Topic: FAIRLAY - SPORTS BETTING for experts - highest liquidity, provably best odds - page 36. (Read 135445 times)
October 06, 2017, 11:07:49 PM
Any plans for Bitcoin Cash support?
October 06, 2017, 10:02:26 PM
Regarding the upcoming hard fork:
We will most likely switch to the SegWit2X blockchain. In that case those bets that were placed before the hard fork and settled after it will only be settled on the SegWit2X chain and will be voided on the legacy chain.
We are once more asking all users to pull their support from all Core developers who are working for Blockstream. These developers have a serious conflict of interest and are unfit to lead the Bitcoin development.
Our ticker symbol for SegWit2X will be BTC. Legacy Bitcoin will be made available for withdraw and to trade against BTC (2X).
We will write a blog post once our decision is final.
Further announcements will be posted on our blog from now on: http://blog.fairlay.com/
We will most likely switch to the SegWit2X blockchain. In that case those bets that were placed before the hard fork and settled after it will only be settled on the SegWit2X chain and will be voided on the legacy chain.
We are once more asking all users to pull their support from all Core developers who are working for Blockstream. These developers have a serious conflict of interest and are unfit to lead the Bitcoin development.
Our ticker symbol for SegWit2X will be BTC. Legacy Bitcoin will be made available for withdraw and to trade against BTC (2X).
We will write a blog post once our decision is final.
Further announcements will be posted on our blog from now on: http://blog.fairlay.com/
October 06, 2017, 08:28:32 PM
Is this betting on blockchain? Or only use bitcoin to bet on your site?
October 06, 2017, 07:29:50 PM
Could you tell your market makers that they should consider seeding the horse betting markets
with more liquidity?
Right now I want to place a bet on a horse race that starts in roughly 25 minutes.
It´s not an exotic event, but rather the opening race of the racing day at
Ascot (one of the more prominent racing stops).
On the favorite (Alaadeel) I can place only a paltry 6 mBTC. This is not, because someone
took away the available liquidity (the market has no bets as of now), but rather
because the market maker didn´t offer more than 6 mBTC.
I can understand when the market maker doesn´t want to expose himself on a longshot,
but I´m talking about the favorite here.
with more liquidity?
Right now I want to place a bet on a horse race that starts in roughly 25 minutes.
It´s not an exotic event, but rather the opening race of the racing day at
Ascot (one of the more prominent racing stops).
On the favorite (Alaadeel) I can place only a paltry 6 mBTC. This is not, because someone
took away the available liquidity (the market has no bets as of now), but rather
because the market maker didn´t offer more than 6 mBTC.
I can understand when the market maker doesn´t want to expose himself on a longshot,
but I´m talking about the favorite here.
We have several market makers in the horse racing section. If you provide a link to the market we can notify the market maker.
October 06, 2017, 06:16:40 PM
Could you tell your market makers that they should consider seeding the horse betting markets
with more liquidity?
Right now I want to place a bet on a horse race that starts in roughly 25 minutes.
It´s not an exotic event, but rather the opening race of the racing day at
Ascot (one of the more prominent racing stops).
On the favorite (Alaadeel) I can place only a paltry 6 mBTC. This is not, because someone
took away the available liquidity (the market has no bets as of now), but rather
because the market maker didn´t offer more than 6 mBTC.
I can understand when the market maker doesn´t want to expose himself on a longshot,
but I´m talking about the favorite here.
with more liquidity?
Right now I want to place a bet on a horse race that starts in roughly 25 minutes.
It´s not an exotic event, but rather the opening race of the racing day at
Ascot (one of the more prominent racing stops).
On the favorite (Alaadeel) I can place only a paltry 6 mBTC. This is not, because someone
took away the available liquidity (the market has no bets as of now), but rather
because the market maker didn´t offer more than 6 mBTC.
I can understand when the market maker doesn´t want to expose himself on a longshot,
but I´m talking about the favorite here.
I'm supporting your request. A month ago I tried to sue Fl for horses but the liquidity totally sucks. And horses are event who are attracting X00,000 pound on every start on betfair.
October 06, 2017, 08:38:43 AM
Could you tell your market makers that they should consider seeding the horse betting markets
with more liquidity?
Right now I want to place a bet on a horse race that starts in roughly 25 minutes.
It´s not an exotic event, but rather the opening race of the racing day at
Ascot (one of the more prominent racing stops).
On the favorite (Alaadeel) I can place only a paltry 6 mBTC. This is not, because someone
took away the available liquidity (the market has no bets as of now), but rather
because the market maker didn´t offer more than 6 mBTC.
I can understand when the market maker doesn´t want to expose himself on a longshot,
but I´m talking about the favorite here.
with more liquidity?
Right now I want to place a bet on a horse race that starts in roughly 25 minutes.
It´s not an exotic event, but rather the opening race of the racing day at
Ascot (one of the more prominent racing stops).
On the favorite (Alaadeel) I can place only a paltry 6 mBTC. This is not, because someone
took away the available liquidity (the market has no bets as of now), but rather
because the market maker didn´t offer more than 6 mBTC.
I can understand when the market maker doesn´t want to expose himself on a longshot,
but I´m talking about the favorite here.
October 04, 2017, 10:06:47 PM
So in this screenshot, am I betting NC State +5 at -171 odds?
THANK YOU!
So would you say the fact that I clicked the "bet against +171" square and then an input box with odds -171 comes up. Wouldn't you say that's a bug or at the very least counter-intuitive? I don't get that at all!
October 04, 2017, 06:29:00 PM
This looks very promising indeed but I don't think I will be using it any moment from now. I will be observing and waiting for feedbacks from other users first and I hope those are positive ones. Hope this becomes very successful!
October 03, 2017, 08:31:05 PM
So in this screenshot, am I betting NC State +5 at -171 odds?
THANK YOU!
So would you say the fact that I clicked the "bet against +171" square and then an input box with odds -171 comes up. Wouldn't you say that's a bug or at the very least counter-intuitive? I don't get that at all!
Maybe, but this is how the exchange view works (as implemented on Betfair, Betdaq, Matchbook, Smarkets and many more). +171 are the odds someone else is asking for. We will however follow matchbook and offer a bookmaker view soon for users who are not used to it.
October 03, 2017, 08:24:07 PM
Yes that is correct, you are betting on the other team (NC State) with a handicap of +5 at -171.
THANK YOU!
So would you say the fact that I clicked the "bet against +171" square and then an input box with odds -171 comes up. Wouldn't you say that's a bug or at the very least counter-intuitive? I don't get that at all!
October 03, 2017, 08:02:51 PM
Hope someone can help with an account issue. I've had an account at Fairlay for quite a long while that I used occasionally, but when I went to log in today it would not accept my user name and password that I had been using. I noticed that login fields since the re-design now ask for an email address (instead of a user name) and a password but it would not accept those either. So I followed the Forgot Password link to try to re-set my password and it said that I was sent a new password. But I haven't received it yet at my email address a couple of hours later now.
please send an email to [email protected]
October 03, 2017, 07:59:44 PM
Hope someone can help with an account issue. I've had an account at Fairlay for quite a long while that I used occasionally, but when I went to log in today it would not accept my user name and password that I had been using. I noticed that login fields since the re-design now ask for an email address (instead of a user name) and a password but it would not accept those either. So I followed the Forgot Password link to try to re-set my password and it said that I was sent a new password. But I haven't received it yet at my email address a couple of hours later now.
October 03, 2017, 08:08:40 AM
Hi fairlay, Question how long will the https://old.fairlay.com/ be available for? and are we safe using that for now? Will it work just like it has in past? ty
So far, so good. The old site is not great, but perfectly usable as long as you are not in a hurry. The new site...looks like a high school coding project to be honest. I used to tell people, "it's takes a bit to get used to, but the interface is fine." I just cannot say that with a straight face anymore. I would scrap it and start from scratch. Why not make it as easy to use as Matchbook? If you display +120, and the user clicks on +120, he should be getting +120 odds, not -120... The whole "ON" vs. "AGAINST" set-up is extremely counter-intuitive and unnecessary/redundant for sports wagering.
We will follow matchbook and add an option to switch from exchange view to bookmaker view. Is there anything else in particular that needs to be improved?
October 03, 2017, 03:02:25 AM
Hi fairlay, Question how long will the https://old.fairlay.com/ be available for? and are we safe using that for now? Will it work just like it has in past? ty
So far, so good. The old site is not great, but perfectly usable as long as you are not in a hurry. The new site...looks like a high school coding project to be honest. I used to tell people, "it's takes a bit to get used to, but the interface is fine." I just cannot say that with a straight face anymore. I would scrap it and start from scratch. Why not make it as easy to use as Matchbook? If you display +120, and the user clicks on +120, he should be getting +120 odds, not -120... The whole "ON" vs. "AGAINST" set-up is extremely counter-intuitive and unnecessary/redundant for sports wagering.
October 03, 2017, 02:04:52 AM
Hi fairlay, Question how long will the https://old.fairlay.com/ be available for? and are we safe using that for now? Will it work just like it has in past? ty
So far, so good. The old site is not great, but perfectly usable as long as you are not in a hurry. The new site...looks like a high school coding project to be honest. I used to tell people, "it's takes a bit to get used to, but the interface is fine." I just cannot say that with a straight face anymore. I would scrap it and start from scratch. Why not make it as easy to use as Matchbook? If you display +120, and the user clicks on +120, he should be getting +120 odds, not -120... The whole "ON" vs. "AGAINST" set-up is extremely counter-intuitive and unnecessary/redundant for sports wagering.
October 02, 2017, 10:58:15 PM
Yes But the line has changed its -118.0 + 5 NC State
https://old.fairlay.com/market/louisville-nc-state-1/
So the fact that I click "+171 bet against" and in the input box I get "-171" you'd call that a bug? Or is that logical somehow?
https://fairlay.com/market/louisville-nc-state-1/
It’s -118....don’t go by number you see click on it that’s the correct line
October 02, 2017, 10:03:09 PM
So in this screenshot, am I betting NC State +5 at -171 odds?
October 02, 2017, 08:57:37 PM
Yes But the line has changed its -118.0 + 5 NC State
https://old.fairlay.com/market/louisville-nc-state-1/
So the fact that I click "+171 bet against" and in the input box I get "-171" you'd call that a bug? Or is that logical somehow?
October 02, 2017, 06:05:47 PM
Yes But the line has changed its -118.0 + 5 NC State
https://old.fairlay.com/market/louisville-nc-state-1/
October 02, 2017, 03:46:19 PM
Jump to: