BetFair voids winnings on ATP tennis match

[acepedro45]

Tennis officials investigate irregular betting on match

Associated Press

Updated: August 3, 2007, 12:07 PM ET

LONDON -- Tennis officials are investigating suspicious betting patterns on a match involving top-seeded Nikolay Davydenko of Russia, who retired with an injury against a low-ranked opponent at an ATP tournament in Poland.


Betfair said it received about $7 million in bets on the Davydenko-Arguello match -- 10 times the usual amount -- and most of the money was on Arguello to win, even after Davydenko won the first set 6-2.

In an unprecedented move, British online gambling company Betfair voided all bets Friday placed on Thursday's second-round match at the Prokom Open in Sopot between the defending champion and No. 4-ranked Davydenko and No. 87-ranked Martin Vassallo Arguello of Argentina.


Betfair said it received about $7 million in bets on the match -- 10 times the usual amount -- and most of the money was on Arguello to win, even after Davydenko won the first set 6-2.

Arguello won the second set 6-3 and was leading 2-1 in the third when the Russian retired. Davydenko said he aggravated a left foot injury in the second set. He received medical attention from a tournament trainer before deciding to quit.

Betfair, which has had an agreement with the ATP since 2003 to share information on any irregular betting activity, said it was concerned with the volume of wagers coming in on Arguello from the start.

"We think the market quite clearly wasn't fair," Betfair managing director Mark Davies said. "The prices seemed very odd. As a result, in the interest of fairness and integrity and in consultation with the ATP, we have decided to void the market and return all stakes to [bettors]."

It's the first time the company has taken such a step in any sport. Davis said Betfair would turn over its betting records for the ATP to investigate.

"The ATP takes issues surrounding gambling extremely seriously," the men's tour said in a statement. "We are committed to ensuring our sport remains corruption free and have strict rules in place governing this area.

"In addition we have memorandums of understanding with U.K. and European betting companies that ensures information pertaining to any ATP Tour match that may look suspicious, based upon gambling patterns, is shared with us immediately."

ATP officials said Friday that Davydenko had left Poland.

"Normally I try to fight to the end but it was very painful and I may have done even more damage by trying to finish the match," Davydenko said Thursday after the match. "Since the beginning of Monday I've had a problem with my left toes. Today that became a problem with my foot."

Since losing in the fourth round at Wimbledon to Marcos Baghdatis, Davydenko lost three straight first-round matches -- to Gael Monfils at the Swiss Open, Florent Serra at the Dutch Open and Gilles Simon at the Croatia Open -- before beating Andrei Pavel, 6-3, 6-4 in the opening round in Poland.

Arguello lost 2-6, 6-4, 6-2 on Friday in the quarterfinals to another Argentine player, Jose Acasuso.

"I saw Davydenko playing very well the first set, and I saw also that he had problems with his feet, and that was true, he was not inventing that, so it's difficult to suspect him," Arguello told The Associated Press by telephone from his hotel room in Sopot.

At Wimbledon in 2006, Betfair reported irregular patterns surrounding a first-round match between British wild card Richard Bloomfield and Carlos Berlocq of Argentina.

Berlocq, who was ranked 170 places higher than Bloomfield, lost 6-1, 6-2, 6-2. Most of the bets placed were on Berlocq to lose. However, no wrongdoing was detected.

Copyright 2007 by The Associated Press


This brings up a whole host of issues.

I'd be pretty pissed right now if a casino tried to void my winnings based on a "suspicious pattern" that I happened to stumble into by dumb, blind bad luck. What about the innocent punters who happened onto that match?

This operator is using a "suspicious pattern" as the sole basis to not pay out winnings. The discovery of this scheme reeks of "information mining." I'm not questioning the validity of the conclusion in this case (i.e. the match was somehow rigged) but is this technique enough to constitute evidence when a lot of money is at stake?

Anyone play there regularly? What do you guys think?

[happygobrokey]

scary stuff. i don't think the match was fixed. i didn't see it, but i don't believe you'd throw away your chance at a big purse (and likely your career if discovered) for a cut of a betting fix.

but then again, betting on the underdog in tennis is not smart imo. it's not possible they noticed davydenko was having foot troubles in a previous match and were banking on it being a factor in this match? but also, doesn't the line go down after so many people bet on the dog? as more people made the bet, the odds may not look so long to the next guy, and so on.

we don't think this nagging injury could have been disseminated by his coach, wife, other sports bettors, etc to some published source, prompting people to have an "insider tip" of sorts?

finally, it seems suspect to retire from the match if you were in on a fix, since that would and has aroused suspicion. why not just lose quickly, like the other guy in the article when they suspected a fix?

but i think in the case of a rig/fix, it is appropriate that all bets are no action. if betting affects the way a match is played, then it is no longer a sporting event.

since no fix is yet proven, it may be a bit pre-emptive to cancel the bet. but they certainly wouldn't pay it out before they know for sure, and they can't really hold everyone's money in limbo forever either.

and the innocent punter that bets on a heavy dog in tennis would probably lose anything they won off these crazy bets before long anyhow.

[roslilj]

Vassallo is a match fixer. Just today again! Vassallo-Arguello had 6-2 4-1 against Montanes. Someone was pushing up the odds to above evens, he should be 1.15-1.20 at this stage. When those bets were matched. He eventually lost 6-2 4-6 2-6.

[tristan727]

Originally Posted by happygobrokey

i don't think the match was fixed. i didn't see it, but i don't believe you'd throw away your chance at a big purse (and likely your career if discovered) for a cut of a betting fix.

Don't be daft - he's Russian. Sometimes you get made offers you can't refuse, shall we say.

[dancinggoon]

I think betfair is a betting exchange, where players bet against other players and betfair takes a commision fee from the winning bets. Not like a normal sportsbook, where players are betting against the house.

This way betfair has no advance in voiding all bets and returning the money to their customers, they even lost a nice amount on fees, wich they can collect from the winners.

Please correct me if im totaly wrong.

[tristan727]

Yes that's right - which, call me a cynic, is why when there have been numerous other soccer & tennis matches with identical betting patterns, and results - this is the 1st time they've ever voided. Possibly, Davydenko being no.4 in the world made it higher profile than the others, plus the money involved was greater.

[winbig]

Originally Posted by acepedro45

Tennis officials investigate irregular betting on match

Associated Press

Updated: August 3, 2007, 12:07 PM ET

LONDON -- Tennis officials are investigating suspicious betting patterns on a match involving top-seeded Nikolay Davydenko of Russia, who retired with an injury against a low-ranked opponent at an ATP tournament in Poland.

Was his pre-existing foot problem public knowledge? If so, I myself would have bet on his opponent. It's no different than knowing a key football player is hurt and not performing 100%. You'd bet on the other team, no?

[james01]

No, it was no public knowledge. Maybe a few insiders knew it.

[happygobrokey]

say it ain't so, davydenko!

[ThodorisK]

Check out my experience at betfair casino:
I deposited 70euros and started the wagering for the 75euros bonus. I played single deck blackjack 1-2 euros each hand, basic strategy, and without ever by balance exceeding my initial deposit, I kept losing and losing. Lost my deposit and had to reload. Results after I completed wagering:

hands=893
average bet=1.38 euros
profit/loss=-76.5 euros

Now when I had completed about 750 hands, I was 98 euros down.
How certain it is that I was cheated? I found an easy way to answer this:
I use this calculator for estimating risk of ruin which refers only to the number of hands: http://www.card-counting.com/blackja...culator-c3.htm
I was not flatbetting but changing my bet between 1 and 2 euros. However, as a rough idea, with that calculator you can get the probability that someone who has a bankroll of 98/1.38=71 units, will get ruined-bankrupt after 750 hands. I did bet about 10 euros once and lost. So exclude this 10 euros bet I made, and suppose this was a bet of 1 euro. So, calculate the risk of ruin for 62 units of bankroll after 750 hands. (house edge=0.3%, standard deviation per 100 hands = 11.3)

The risk of ruin for these values is 5.21%. That much I had for what happened. Bad luck? I would think so too, since when playing too many bonuses, this 5% naturally it will happen, but how often? Almost the same thing happened to me to quite a few casinos.

You are doubting whether they would cheat for millions of dollars, whereas they cheat for a few dollars. Of course these few dollars multiplied by the number of players, is thousands.