Did we suspect an innocent??
Bet scandal worries Davydenko
RUSSIAN Nikolay Davydenko is worried his reputation will suffer after becoming embroiled in a betting controversy. Davydenko retired with a foot injury in the third set of his match with Argentine Martin Vasallo Arguello at the ATP event in Sopot, Poland, last week, only to find the match was at the centre of a betting scandal. “-It’-s so surprising,”- Davydenko said in Montreal, where he is competing in the Masters Series tournament. “-Like, who can know that I can be injured and (would) retire in my match? “-I am disappointed, because I’-m a top player and people are talking (about it) not only in Russia, in my country, (but) also talking everywhere in the world. “-It is pretty tough for me, I get more pressure now. Mentally, it’-s pretty tough.”- British betting exchange Betfair voided all bets on the match, saying $8.55 million had been placed on it, more than twice the usual amount. Though world No. 5 Davydenko won the first set, Vasallo Arguello —- ranked about 80 places lower —- became the favourite, the opposite of normal practice in such a situation. Betfair voided all bets and notified the governing body of men’-s tennis, the ATP. Davydenko said he was not in contact with anyone regarding the throwing of a match. “-I play 30 tournaments in a year,”- he said. “-Last year I lost 10 tournaments in the first round and also sometimes I’-m injured and I retire from a match.”-
– Reuters
Previous: CORRUPTION IN TENNIS: the Nikolay Davydenko vs. Vassallo Arguello prediction markets at BetFair
More info from The Guardian
NEXT: BetFair has an anti-fraud team whereas InTrade-TradeSports has none.
Read the previous blog posts by Chris F. Masse:
- Terrorism Futures
- InTrade-TradeSports and BetFair-TradeFair should take a close look at Cantor Fitzgerald’s strategy to gain a share of the $100 billion U.S. gambling industry.
- The secrecy-seeking Mark Davies is solely to blame for all this mess… but this vibrating BetFair spin doctor has managed to repair the PR damages quite brillantly, it shall be said.
- A Betting Exchange = A Bookmaker —> !??
- BetFair’s new bet matching logic + BetFair Malta’s trading on the multiples
- Dick Cheney, the new Churchill?
- BetFair Malta’s combo market maker (trading algorithm + human market makers) operating on the multiples
Of course there is no need for the player himself to have been involved for there to have been gambling-inspired corruption. A trainer, coach or official might have means for influencing an outcome.
And Betfair, suspecting foul play, is within its contracted rights to call off bets placed through its service, and further provides a public service when it notifies the organizers of the underlying event of its suspicions.
This LA Times article has more details about the tennis betting scandal: http://www.latimes.com/sports/…..k=ntottext
That someone would make anonymous calls to players and offer them money to throw a match sounds ridiculous. More realistic is the articles report that coaches have been approached for non-public information that impacts a player’s game, e.g., injury reports.
An athlete throwing a match is good reason to void a bet, but isn’t finding out about an injury just good research?
“An athlete throwing a match is good reason to void a bet, but isn’t finding out about an injury just good research?”
Good question. Suppose a fan had spotted Davydenko limping earlier in the day, mentioned it to a friend, and the friend – believing he has an inside edge – begins betting heavily on the information.
How can Betfair and/or the ATP distinguish between betting on new information and betting based on corruption?
Corruption is when the athlete is paid back with the profits made by short-selling his event derivative —short-selling done by accomplices who received insider info that the athlete will make effort to lose the game (as opposed to try to win it).
Of course there is no need for the player himself to have been involved for there to have been gambling-inspired corruption. A trainer, coach or official might have means for influencing an outcome.
And Betfair, suspecting foul play, is within its contracted rights to call off bets placed through its service, and further provides a public service when it notifies the organizers of the underlying event of its suspicions.
This LA Times article has more details about the tennis betting scandal: http://www.latimes.com/sports/…..k=ntottext
That someone would make anonymous calls to players and offer them money to throw a match sounds ridiculous. More realistic is the articles report that coaches have been approached for non-public information that impacts a player’s game, e.g., injury reports.
An athlete throwing a match is good reason to void a bet, but isn’t finding out about an injury just good research?
“An athlete throwing a match is good reason to void a bet, but isn’t finding out about an injury just good research?”
Good question. Suppose a fan had spotted Davydenko limping earlier in the day, mentioned it to a friend, and the friend – believing he has an inside edge – begins betting heavily on the information.
How can Betfair and/or the ATP distinguish between betting on new information and betting based on corruption?
Corruption is when the athlete is paid back with the profits made by short-selling his event derivative —short-selling done by accomplices who received insider info that the athlete will make effort to lose the game (as opposed to try to win it).