January 23 – A report titled The Odds of Match Fixing – Facts & figures on the integrity risks of certain sports bets by Professor Dr Ben Van Rompuy of the ASSER International Sports Law Centre draws a number of conclusions that blow away some of the myths around conventionally held thinking on match-fixing.
Top of the list are his findings that betting-related match-fixing is predominantly focused on the final outcome of a match and in particular to the number of goals (winning margin).
He finds that there is no empirical support for the belief that ‘side bets’ (betting on the number of corners or free kicks – more commonly known as spot fixing) are “significant match-fixing risks, nor that live betting poses a specific or greater match fixing risk in comparison to traditional pre-match betting.”
His findings have implications for policy makers and raise questions over the appropriateness of regulating the types of sports bets bookmakers can offer as an anti-match fixing package of measures.
Professor Van Rompuy used Sportradar data for his report. “The lack of access to systematic empirical evidence on betting-related match fixing has so far limited the capacity of academic research to make a proper risk assessment of certain types of sports bets… Sportradar has built up a truly unique dataset of statistical information on football matches that likely have been manipulated. Our collaboration provided me with a wealth of factual information that challenged some myths that still persist in media reports and ongoing policy discussions.”
Sportradar Managing Director Integrity and Strategy Andreas Krannich added: “Misconceptions about where and how match-fixing takes place are not only frustrating, but dangerous and a waste of time, energy, focus and resources.”
The report finds that betting-related match fixing is mainly related to the final outcome of a match and in particular to the number of goals scored (winning margin).
“Almost all of the suspicious betting activity is detected in the most popular sports betting markets: the Match Odds market (i.e. the traditional 1X2 betting formula), the Total Goals market, and the Asian Handicap market,” says the report.
“The fix of having a particular team losing or winning by a predefined (minimum) margin is by far the most frequently observed method of betting-related match fixing. This is because, when manipulating a match to lose by multiple goals, profits can be maximized. This manipulation can only be realistically achieved through coordinated action by several players and/or the involvement of the referee.” These markets also offer the best opportunity to make large financial gains with lower risks of being detected.
The report highlights that match fixers, in an attempt to spread the risk of detection and minimize loss of profit, “will typically choose to take advantage of both pre-match and live betting options in the three main betting markets (Match Odds, Total Goals, and Asian Handicap). For two-thirds of the likely manipulated matches both suspicious pre-match and live betting patterns was observed and for the vast majority of matches irregular betting patterns appeared in a combination of these markets.”
A full copy of the report can be downloaded at http://www.asser.nl/SportsLaw/Blog/post/the-odds-of-match-fixing-facts-and-figures-on-the-integrity-risk-of-certain-sports-bets-by-ben-van-rompuy
Contact the writer of this story at moc.l1735090942labto1735090942ofdlr1735090942owedi1735090942sni@n1735090942osloh1735090942cin.l1735090942uap1735090942