If you're running a sportsbook there are two paths you can go down:

Offer lines that aren't competitive with other books, and only on main stream sports/leagues, but never worry protecting your edge against sharps/insiders.  That means you take any bet from anyone and everyone has more or less the same limits. 

or

Compete to offer the best lines, either ban or limit those who you suspect might have an edge, and increase limits for players you're confident are recreational players.


If you offer competitive lines and don't limit sharp bettors, you're going to go bankrupt.  In the end, for a bet to be valid, both sides have to agree on the terms.  When a player is limited, and then bets more than that limit using another account, that's a bet that the book did not agree to, and the player knows that when they try to make it.  It's as simple as that.

Yeah.  And it was really messed up.  They can make it whatever they want, but doing it without any sort of warning or even notification when it happens was really disappointing to see.  I immediately complained about it when it happened.

After being limited, OP used multiple accounts to get around the limit.  That's the allegation.  Stake said "we don't want your action over $X" and OP pretended to be multiple different people and then wagered more than the limit.   

Stunna, one of the most trusted in the crypto gambling world and the co founder of prime dice and stake:

Also, as a regular on Stake for years, that talks to many other regulars on Stake, I know for a fact that Stake very rarely freezes funds, and when they do it's not for having multiple accounts.  If they started doing that, I would hear about it, and we'd have multiple accusations from credible members in no time.

Week 35 Payments Sent


2 Spots Open

To be accepted your posts quality must be at least a 9/10, no matter if your a Hero or Legendary

Im not sure to call it as a 'bonus' or not but its more like incentive to put in your wager earlier than the others but of course there are higher risk with early bet as well

The time weight multiplier will not affect the odds but rather your wager. If you wager 0.001 btc with 10x time weight multiplier and the final odds is 2x that means you will receive 0.0022 if you win instead of 0.002 because you received 10% extra from the bonus weight multiplier so your wager count as 0.001 btc instead

Edit = CMIIW, its been a while since I bet in here

Exactly what it is. The amount of money on the pool to reward the winner for their bets


Yes. The odds, your wager and time weight multiplier will define your share of the prizepool in case if you win your bet


No. The bonus would be from the time weight multiplier

I am really looking forward to when MyCryptoMixer will get in touch and somehow comment on this situation and also return everything in full. If this does not happen, then I hope that other users will pay attention to this situation and will not trust them. I do not want to call MyCryptoMixer scammers because I still think that there was some technical error and MyCryptoMixer will fix this situation.

Yes. Every half decent wallet does this automatically. If you are using a wallet which can't combine two UTXOs from different addresses in the same wallet in to one transaction, I suggest you change wallet. No wonder you have problems with dust if this is the case.

Pretty much all of them.

They don't need to. The wallet should deal with it all automatically.

Which wallet are you using that can't handle more than one address without creating dust?

It will be automatically summed up by the wallet, for example Electrum. Imagine, you have a lot of addresses which have a balance of 0.01 each. Now, if you want to send 0.1 BTC, wallet will be able to send 0.1 BTC which will be the input. And with coin control, you can send any utxo you want.

Same, electrum mobile wallet can do that.

I don't know what you are refrring, I'm confused too. However, this is very simple work.

It will be automatically summed up by the wallet, for example Electrum. Imagine, you have a lot of addresses which have a balance of 0.01 each. Now, if you want to send 0.1 BTC, wallet will be able to send 0.1 BTC which will be the input.
Same, electrum mobile wallet can do that.
People who care about privacy does this every time certainly. Personally I don't do this most of the times. It depends on which wallet I am using.
I don't know what you are refrring, I'm confused too. However, this is very simple work.

It sounds like you are maybe talking about an account on an exchange or some other website or online service, which might explain your confusion. These online services, in which someone else holds your private keys and holds your coins are not really wallets at all. If you are running a actual wallet where you control the private keys, then which specific address within that wallet the output is on, or whether you have multiple outputs on one address or spread across multiple address, is completely irrelevant.

It is completely trivial to make a transaction which combines multiple UTXOs from multiple addresses as inputs.

You are wrong. As I said above, using a single address or using multiple addresses within the same wallet makes absolutely zero difference when talking about dust. If the input is too small to be sent, it will be too small to be sent regardless of what address it is on. Since UTXOs remain entirely separate until spent, it doesn't matter if all your dust outputs are contained within a single address - they are still dust.

You are confusing addresses with outputs. Addresses can hold multiple outputs. Outputs are what are fed in to transactions. It is the value of the output, not the value of the address, which is important. An address with 5,000 outputs of 100 satoshi each will have a total value of 0.005 BTC, but the outputs are still dust.

This is not accurate.

Fees are based on outputs, not addresses. If I receive 100 transactions to 100 addresses and consolidate them in to one output, I the transaction size will be exactly the same as if I had received 100 transactions to the same addresses and was consolidating them in to one output. Using the same address to receive to over and over again doesn't save you anything in fees at all.

Using multiple address is not inconvenient or difficult at all, as you make it out to be. All good wallets will manage your addresses for you automatically - creating a new one every time you go to make a deposit, and automatically returning your change to a new one.

If you do not care about the security and privacy of your coins, theny why bother changing your address?

People are doing it because they wanted to attain an optimum privacy and security to their hard-earned money. This would be the very best practice if you are holding a large amount of cryptocurrency in your pocket. They just wanted to reduce the risk of a virtual and physical threat.

There is nothing more convenient than knowing that you are not compromised.

Looks like OP got lucky... as did ViaBTC! Transaction got included in block# 629574 which was mined by ViaBTC...




Although the fee rates on the network are slowly decreasing... so it would probably have confirmed "naturally" about now anyway... anything above 20 sats/byte is most likely "next block" at the moment:

Can you share the tx link?
I think the fee is not the case. I have not seen fee to be an issue in a shitcoin because they have a lot of space in the block and I am sure most of the blocks are not fulfilled too.
It can be something else. If you have no problem with sharing the tx link, some may help you.

This is what I got-
From- https://vergecurrency.com/faq/

Excellent. You won my award and thank you for your application.
That topic help you won my award. Thank you and enjoy. You now will be a member soon.