[...]

unbelievable. Holydarkness said that. I'll get link. Nutildah said it was word for word.

edit- I apologize for the mixup. I did misquote the wrong person. But I'll get the quotes from holydarkness saying the same. It was a mistake on my part. Obviously I'm not posting something that can be easily checked.

holydarkness
Nutildah - I apologize for my false allegation of calling you a liar.

[...]

---

Part Three

---

holydarkness said what in 27th June 2025?


[...]

I hope they come to their senses and resolve this, because it is quite obvious who is in the wrong here. Holydarkness was going to initiate contact with someone from their team, i'm just mentioning him here, in case there is any feedback to report, any?
I second that as well. It cannot be that they do not know that their self-exclusion system sucks, so the reason they let it be that way has to be what you said and that does not do their reputation any good i must say.

Sure, I have no problem doing it if Shuffle agrees. If they agree, then I need them to tell me the accusation and show proof as to why it’s valid. Then we could discuss the case. If need be, I’ll question the OP.

This has always been my normal account pattern and there was nothing unusual about those logins.

Regarding deposits and withdrawals, yes, I use a custodial service. I had already publicly posted the specific deposit related to these bets, as well as the withdrawal requests, including the cancelled ones.

what are we betting? Do it in one sentence. All 5 of your contacts were wrong last time. The book is not the middleman. The flag travels, nothing else. One book may have a $5 limit on a player, the second Betby book $100 and NL at the third Betby book. It's an individual risk tolerance set by the sportsbook. This is the problem. You rule for the sportsbooks because of the misinformation they pass to you.

Now now, boy, don't try to twist words again, it's a simple statement, you asked for one sentence, and I give you exactly one. Knows that --I believe most agreed-- you've entered a written agreement with me, following above reply.

The situation is simple: you accuse me of being clueless about how sportsbook and provider works. You brag about forcing sportsbook to pay both on-screen on your thread, or off-screen from PM and other methods. I raise a flag against you as you poses a risk of financial lost to members of our forum [the sportsbook] due to your confidence of your knowledge.

So I'll make it even more simple, since you're repetitively focusing on Xyes and BetPanda on this thread. This is the written agreement we've both entered as per your above reply:

"You, Rating Place, will escrow 1,560,000 USD, that will rightfully released and become holydarkness's upon holydarkness's capability to show proof that providers like betby do has direct influence and dictate outcomes on matches via flags because sportsbook like BetPanda or XYes follows their risk assessment."

No need to drag it. Simple "yes" or "no" will put us into binding agreement where you'll escrow the fund and I'll proceed by flooding this thread with abundant supporting evidence.

The sportsbook has the OP bet history. Don’t ever do binding arbitration again. It’s absurd what you are doing.

Shuffle knew the bets were from the same device. They didn’t tell you that. Because he used the same device, there was no reason for your investigation.

You didn’t see it because I edited above but the book makes an accusation and then they have to prove it. You make these things way too difficult.

The game wasn’t fixed.

The city in question is one of the most common places in Brazil for airport connections and domestic travel. It is extremely common for Brazilians to travel among them

I have family there, and I regularly travel there for to visit them, exactly as reflected in the login history I already provided you. The additional screenshots I sent via PM clearly show this same consistent pattern throughout the entire 2 years of my account activity.

What question about account details?

lol. I say I’m not home and will go post exact qoutes when I get home so that I can look at my PC. When I get home I post exact quotes. You mixed up threads, no big deal. You do it a lot.

Do you see quotes about something that I said wrong? No idea why you went to the wrong thread.

In your life, that’s important. I’m interested in the player losing $30k because of holy.

Holy, he used the same device. Shuffle knew this. Shuffle is trying to trick you and once again you took the bait.

That has always been completely normal behavior for my account.

The place you are referring to is only around a 1-hour flight away from where I live, and it is a location many Brazilians frequently travel to and from for work and personal reasons. There is absolutely nothing unusual about that, and my login pattern throughout nearly 2 years of account history has consistently been like this. I have also sent you additional proof regarding this privately via PM.

On top of that, the screenshot/log only shows “2 months ago”, not the exact date and exact timing of the bets themselves, so you cannot accurately conclude that I was supposedly somewhere unusual at the precise moment the wagers were placed.

And to be completely clear: I was not traveling abroad, I was not using a different device, and I was not using someone else’s account or allowing someone else to use mine.

Again, this is exactly what I meant when I said every answer simply creates another endless chain of speculation completely disconnected from the original accusation.

No, nothing unusual on my side.

The bets were placed normally from my usual device, using my normal account, with no suspicious activity, no traveling abroad, and no borrowed device involved.

My account was fully verified, and I also completed the additional Level 3 verification and liveness check they requested without any issues.

They already confirmed that the issue was not related to my account, my IP, my device, or my deposits. Their justification was always about the event itself and the supposed "integrity concerns" regarding that match.

Fair. Now that you brought it up, i didn't think of that from that angle. Just as an example, if anyone can clarify this for me, and i genuinly don't know. Let's imagine OP normally bets from his PC, but for some reason, he placed bets for example from his phone using his mobile phone internet connection. Both devices used by OP, but different devices and different IP's. Could OP still easily prove his innocence like that?

holy doesn't understand flags. When an unusual bet comes in a flag goes up. It could be before the game starts or during the game. It's AI and done instantly in case someone wants to halt bets. It can also be done automatically by the provider. After the game is when they determine if the game is fixed.

No one agreed with you. There was no proof. The accusation was match fixing.

 You did the same with BetPanda when they paid you through the sig campaign. This time $30,000 was on the line. There was no question what would happen.

 Don't ask questions, show me what I did wrong other than exposing your every scam where you rule for the book.

You are crooked. I'd never make a bet with you.

You set the OP up. Why did you introduce that the case be binding. It was a fix just like BetPanda and who knows how many more.

[...]

As i have been just following this case from the shadows, just for pure entertainment, i feel something needs to be answered here.

As soon as i saw holydarkness's response to rohang's questions, i immediatly thought, then why wasn't the player banned?

OP's response to the verdict made the same question i had in mind.

I think this is a very pertinent question to ask. If OP really lend his account or use other player's funds, and Shuffle has proof of that, then why were only those bets with higher stakes voided and not all of them, and why wasn't the player immediatly banned from the platform?

I don't have to prove anything. You have to prove I deserve negative trust. You should be jailed for what's been going on the last 2 years. Later I'll post how many posters said there was no proof of match fixing.

This case is not closed at all. I won fairly, using my own money, my own account, and logging in from the same places and devices I have always used. The accusations from Shuffle make no sense, and honestly, neither does this garbage mediation process that was supposed to be neutral and transparent but clearly was not.

The mediation was supposed to focus on the original accusation: alleged integrity concerns regarding the EVENT. Instead, the entire discussion got twisted into an endless interrogation about unrelated things, constantly moving goalposts and expanding far beyond what was originally agreed. That completely destroys the credibility of this so-called “binding mediation”.

I never had any issue showing deposits, login IPs, or anything else. The problem is obvious: no matter what I answered, more and more questions would keep appearing forever because the objective stopped being clarification and became trying to force a narrative that justified confiscating my winnings.

And where is Shuffle in all this? They barely even appear publicly. They don’t present evidence here, don’t defend their accusations openly, and don’t explain anything directly. Everything happens behind closed doors while my winnings get confiscated based on speculation and “trust me bro” conclusions.

What makes this even more ridiculous is that if I had actually committed such a serious violation, my account would obviously be suspended or permanently banned. But it isn’t. My account still works normally.

So what exactly are they claiming here? That I supposedly “lent” my account to someone else, yet the account remains active? Why did they ask for Level 3 verification and liveness checks then? Why were all verifications successfully completed? Why was the match itself admitted to be fair?

Too many questions still have no answers.

At the end of the day, there is still no concrete proof of match-fixing, no concrete proof I broke any rule, and no concrete proof I “lent” my account to anyone. Just assumptions, speculation, and a constantly changing narrative created after the bets won.

baba20 on the fixed match.

I do say that, because the casino [sportsbook provider] has to follow the warning flag. You do not believe that? You believe that the casino can just ignore the flag?

If yes, what stakes are you willing to enter for me to prove you wrong [given you have no reputation to be staked here]? I stake my reputation as DT and entire reputation of my existence here, I will cease to exist, if I am wrong. If I can prove that casino has to follow provider's flag, though... 1,560,000 USD a good enough number to show that you're a man with vast knowledge of the sportbetting dynamic? Previously we goes back and forth between 1,560,000 USD, so let's seal it here. Is this good? I can prove to the overseers here that, in many cases, casino has to follow?

If no, then please explain very clearly, yet shortly, why you say as above and parading all over the SA, disrupting mediation with those propaganda.

go to my thread. If you don't like and answer or want to twist things, you delete my replies.