Skip to main content

message for the ATP - do something NOW!

Stop playing tournaments in Russia - it's that simple. No respect for authority and importantly, no prosecutable laws for sporting corruption.

The latest fix, which was actually a spoof manoeuvre, designed purely to gain better odds for the syndicate pulling all the strings. Tursunov was never going to lose this one but he's obviously been approached to tank the first set so the syndicate could get far better odds on the victory...

From Tennisform again:

26 October 2010

17:14 Tursunov has been heavily opposed on Betfair from 1.23 to 1.9 (345K matched).

19:25 Tursunov came through in three sets against Michal Przysiezny in what appeared to be yet another predetermined outcome. The Russian rolled over for the first set before Przysiezny stopped trying in sets two and three. Tursunov won 82% of his service points but the stats are totally irrelevant. The Russian drifted hugely just prior to the off, to suggest that he wasn't going to win the first set, before the money poured onto him when he was a set down. The Russian was being backed at sub-1.10 odds despite trailing by a set before starting the deciding set at a ridiculous 1.02. Przysiezny showed absolutely no sign of injury. "The first match of a tournament is always difficult to win. You have to get used to the court and the balls. I was a little nervous but I am glad that I managed to win," said Tursunov laughingly afterwards. Tursunov 3/6 6/3 6/2.

--

This is now so farcical it is turning into wrestling, with results determined by scriptwriters, or in these cases, eastern European betting syndicates. Get off your arse ATP and do something about it NOW, or risk ruining the fabric of the sport across a whole continent, like cricket is in serious danger of...

Meanwhile the mainstream press are excited about a nothing story about how a senior IMG executive had a bet on Federer (one of his clients) to win the French Open back in 2007. Such a beat-up with absolutely no question over the integrity of Federer - he was just confident he could win. How exactly is that privileged information?? At that stage little did he know that Nadal would become the invincible force he is now...

UPDATE - Another questionable match this week in St Petersburg was Yen-Hsun Lu versus Potito Starace. The Italian drifted sharply from 2.3 to around 5 by the start of the match. In-play patterns have not been reported as unusual so the assumption is that Starace wasn't fully fit again and the information was leaked. Lu won comfortably, 6-2 6-2.

Comments

  1. Always one or two every R1, and pretty much the same names over and over and over and over.....

    Tipsarevic-Zeballos
    Volandi-Gabashvili
    Isner-Llodra
    Hajek-Riba
    Starace-Gabashvili

    That's just the last few weeks too.

    ReplyDelete
  2. wouldn't say it was quite that bad, but certainly at low-level events with very little at stake, it is rife. Some results have genuine reasons - guy will play injured so they can pick up their R1 loser's cheque, and the info gets out. That will always happen. It's when the nuances of the match are manipulated i.e. first set deliberately lost in order to gain a better price, then the other guy calls a medical timeout to justify how shit he is playing, they are the ones really stinking of fixes.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Yeah, although it's fairly obvious some players seem to be "injured" and it always "leaks" any time the draw is bad for them. For example, Ferrer to beat Dolgopolov at the US Open, the 3-0 was hit down to 1.10, literally any money available was taken.

    I'd agree totally scripted matches where both players are involved are relatively rare though, they stand out like a sore thumb and must draw some negatives in potential sponsorship, wildcards etc etc. Volandri-Gaba was one of those - Volandri won the opener, and Gabashvili's price was hammered down to 1.11 while still on serve. The acting was truly dreadful too, quite comical to watch.

    Tipsarev-Zeballos was another. Tipsy took the opening set, and his price increased to 3.00. Unsurprisingly, he then lost.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Thanks for your comments, but if you're a spammer, you've just wasted your time - it won't get posted.

Popular posts from this blog

Spot-fixing - you will never, ever be able to stop it

According to this report , IPL tournaments so far have been rife with spot-fixing - that is fixing minor elements of the game - runs in a single over, number of wides bowled etc. The curious part of that article is that the Income Tax department are supposed to have found these crimes. What idiot would be stupid enough to put down 'big wad of cash handed to me by bookie' as a source of income? Backhanders for sportsmen, particularly in a celebrity- and cricket-obsessed culture like India are not rare. They could come from anything like turning up to open someone's new business (not a sponsor, but a 'friend of a friend' arrangement), to being a guest at some devoted fan's dinner party etc. The opportunities are always there, and there will always be people trying to become friends with players and their entourage - that is human nature. This form of match-fixing (and it's not really fixing a match, just a minor element of it) is very hard to prove, but also, ...

lay the field - my favourite racing strategy

Dabbling with laying the field in-running at various prices today, not just one price, but several in the same race. Got several matched in the previous race at Brighton, then this race came along at Nottingham. Such a long straight at Nottingham makes punters often over-react and think the finish line is closer than it actually is. As you can see by the number of bets matched, there was plenty of volatility in this in-play market. It's rare you'll get a complete wipe-out with one horse getting matched at all levels, but it can happen, so don't give yourself too much risk...

It's all gone Pete Tong at Betfair!

The Christmas Hurdle from Leopardstown, a good Grade 2 race during the holiday period. But now it will go into history as the race which brought Betfair down. Over £21m at odds of 29 available on Voler La Vedette in-running - that's a potential liability of over £500m. You might think that's a bit suspicious, something's fishy, especially with the horse starting at a Betfair SP of 2.96. Well, this wasn't a horse being stopped by a jockey either - the bloody horse won! Look at what was matched at 29. Split that in half and multiply by 28 for the actual liability for the layer(s). (Matched amounts always shown as double the backers' stake, never counts the layers' risk). There's no way a Betfair client would have £600m+ in their account. Maybe £20 or even £50m from the massive syndicates who regard(ed) Betfair as safer than any bank, but not £600m. So the error has to be something technical. However, rumour has it, a helpdesk reply (not gospel, natur...