entain_sgm_price
Price a custom Same Game Multi for Entain events by sending selections from one event; get the correlation-adjusted combined odds, including combinations the book hasn't pre-built.
Instructions
PRICE A SAME GAME MULTI you choose — give it selections from one Entain (Ladbrokes/Neds) event, get the correlation-adjusted combined price. Prices combinations the book has not pre-built (for those, see entain_graphql_call SportingEventPopularSameGameMultis). Several events can be priced in one call.
Returns: {prices:{:{available: true, odds:{numerator: 27, denominator: 10}}}} — keyed by event id, one entry per event you asked about. VERIFIED live 2026-08-27 against AFL Melbourne v Carlton (event eccdc4f5-e01e-4aca-afab-570869b53702), unauthenticated.
ODDS ARE FRACTIONAL AND DECIMAL = numerator/denominator + 1. 27/10 is 3.70 — not 2.7, and not 27. Confirmed against the site's own displayed prices on the same event: Melbourne showed 2.15 and returns 23/20, Over showed 1.88 and returns 22/25. Every price in entain_sport_event_card is the same shape, so the conversion is the provider's convention rather than this endpoint's quirk. FORGETTING THE +1 UNDERSTATES EVERY PRICE.
THE PRICE IS NOT THE PRODUCT OF THE LEGS. Melbourne (2.15) with Over 173.5 (1.88) prices 3.70, against a naive 4.042.
IT SILENTLY COLLAPSES A REDUNDANT LEG AND STILL SAYS available: true. Melbourne to win plus Melbourne on the line returned 23/20 — 2.15, the SINGLE-LEG price — with no echo of the legs and nothing marking the drop. Repeating one selection twice does the same. There is no leg list in the response, so RESTATE THE SELECTIONS YOU SENT whenever you report a price, and treat a price equal to a shorter combination's as a collapse.
SOME IMPOSSIBLE COMBINATIONS ARE QUOTED RATHER THAN REFUSED, AT BIG PRICES. The conflict detector is good but not complete. Every exactly-two-entrant SGM-available market on the verified event was tested (41 of them): 35 correctly refused their mutually exclusive pair, and FIVE priced it — Match Betting, both teams to win, at 146.51, plus each of the four Quarter Match Betting markets at 70-82. The failing set is the WIN-MARKET FAMILY with two entrants and an implicit draw; the three-entrant version that lists Tie as an entrant (1st Half Betting) is refused correctly.
TWO CLIENT-SIDE DEFENCES, because nothing in the payload marks exclusivity. FIRST, honour same_game_multi_available from entain_sport_event_card — THE PRICER IGNORES ITS OWN FLAG (12 of 14 markets marked unavailable were priced anyway, including the two worst impossible quotes, Highest Scoring Half at 143.65 and 1st Half Match Betting at 110.18). SECOND, do not combine two legs from the SAME market_id unless you know that market permits it: every hole found is a same-market pair. Legitimate same-market pairs do exist — nested Alternate Handicaps/Totals lines, and multi-winner props like Anytime Goal Kicker — so a blanket rule costs a little coverage and removes the whole class.
DO NOT USE num_winners FOR THIS. It was tried and it does not mean exclusivity in either direction: Melbourne Alternate Handicaps is num_winners 1 with 96 nested lines that legitimately combine, while Race To 15 is num_winners 3 with two mutually exclusive entrants.
A bet that cannot win, quoted at 146.51, looks exactly like a longshot with enormous edge, which is what an automated screener selects for. Never trust available: true as proof a combination is coherent.
WHEN IT DOES DETECT A CLASH IT IS THE BEST DIAGNOSTIC OF ANY BOOK HERE: {available: false, conflicting_selections:[{market_id, entrant_id}, …]} names the exact pair. It correctly refused Over with Under, both line sides, two margin bands, and cross-market impossibilities like Melbourne to win with Carlton by 1-39.
available: false WITH NO odds KEY is also what an unknown event returns, quietly and alongside the events that did price. Unlike the other Australian books there is no fake zero to guard against — a refusal simply has no number — but a missing odds must never be read as 0.
Malformed requests are real HTTP 400s naming the problem: a selection missing market_id or entrant_id, and event id must match key when the map key and the inner event_id disagree.
Example: Price Melbourne to win with over 173.5 points {"same_game_multies": {"eccdc4f5-e01e-4aca-afab-570869b53702": {"event_id": "eccdc4f5-e01e-4aca-afab-570869b53702", "selections": [{"market_id": "c73591e5-b00e-4c92-abfb-b3737acbdd30", "entrant_id": "49475673-c7b8-4b49-8c87-e14637ebfa5c"}, {"market_id": "2bc6b298-4fce-4545-93cd-ed232a9c69a0", "entrant_id": "8ada7d51-2a67-4bcb-9593-f9fcbbbd5188"}]}}}
Auth: works without a key; ENTAIN_REFRESH_TOKEN unlocks more if set.
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| same_game_multies | Yes | The whole request envelope: a MAP KEYED BY EVENT ID whose value repeats that id. {"<eventId>": {"event_id": "<eventId>", "selections": [{"market_id": "…", "entrant_id": "…"}, …]}}. THE KEY AND THE INNER `event_id` MUST BE THE SAME STRING — they are not redundant, a mismatch is a 400 saying so. Both ids per selection come from entain_sport_event_card: `market_id` is a key of `markets`, `entrant_id` a key of `entrants` (whose own `market_id` must be that market). More than one event may be priced in a single call — that is what the map is for — and each is answered independently under its own key. |