Bifrost Integration Chat — 2026-03-04 (Wednesday)

Channel: #forsyt-bm-integration (Suntech Innovation Slack)

Badal Agrawal — 12:15 PM

@Michael Cheremuhin Let us know how is the testing going on. Any other issues yet?

Michael Cheremuhin — 1:23 PM

@Badal Agrawal hi! please check the following:

critical. check the last bet from me (my user is adsad), it failed on placement, deducted my balance and got stuck forever. the case is - i can't see it from our side, most probably it didn't hit us
critical. you doesn't seem to pass us correct member name as we are receiving it as 'forsyt', please check. we don't need any information about your members, but we need any form of unique identifier so our risk management system could identify fraud among different bets of the same member. numeric or uuid will be totally fine.
average. after bet is added to betslip, market max stake doesn't update in betslip. overall our system supports multiple prices per side per selection (exchange style with 6 prices per selection) and for such offering we control max stake per each price which might be changing pretty often. i'd recommend updating betslip as well.
cosmetics. up to you to decide, but when we are voiding the bets you show that bet was rejected offering to try again. if you show it for any bet that is not in status=PLACED, might be you were considering to handle also status=VOID (you can also use voidReason from bet snapshot in case of complains from members). if that's intended, the voiding flow seems to be fine. the bets also sits in Canceled tab in My Bets, Voided tab is reserved for other case? overall things look very responsive, odds and statuses are correct and fast. basic cases passed.

unfortunately i drained the balance with that stuck bet, so need more balance as i'm passing it further to conformance team.

Thread (1 replies):

Bhargav — 8:47 PM @Michael Cheremuhin Hey Michael! All 4 issues are fixed and deployed to bhdev.

Stuck bet — You're right, it never hit your side. Bug was on our end in the placement flow. Fixed, and your balance is already auto-refunded back to 5000 — should be good to go.

memberCode — Fixed. Now sending a unique UUID per user instead of the platform-level 'forsyt'.

Betslip maxStake — Fixed. Betslip now syncs with live price/stake updates from WS.

Voided bets — Fixed. Voids now show as a settlement outcome with a "Bet Voided" message and purple badge in Settled + Voided tabs. Also reading voidReason from the snapshot.

Let us know if you find any other issues and if we are ready to continue with the conformance team.

Badal Agrawal — 1:29 PM

@Bhargav Lets fix these asap.

Lets test 1 across dev, prod and your personal branch as well. Fixing this should also automatically refund the stuck amount right?
Small change. Will fix asap.
Need to debug, should be easily reproducible.
Voided bets should ideally appear in Bet History with Settled filter applied and outcome = Voided. Showing as Cancelled is NOT the expected behaviour. Seems like a bug. We can get on a quick huddle to discuss and close this. CC: @Prashant Malik

Michael Cheremuhin — 11:10 PM

@Bhargav hi! please check some more cases

Thread (18 replies):

Michael Cheremuhin — 11:11 PM

For Fancy markets, e.g. Session, are you charging 5% commision on top of the margin that we already send to you in the lines or prices?

Michael Cheremuhin — 11:12 PM 2. Something odd before i place a bet. If i bet YES on a session i get this which suggests that if i bet 100points at a Harjeet price of 100, i will get back 200 points which is correct

Michael Cheremuhin — 11:12 PM 📎 image.png

Michael Cheremuhin — 11:12 PM however when i bet NO, i get the message that i am betting 100points at Harjeet price of 100 to return 100 only

Michael Cheremuhin — 11:12 PM 📎 image.png

Michael Cheremuhin — 11:12 PM 3. Most important - when i place a 100 point bet on YES at Harjeet price of 100, it goes through and takes 100points off my balance (and when i settle it returns 95 which looks like 100 minus 5% commission), but when i try and place a 100point bet on NO at Harjeet 100 price it gives me this error. This to me is suggesting that your system thinks that the 100 price is a decimal price of 100.0, or 99/1 in fractions, the 2 pictures being for 100points and 200 points -instead of at 2.00/evens

Michael Cheremuhin — 11:12 PM 📎 image.png

Michael Cheremuhin — 11:12 PM 📎 image.png

Michael Cheremuhin — 11:13 PM some other comments/questions: 4. Clicking 'max' in the betslip puts in a number far above the actual max which will get rejected (VERY minor) 5. If a customer opens a bet slip at a particular price (99.9% in MO but it can be Fancy too), and we have changed our price to be bigger, you do not pass on the better price to the customer (partner preference but we beleive that if customers have a betslip open on a stale price and our price gets better we should pass it on. For instance if customer is slow (mobile phone) and there has been an event that changes a price (e.g. boundary or wicket), the price can move wildly different, but the customer takes the very poor old price and will be unhappy that you have allowed that) 6. Out of interest, what do the green and red box highlighting represent - is it simply green = drifting, red = shortening for Match Odds? Core Fancy doesn't follow this pattern. Some fancy doesn't have colouring at all and some mimics MO

Michael Cheremuhin — 2:59 PM @Bhargav @Badal Agrawal @Prashant Malik hi! any updates on the items above?

Bhargav — 3:07 PM Hi Michael, thanks for the detailed feedback. Updates:

Commission on Fancy markets: We found a config mistmatch — our commission was set to 5% instead of the intended 2%. This has been corrected. The 2% commission is on net market winnings at settlement (exchange-style), and is separate from any margin in your prices/lines. We do NOT apply additional margin on top of your fancy/session prices.

2 & 3. YES/NO betting and settlement: Fixed — our system was misinterpreting the Harjeet rate on the NO side. 4. Max stake in betslip: Fixed — now correctly shows the available size from the price ladder. 5. Price updates in betslip: Fixed — we now always pass through the latest price to the customer, whether better or worse. 6. It's our own UX for now. Deploying now. Will confirm when ready for testing.

Michael Cheremuhin — 3:15 PM regarding #5. it might be confusing for the member if odds are silently decreased. though up to you to decide

Michael Cheremuhin — 3:26 PM regarding #1. one of the selling points for our bookmaker offering is it's intended to be commission free as it has margin with already included commission there. keeping the commission will make bookmaker offering not so interesting as marking it with "0% commision"

Bhargav — 4:16 PM @Michael Cheremuhin On #5 — agreed, we've changed it so we only pass through better prices. If the price worsens, the customer keeps their original price.

On #1 — understood, that's a good point. We'll discuss internally whether to remove commission on bookmaker/fancy markets since the margin is already baked in. Will get back to you on this.

All fixes are deployed. You can test and give us feedback.

Bhargav — 4:24 PM We also noticed a couple of more users. Do you want us to allocate points to them?

Badal Agrawal — 4:30 PM 5. What do you mean? If the odds worsen and we do not update in the betslip, it would still get executed at the updated worse odds right?

@Michael Cheremuhin

Bhargav — 5:11 PM Update on #1 — confirmed, no commission on bookmaker markets. Your sportsbook offering is commission-free as intended.

Michael Cheremuhin — 5:53 PM 5. I mean you might update only if odds gets better, if it became worse you can keep the bet failing