need to question whether the bet placed in odd number because OP felt funny or want to round his balance, or just there to be fancy. It's there because or arb. At the very least, that's what perceived by the provider.
To summarize: no CLV, no value betting, no syndicate betting, no bot-betting or whatever-other-betting, specifically "arbitrage bet", and the provider risk team is the one that flag this.
Edit for your edit of your edit:
Example of value betting:
OP makes a bet at odds of 2.25.
Line closes 2.15.
It has 0 to do with arbitrage.
Make a few of these in a row and account gets flagged for value betting.
This one is arbitrage betting, not value betting. The one who value bet is the other case, ziportan. That image you quoted is from his thread.
[...]
[...]
[...]
this one, darwstall, is arbitrage betting,
I believe that 20 USD thingy is also you getting mixed up between the details of ziportan's and darwstall's, and I strongly believe you didn't do that intentionally. They just happen to have same case at the same time and you oversee both cases, and got mixed up. Those things happens. But please give your best to stop getting mixed up again in the future.
Original archived Re: XYES.COM SCAM
Scraped on 25/06/2025, 18:01:48 UTC
I edited my post. Had 2nd thoughts on discussing but since you asked.
1. Value betting= CLV (closing line Value) not arbitrage.
2. All 5 of your reps were wrong. They said the odds provider makes the final decision.
3. You only got a headache because you were unaware of the meaning of CLV. You should have stopped when they showed no proof of arbitrage.
4. I know what those player analysis sheets are that you are talking about. Once again it said Value or CLV. It didn’t say arbitrage from the provider and you know it.
5. There is no middle ground. XYes made up another story and changed from Value to Arb.
[image snip]
1. Value betting= CLV (closing line Value) not arbitrage.
2. All 5 of your reps were wrong. They said the odds provider makes the final decision.
3. You only got a headache because you were unaware of the meaning of CLV. You should have stopped when they showed no proof of arbitrage.
4. I know what those player analysis sheets are that you are talking about. Once again it said Value or CLV. It didn’t say arbitrage from the provider and you know it.
5. There is no middle ground. XYes made up another story and changed from Value to Arb.
[image snip]
No, it says "arbitrage bet", not CLV, no other thing. Specifically "arbitrage bet".
And here's one more interesting thing: I only glanced at OP's image on the opening post to see his three bets, as [honest to any divine being here] I was too shocked that the casino asked for verbal consent, I thought it's way too excessive. And when my contact showed me the evidence, I was only glancing at it too... well, I read, but I didn't commit it to my memory, as I don't want to deliberately store private information of players I'm "bridging", I'm here just to get to the bottom of cases and resolutions, not being nosy.
Only earlier today when I try to understand where that 20 USD number come from, that I peeked at OP's opening post again and re-read his betting history, and mull over the facts and possible middle-ground. I made that post, inquiring the possibility of arbing due to the uneven wager, and then leave for RL.
Only much later after that "earlier today", very much later after I make that post, that I realized I can confirm myself, so I look into the name of the bet OP provided here and the evidence given to me by my contact, and they matched. So yeah, that bet is what flag him. No need to question whether the bet placed in odd number because OP felt funny or want to round his balance, or just there to be fancy. It's there because or arb. At the very least, that's what perceived by the provider.
To summarize: no CLV, no value betting, no syndicate betting, no bot-betting or whatever-other-betting, specifically "arbitrage bet", and the provider risk team is the one that flag this.