Skip to main content

Another item for the FIFA are bleeding idiots file

Item in today's RP suggests FIFA are considering banning in-play betting on football over corruption fears. 'What a great idea' will say the do-gooders and Daily Mail readers who don't have a clue about the outside world. Any knowledge of betting in football will let you swiftly decide this is the stupidest idea since awarding the World Cup to a country which bans alcohol and homosexuality, doesn't even have to hotel capacity to cater for one full stadium of visitors and will be 45-50C during July.

Mark Davies has written an excellent post on it here - UEFA and FIFA: focus, please!

If bookmakers offer 'micro-betting', markets on tiny events during the match such as next free kick or next throw-in, who is taking the risk? The bookie. What is a bookie's job to do? Manage risk. What happens when people fall out of trees to back one option in a multi-selection, reasonably random market? They shut it off and investigate, maybe even alerting sporting authorities.

These are not markets where big bets are accepted unless you have the word MUG stamped across your forehead (i.e. You are a high-rolling loser with that bookmaker). Bookies know the famous Matt Le Tissier throw-in story from the 90s. These types of markets have the potential to be manipulated so the %s bet are wide and the risk taken is low. It's a product for the 'very' recreational punter who'd rather bet on an event within a sporting contest than on an electronic random number generation contest in the casino. Few bookies offer this stuff anyway, the ones which do are incredibly quick on the 'restrict bets' control if a punter starts winning.

As hinted at by the Sportingbet spokesman in the RP article - the majority of in-play football betting still goes through the unregulated markets in Asia. No amount of interference with European bookies will make an iota of difference to them; if anything it will only increase their turnover.

Yet more proof that FIFA is a body of self-serving idiots out of touch with the rest of the world.... unless someone from that world turns up with suitcases full of cash.

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

What shits me about match-fixing 'journalism'.

The anti-wagering media bandwagon has dozens of new members this week, all weighing in an industry they have absolutely no idea about. I'm all for getting the betting industry into the mainstream but it shits me no end when they roll out reports and celebrities who simply don't have a clue what they are talking about and don't bother to check basic facts which key arguments in their story. If this was the financial industry, making errors like this would have them in all sorts of trouble, but the same level of regulation doesn't apply because finance stock markets are supposedly all legitimate and serious, whereas sports betting is just a bit of fun for people who can never win in the long-term... according to the media. This week we have seen the sting by the Telegraph which, on the face of it, looks to be a tremendous piece of investigative work into fixing in English football. But the headlines around it are over-sensationalised yet again. Delroy Facey, a former pla

Racing has a Ponzi scheme - and the fallout will be enormous

When the term ' Ponzi scheme ' is mentioned these days, the names Bernard Madoff and Allen Stanford instantly spring to mind. The pair of them ran multi-billion dollar frauds (US$60bn and $8bn respectively) that destroyed the lives of thousands of investors who had put their life savings into a 'wonderful' investment strategy. How so many people were sucked into the scheme is baffling to those on the outside. The lifestyle, the sales pitch, the success stories of the early investors - I suppose it all adds up. So where does this link to racing you ask? A prominent Australian 'racing identity' this week has been reported to have lost access to a bank account with punters' club funds of $194m in it. Firstly - is there a worse term for anyone to be labelled with that 'racing identity'? It ALWAYS ends up meaning shonky crook! Secondly - who the hell has a punters' club with an active bankroll in the tens of millions? It simply can't be done. T