+1
Smarkets public API
-
- Posts: 3140
- Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2010 8:06 pm
vide0star wrote: ↑Mon Jun 04, 2018 6:36 pmOur erroneous bets policy lays out what we honour and when trades get busted, similar to Nasdaq. It's not cool for me to comment on individual cases for privacy reasons. The OP is very welcome to email me if they are still aggrieved.
Is there interest for me to host a conference call? I'd be happy if you guys want to jump on a chat and you can hammer me with questions.
" If the erroneous bet was matched at a price of +-15% of the fair market price at the time, Smarkets reserves the right to void the bet."
How many punters have requested bets voided, and how many bets voided for market makers? 15% is a very small window on fluid betting markets.
"3. Outlier transactions
In the case of outlier transactions Smarkets may, at its sole and absolute discretion and on a case by case basis, carry out investigations into trades beyond the 60 minute reporting window or after events have been settled.
Outlier transactions are defined as bets matched at a price that exceeds +-20% of the determined fair market price at the time the bet was matched.
4. Defining fair market price
When a complaint is filed, Smarkets will use any available resources, including but not limited to, recent trades on the Smarkets exchange and prices available elsewhere at the time, to determine the fair market price at the time the bet was matched. If the erroneous bet was matched at a price of +-15% of the fair market price at the time, Smarkets reserves the right to void the bet.
In addition to recent execution prices and prices available on other platforms at the time the bet was matched, Smarkets may also consider a number of additional factors when deciding whether a bet is clearly erroneous.
These include, but are not limited to, system malfunction, the volatility of the contract, new information becoming available in the public domain that may significantly alter the price (such as team news for a football match), whether the result of the bet had been unconditionally decided before a complaint was raised, whether betting on the market was recently halted and resumed, the start price of the selection and if the complainant had taken any steps to limit their exposure to the erroneous bet.
In cases where Smarkets cannot provide a reasonable determination of the fair price of the contract, no bets will be voided."
I wouldn't touch it with a barge poll.
If the price jumps briefly from 10.0 to 12.0 and you back it, how long would you have to sit and wait to find out if the bet will be voided?
Do you lay it at 10.0 and risk having your back bet voided?
If the price jumps briefly from 10.0 to 12.0 and you back it, how long would you have to sit and wait to find out if the bet will be voided?
Do you lay it at 10.0 and risk having your back bet voided?
We're adding about one market maker a month and was on this forum to answer questions and clear up misunderstanding. This community is a bunch exchange power users and I respect you guys a lot. Not trying to get you guys as customers, I know you need the power tools that Peter provides.
It might be a bit of a new age-y term, but the point remains, can you name a bookmaker or exchange who is more transparent than Smarkets? By open kimono I meant we're very transparent about our financials, how the exchange works, our plans, our views, etc.ShaunWhite wrote: ↑Mon Jun 04, 2018 7:12 pmThat must be the most ridiculous, obnoxious piece of business-speak bullshit I've ever heard.
It's not clever, it's not describing something new, and a prime example of why middle management desperation to sound clever is ridiculed.
'open kimono' FFS get a grip man and stop being such a pseud.
The policy is pretty deterministic of what qualifies and what doesn't so that we don't make judgement calls in this area.
I don't have that information in front of me but anecdotally I'd say it happens a handful of times per month.spreadbetting wrote: ↑Mon Jun 04, 2018 9:02 pm
" If the erroneous bet was matched at a price of +-15% of the fair market price at the time, Smarkets reserves the right to void the bet."
How many punters have requested bets voided, and how many bets voided for market makers? 15% is a very small window on fluid betting markets.
The point I'm making is that if you open a trade, in certain circumstances you won't know if the bet is valid before you close trade, making the market untradable!!
Wouldn’t it be much more transparent simply not to have such policies of “erroneous” or “outlier” bet voiding?
After all, the definition of a fair price is what a buyer is offering to buy at and a seller offering to sell at. The price would not have been matched had both parties not agreed at that price at the same time. That’s the whole point of an exchange! Yes, mistakes can be made, but people should take responsibility for the odds they offer and take. They should be implicitly agreeing to it when they take part on the exchange. I know I am. Otherwise integrity of the exchange is compromised and you end up back in this “bookmaker style” arbitrary decision making. Like Derek says, how do I know my bet will be honoured if I’ve matched a spike?
Of course there need to be rules for technical failures, but in that case a whole market should be void or all bets across a time period, and not this one bet or that one bet.
After all, the definition of a fair price is what a buyer is offering to buy at and a seller offering to sell at. The price would not have been matched had both parties not agreed at that price at the same time. That’s the whole point of an exchange! Yes, mistakes can be made, but people should take responsibility for the odds they offer and take. They should be implicitly agreeing to it when they take part on the exchange. I know I am. Otherwise integrity of the exchange is compromised and you end up back in this “bookmaker style” arbitrary decision making. Like Derek says, how do I know my bet will be honoured if I’ve matched a spike?
Of course there need to be rules for technical failures, but in that case a whole market should be void or all bets across a time period, and not this one bet or that one bet.
As an example to the “grey” area mentioned above. What happens if the price on Betfair spikes, but it doesn’t on Smarkets. What’s the fair price in that case?
Perhaps the price will continue where the spike went on Betfair and Smarkets will eventually adjust. Maybe it won’t and the price on Betfair will return to where it was. But for that moment they’ll be more than 20% apart.
The point is that there’s no such thing as a fair price other than what the peers are trading with each other on the exchange. Otherwise the exchange is pointless if someone behind the scenes is deciding what the price should be.
In summary, don’t control the market. Let the market find it’s own efficiency. The participants of the exchange can do it all fine themselves. Otherwise you’re just like Betfair introducing things like cross matching which was never needed, and ultimately gave themselves a bad name in communities like these.
Perhaps the price will continue where the spike went on Betfair and Smarkets will eventually adjust. Maybe it won’t and the price on Betfair will return to where it was. But for that moment they’ll be more than 20% apart.
The point is that there’s no such thing as a fair price other than what the peers are trading with each other on the exchange. Otherwise the exchange is pointless if someone behind the scenes is deciding what the price should be.
In summary, don’t control the market. Let the market find it’s own efficiency. The participants of the exchange can do it all fine themselves. Otherwise you’re just like Betfair introducing things like cross matching which was never needed, and ultimately gave themselves a bad name in communities like these.
I like the fact he was honest about this, but this policy is the reason I won't be joining them
How many races has this ever been affected? I don't agree with it but if it is just once then that isn't too bad.
Do these big liquidity players use bots to determine what price they should offer relative to BF or do they do it independently?
Btw it feels like dragons den on here
Do these big liquidity players use bots to determine what price they should offer relative to BF or do they do it independently?
Btw it feels like dragons den on here
-
- Posts: 3140
- Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2010 8:06 pm
vide0star wrote: ↑Mon Jun 04, 2018 11:54 pmI don't have that information in front of me but anecdotally I'd say it happens a handful of times per month.spreadbetting wrote: ↑Mon Jun 04, 2018 9:02 pm
" If the erroneous bet was matched at a price of +-15% of the fair market price at the time, Smarkets reserves the right to void the bet."
How many punters have requested bets voided, and how many bets voided for market makers? 15% is a very small window on fluid betting markets.
A handful of times for who though? Requests from the market makers I presume?
-
- Posts: 3140
- Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2010 8:06 pm
They're an "open kimono betting company" so you'd expect that honestly, LeTiss
They're obviously in a catch 22 situation having to appease their market makers with restrictions to the API and palpable bet policies in place in order to guarantee liquidity to the exchange. If they hadn't sold their soul for early liquidity it's unlikely they'd have lasted so for them it was a wise move even though it probably caps your likely growth. I guess the big payday is just around the corner if they play their cards right though.
https://youtu.be/3p-9o9EQ4OQ