Topic: Directbet tennis hack (Read 1129 times)

ive got it yesterday. Refunded and match not complete, but im not sure what happen. Lol

did you get refund your bet? because i see the point is "player retired and match not completed"

How often does a player 'retire injured' & pull out midway through a match? It's pretty rare to be honest & you literally could watch 50 odd full games of tennis & not see anybody retire with injury.

If this is a glitch in DirectBet's tennis betting system then if you were/are planning on taking advantage of it you probably shouldn't have started a thread telling everybody .

DirectBet will probably make sure that this can't be taken advantage of now after reading this so you've screwed yourself OP.

Following is the relevant information from our Rules :

http://www.directbet.eu/Rules.cshtml



Clarifications :

If your bet transfer arrives after the player retires, your bet will be rejected and refunded. We never confirm bets after the result is already determined.

If you believe the player will retire and want to bet on it while the match is still being played, there is no problem with that and we are likely to accept your bet. That's a legitimate bet and the odds should reflect that the player may retire.

Why it's a good rule ?

Consider this example :

Player A wins the first set 6-4. In the second set, player A is leading 4 - 1. If he wins the set he wins the match.

Player B is slightly injured. He realizes he has a slim chance of winning, so rather than risking a greater injury, he decides to retire.

A similar scenario happens all the times and we believe it is not fair to void all Match Odds bets just because player B decided to retire when he had virtually no chance of winning.

For this reason if you bet on player A to win the match, you will win the bet.

Similarly, if you placed a bet on player A to win the first set you will also win your bet. Here again we don't think it is fair to void a bet that was already determined as a winner just because player B gave up and decided to retire later in the match.

Now if you bet on player A to win 6 - 3 in the second set, here we will void all bets on the second set because player B retired and as a result the set was not completed.

I hope this clarifies.

http://www.directbet.eu/

Yea the title isn't accurate, but it certainly is a flaw however it could only be abused but only when something very rare happens in a match. There is a reason nearly every other bookie will void live in play bets if there is a retirement anywhere in the match, of course pre match bets are a lot safer as those betting arn't betting on the chance of retirement.

first of all the name is not accurate at all as its not a hack or something just the website is programmed to work in that way and secondly i dont think its a way to make money out of it

I am certain it would not be accepted. In the future if you place a bet which is received by the bet id address after a player retires(in the case your player retires and loses)  , and Directbet quickly confirms your bet and results it in a loss after that , then this really wouldn't be right. Even a single case of someone having proof of this could result in the loss of their reputation.

I think all the bets which are placed at the time when the game is paused will get rejected or they will stop taking bets on that event for that particular period of time until the issue gets resolved and the play resumes.

But if they don't do this, they should void all the bets which are placed after a player incurred any injury, despite of the fact who was declared the winner. Maybe it's already written somewhere in their rules.

Edit: I think this rule will make those bets void.



Source: http://directbet.eu/Rules.cshtml

No, this site will usually accept your bet pretty quickly, with 0 confirmations.  So, if you're watching a match, you could definitely hit directbet pretty big using this tactic.  Once your bet is accepted, they cannot cancel it.  Just like they didn't refund mine even though my player got hurt.

yes its a flaw in their rules as bets should be voided when a player retires regardless, if the bet is placed live in play. I had the opposite happen to me where i bet a heavy favourite only for them to get injured and lose something like 6 straight games then retire.

The exploitation or hack (which im sure will be fixed now), is that you there are situations where a player slips and you can straight away tell they will probably retire (ie they stop moving or running to the ball, stand still and only win points off a big first serve but appear to wait for the end of a set or until they are broken or double broken to retire). Matches like this have happend and would cost them big if someone bets on it, i remember at Halle, it happend to monfils and then nishi again seppi where the commentators even said theres no way he finishes the set, bookies were still taking bets on seppi to win at like 1.8 but obviously voided them all as soon as nishi retired.

If a heavy favourite leads the first set by a break and gets a serious injury, often they will try to play until they eithor lose their break or lose it and go down a break

Well from my experience they decide really fast. They will never hold it on pending for a long time and would rather just refund it for the time being. However sometimes I even feel like if the retiring player is the one I bet on , then it gets accepted even if he retired before my bet even reached.

If a player is hurt it's not a promise that the match will be adjourned, it also happens sometimes that after a little treatment the play resumes and unless the other guy is winning you're going to lose that bet. And if you're betting after the players retires, your bet won't be accepted.


Right, I think the bet will stay in 'Pending' form until it is decided whether the game will continue or not and if it doesn't the bet will be rejected.

Considering you are betting live wouldn't the bet not even be accepted if you bet after seeing the player retire ? From my previous experience bets take time to show up and be accepted on their site and they are really fast with changing the odds or making it not available.

Please re-read next time.It's not a hack but you can take advantage of it.

so, whats the hack?

Yeah, I'm not disputing the rule.  I'm telling you that many sites have the 1 set completed rule, but then also have a rule for "live" betting which is different from bets that you make before the match started, that say the entire match must complete. 

About this bet rule is simple if 1 set is completed then retired player lost and other player winner few days back I have also this problem and after checking rules from different sites now I understand this all

So I just lost a bet that I placed "live" after a tennis match has started.  It appears that the player I bet on retired after I placed the bet and then the bet counts as a loss.  The rules say if one set is completed then the bets will stand.  I bet this match in the second set and the player retired in the third set. 

Other online betting sites I usually play at say if you bet live tennis then the match must complete, without retirements.  However, at directbet, you can apparently wait until you see a player hurt in the second or third set and then bet the other guy, and you'll win.  Seems like a weird rule setup, but hopefully someone can take advantage of it.