Topic: Anonibet Official Thread - Gold Member of Bitcoin Foundation - page 21. (Read 195844 times)

I've had a lot of problems accepting Anonibet's statement that they have 35 employees.

They're closed 8 hours a day I believe.

So for 2  eight hour shifts they have 17-18 people working per shift?

OK.

I forgot #4 - Someone in this forum has posted several times to be especially wary after the Superbowl, as that is the time books in trouble will cut and run.

Thanks

Peeps to make sure this is clear, they offer a bonus that when someone bets 2-way efficient market at 1.90 per side, they expect a 4% ROI on their deposit with no exploitation or handicapping skills required. They offer this repeated on all deposits. They list no rules, but can at their own discretion without explanation adjust account balances after the fact to remove bonus from winnings as they see fit. <-- complaints or not that's the issue / their model. Yes, the complaints I'm aware relate to that. I believe one is waiting to see if SBR will discuss with them, the other I'm not sure where he stands, but yeah both relate to that policy. And, I only learned of those because I wrote about the risks of their offer looking at it clean without knowledge disputes were outstanding. I got responses from there.

Occam's Razor -

1) Three sketchy problems with withdrawing funds, any one of which would be cause for concern, and damakhun knows of 2 more.

2) The book is offering a bonus which is -ev. The only reason to continue it is to obtain larger than normal deposits from more people than usual, as it's one of those "It's too good to be true" offers. Any book offering this will go bust eventually.

3) The book doesn't answer any of these issues directly, but instead tries to divert -
"People are trying to tarnish our name"; "We now have live chat 24/7"; "We have been in business since 2011"; etc., etc., ad nauseum.

Occam says "Which is more likely? That they are having financial difficulties? Or this is a series of coincidences and has no deeper meaning?"

I don't know all the facts yet. I'll refrain from future comments in this thread until the facts come out. Speculation isn't fair to any of the parties involved.

Bonus dispute?

I've been saying this for a while now 

I'm aware of two others that haven't posted.

One posted this earlier today -

"jemaga1976
Newbie
*


Activity: 5


View Profile Email Personal Message (Offline)
Trust: 0: -0 / +0(0)
Ignore
   
   
Re: Anonibet Official Thread - Gold Member of Bitcoin Foundation
Today at 01:19:50 PM
   
Reply with quote  #1598
I wait you investigate my proble soon and unblocked my account. I need my BTC. Thank you!!!"

What is it about that post that leads you to believe it was settled?

Can you show me a post by either of them stating they were paid?

I had the total wrong - 0ne guy has 19 btc tied up, the other 18, and the 5 in the bonus dispute for a grand total of 42 btc = ~$10,374 USD.

Of course there could be others who aren't aware of this forum and/or haven't posted here.

I thought all of that was paid with the exception of 5 BTC bonus dispute. Am I wrong?

gogo- Although we put Anonibet in the NR category until all problems are addressed. I think it's premature to ask for players to withdraw funds. All books have a hiccup now and then. There haven't been any withdrawal problems with the exception of two disputes.

Anonibet may be wrong in both cases. We shall see and I hope that there are transparent. You have seen a lot of books go under and these two problems look nothing like the problems that books had that ran with our funds.

Before those books went under there were many problems and delays with payouts, not just two disputes.

Peeps Place - "I guess my point is that Anonibet didn't give away the house with their bonuses although there are definitely problems that need to be addressed."
   
There is also the matter of 2 accounts that we are aware of that are not able to get their btc withdrawn,
 for a total of about  28 btc/~ 7k USD total.

Many know optimal strategy on free plays whether it parlay or huge ML play. Many also know the subsets and correlation needed for +ev. Approximately 30% in the NFL without looking at total/spread. Most of this is discussed on sports betting forums.  

lol at the secret agent comment.


Anonibet and others - Once again I apologize for getting off topic and will delete if asked. I guess my point is that Anonibet didn't give away the house with their bonuses although there are definitely problems that need to be addressed.

Bottom line for those not following or understanding the discussion -

DO NOT deposit here until/if several issues are cleared up.

WITHDRAW your funds on deposit here ASAP.

Books still offer 3-team parlays on free plays and it still ins't +EV. It is simply optimal strategy for getting the most out of the bonus. Correlated parlays requires special skill set known to only some players. The situation here is vastly different:

At Anonibet no matter how square the better is, no matter who it is that is making the deposit, every deposit they make that gets a bonus that +EV. It requires degeneracy / lack of knowledge, foolishness or whatever you want to call it to ruin the EV, but it starts off that the mere action of depositing at Anonibet is a +EV action. That would be if they actually offered what they advertised they do. See the problem?

Edit to add a PS. It feels like we're secret agents using these handles lol. You know the people that made that comment, one you've debated with extensively in the past.

 At one time fiat books allowed free plays that could be used in 3 team parlays. Books allowed correlated parlays. Multi accounting for bonus abuse. There are many ways to exploit books putting the player in a +ev situation.  It's a cat and mouse game and doesn't necessitate a book going under.

The dispute in question is 5 BTC. This is far from breaking a book in existence since 2011. If this was a new book, then it's a different story.

I'm in no way trying to defend Anonibet here. It's just a discussion.

You don't even need to exploit it, it is +EV betting it straight.

This is not a traditional sticky bonus. All bets use bonus cash first. You are getting better than even money effective odds on 1.90 odds two-way markets.

Let me explain: deposit 100 get 110. Bet 110 on 1.90 it returns 209. You are now up 109 more than the 100 deposited and have met the full rollover.

Of your 209, 10 is a bonus that must be lost before it is cashed out. Now bet just that 10 over and over again in the smallest increment possible until it has all been lost (remember bonus cash is used first). on a 1.90/1.90 2-way efficient market you will average a loss of the 5% advantage the bookmaker has built into the line, the rest will have converted to bonus winnings. Thus all said and done you lose 0.5 of that 10 that was bonus.

So on an efficient market you deposited 100, and get 209 if win. Half the time you win so your expectation is +4.5 profit. In converting all the sticky bonus to cash just straight betting you lose 0.5 of that, bringing the expectation to 4. Therefore just betting an efficient market priced 1.90 per side, under their terms you expect for every 100 starting deposit amount to have 4 in profit (that's the EV of using it at 1.90/1.90 no matter how bets are broken down, you change variance but not EV, which is 4 per 100 deposited).

The above requires no exploitation, or anything else. It is purely free money they are handing out. Obviously that stuck out as a major red flag because it is offered on all deposits. Seeing it has no rules, and a what appeared to be a rogue term, I decided to inquire to make sure I had this correct.

As far as exploiting it, there are better uses. But as is this is a big risk. I can't help but feel this was a gotcha situation. Since I've become aware of real life complaints about this. In my private group, this was discussed. Smart players there mentioned anyone sharp that got caught by this is foolish and how they cashed out and stop betting when they seen this promo because figured either site was disappearing soon or would be using it in the way I suggested they could use it.

Assuming an efficient market at 1.90 how would you exploit a 10% sticky bonus with a 1x using lessor amount of risk/reward?


Anonibet - I apologize for getting off topic. If you would like me to delete my posts, I will do so.