Skip to main content

tennis rort exposed on Challenger Tour

With thanks to ShankTennis for this article.....

The Romanian media picked this one up last week - an attempted sting at the Rijeka challenger event, but with plenty of matches involved.

Today, the company Advanced Betting System, Super Bet operator, was the victim of massive fraud attempts through the rigging of matches at the Challenger tournament in Rijeka (Croatia). Here are the details of this unpleasant event.

It goes on to claim the following:

A series of identical 12-leg parlays were placed at Super Bet outlets in Bucharest and Drobetu Turnu Severin.
The amount wagered was on each parlay was €1000, with a potential pay-out of €147, 000 on each.
Of the twelve legs, eleven were Challenger tennis matches with ten of those from Rijeka.
Of the tennis bets, all players either won in straight sets or lost via retirement (thus voiding those legs of the parlay).



It could be classed as an attempt to fix a series of matches, or alternatively, one big punter really having a big bet, but spreading out his wager across several tickets because of limits placed upon him or all tickets in general in Romania. I tend to think it's probably one or a few big punters using a bit of information, perhaps someone at the event, noticing a few players were enjoying the nightlife or not 100% fit and coupling them all up for a rather big wager. After all, it doesn't make any sense for an attempt to fix matches to only be punted with one betting outlet - there are enough around these days betting on challengers to get a few bets on.

But that could just be an opinion from someone who wants to see tennis be as clean as possible. Certainly having a couple of matches which involved retirements raises suspicions but it's not concrete evidence of a fix. A punter/syndicate behind a sting of this level cannot hope to have EVERY match under control, but he certainly wager with confidence if he had a few players in his pocket and was getting 147/1 for what he considered to be a 20/1 shot.


And if you want to read some comical responses from people who don't have the slightest idea how the betting industry works, this thread is worth reading.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

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...

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.

The…

damage control when trading goals

When trades go bad, some people will say cut your losses immediately, others will recommend having a bit of patience as events tend to level out (i.e. games with two goals in the first 10 mins never end up with 18 goals in 90 minutes). This is something I like to do on certain matches.

Background:
1. You've backed Under 2.5 goals, trying to nick a few ticks at a time as the clock ticks.
2. You've been caught out by a goal.
3. The market has gone sharply against you.

On this particular match from a couple of weeks ago, there was an early goal (sixth minute) before I got involved. The period immediately after an early goal regularly shows a sharp drop in the Under price, so I was trying to capitalise on that. But Watford then scored again after 14 minutes. The Back price I took (3.95) was now out to 12 - I could close out for a big loss (not my style) or wait and wait for the price to come back to somewhere I could close out for minimal damage. But at 2-0 after 15 minutes, it w…