Skip to main content

and this week's suspicious tennis match is....

Crivoi vs Istomin in Bastad, Sweden!

Victor Crivoi, a journeyman from Romania was backed from 1.81 into 1.06 on Betfair before the match, and the 2-0 sets betting from 2.74 to as low as 1.09. Denis Istomin had retired at Wimbledon with a back injury and it appears as if he wasn't fit to be resuming on the tour. You can't blame the bloke for trying when points and prizemoney is at stake, but obviously people knew he wasn't ready to play.

Every cynic is gonig to jump on this and scream fix. Personally I'd rather give the benefit of the doubt to the player, making every attempt to play despite not being fit. We've all seen footballers in various codes take the field when they shouldn't have. Men are stubborn beasts, and we will try to play through pain, especially when money, and in this case, ranking points (he'd get neither and probably a fine if he pulled out and was replaced by a lucky loser) are at stake. His ranking of 68 means he gets into some ATP events in the main draw, but has to qualify for many others, or play challengers, like he has for most of his career, often competing in challenger finals for as much as the R1 or R2 loser's cheque here. He turned up, hoped to be fit and pride got the better of him. Or sheer stubbornness because it had already cost him a bundle to get here so he might as well cover his expenses. You can't hide as an injured player in an individual sport.

Let me stress this is just a personal opinion, and if this is discovered to be a crooked match, then throw the book at him. But I just can't stand forumites who instantly declare a match has to be fixed simply because a major plunge was landed. An understanding of psychology and human emotion makes it much more complicated than that....

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

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

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...

hope for investors in the Centaur scandal?

In a breaking story, it has been reported that directors of the failed sports investment fund Centaur have had their assets frozen in order to repay investors. It is believed that managing director Keith Sobey skipped town trying to avoid prosecution however he either naively thought Ireland was a safe enough place to hide or had a lingering feeling of guilt and sat waiting for that knock on the door. Sobey, the name behind Centaur ( read the original story here ), is believed to own four houses, worth more in total than the missing £1.6m. His willingness to sell them to repay investors is likely to keep the matter out of the courts, and at least one other director, Andrew Cork, will apparently follow suit. All this adds weight to anecdotal evidence that the collapse of the fund came down to mismanagement rather than fraudulent deeds. As costs grew (why would you set up a training academy in central London?), margins evaporated and keeping the business afloat went through money like