Sports betting chatter
Quote: AxelWolf
What are the legalities of betting on something you believe might be fixed, however, you had nothing to do with the fixing, and you're not sure the match is being fixed, you are just using data that would indicate there might be some shenanigans going on.
link to original post
You’d have to give a specific example. Your question is too vague.
One easy example. ‘I feel the Chiefs Broncos playoff game is fixed because the NFL wants Mahomes to advance’. I can see no way your bet on the Chiefs is not legit.
You are standing on a line to place a bet and you recognize a Chief’s players father betting big $$ AGAINST the Chiefs. This might be murky if you tail him.
And if it’s you had someone actually TELL you the game is fixed and you believe it’s credible you are probably guilty somehow.
Give us one example you are thinking of.
You monitor sports monitoring services. When they indicate suspicious betting activity( possible fixed tennis match) on a particular bet, you use that information to bet along with those bets at multiple offshore sports books.Quote: SOOPOOQuote: AxelWolf
What are the legalities of betting on something you believe might be fixed, however, you had nothing to do with the fixing, and you're not sure the match is being fixed, you are just using data that would indicate there might be some shenanigans going on.
link to original post
You’d have to give a specific example. Your question is too vague.
One easy example. ‘I feel the Chiefs Broncos playoff game is fixed because the NFL wants Mahomes to advance’. I can see no way your bet on the Chiefs is not legit.
You are standing on a line to place a bet and you recognize a Chief’s players father betting big $$ AGAINST the Chiefs. This might be murky if you tail him.
And if it’s you had someone actually TELL you the game is fixed and you believe it’s credible you are probably guilty somehow.
Give us one example you are thinking of.
link to original post
Quote: AxelWolfYou monitor sports monitoring services. When they indicate suspicious betting activity( possible fixed tennis match) on a particular bet, you use that information to bet along with those bets at multiple offshore sports books.Quote: SOOPOOQuote: AxelWolf
What are the legalities of betting on something you believe might be fixed, however, you had nothing to do with the fixing, and you're not sure the match is being fixed, you are just using data that would indicate there might be some shenanigans going on.
link to original post
You’d have to give a specific example. Your question is too vague.
One easy example. ‘I feel the Chiefs Broncos playoff game is fixed because the NFL wants Mahomes to advance’. I can see no way your bet on the Chiefs is not legit.
You are standing on a line to place a bet and you recognize a Chief’s players father betting big $$ AGAINST the Chiefs. This might be murky if you tail him.
And if it’s you had someone actually TELL you the game is fixed and you believe it’s credible you are probably guilty somehow.
Give us one example you are thinking of.
link to original post
link to original post
IANAL, but I think you would still be OK. Once again, in this case, the word ‘suspicious’ is very nuanced.
I once had ‘inside information’ on the health of an NFL player. I was his anesthesiologist and watched his surgery. Let’s say I was a regular $50-$200 bettor. How much would I have needed to bet on his ‘under yards receiving’ to qualify as ‘suspicious’? (I of course made no bets on that game, and would have been wrong anyway!)
Quote: SOOPOOQuote: AxelWolfYou monitor sports monitoring services. When they indicate suspicious betting activity( possible fixed tennis match) on a particular bet, you use that information to bet along with those bets at multiple offshore sports books.Quote: SOOPOOQuote: AxelWolf
What are the legalities of betting on something you believe might be fixed, however, you had nothing to do with the fixing, and you're not sure the match is being fixed, you are just using data that would indicate there might be some shenanigans going on.
link to original post
You’d have to give a specific example. Your question is too vague.
One easy example. ‘I feel the Chiefs Broncos playoff game is fixed because the NFL wants Mahomes to advance’. I can see no way your bet on the Chiefs is not legit.
You are standing on a line to place a bet and you recognize a Chief’s players father betting big $$ AGAINST the Chiefs. This might be murky if you tail him.
And if it’s you had someone actually TELL you the game is fixed and you believe it’s credible you are probably guilty somehow.
Give us one example you are thinking of.
link to original post
link to original post
IANAL, but I think you would still be OK. Once again, in this case, the word ‘suspicious’ is very nuanced.
I once had ‘inside information’ on the health of an NFL player. I was his anesthesiologist and watched his surgery. Let’s say I was a regular $50-$200 bettor. How much would I have needed to bet on his ‘under yards receiving’ to qualify as ‘suspicious’? (I of course made no bets on that game, and would have been wrong anyway!)
link to original post
The good doctor knows of what he speaks. Never make the bets yourself when you can pass the information to your New York friends with crooked noses and take a cut. Soopoo wouldn't do that but others might.
Quote: DRichQuote: SOOPOOQuote: AxelWolfYou monitor sports monitoring services. When they indicate suspicious betting activity( possible fixed tennis match) on a particular bet, you use that information to bet along with those bets at multiple offshore sports books.Quote: SOOPOOQuote: AxelWolf
What are the legalities of betting on something you believe might be fixed, however, you had nothing to do with the fixing, and you're not sure the match is being fixed, you are just using data that would indicate there might be some shenanigans going on.
link to original post
You’d have to give a specific example. Your question is too vague.
One easy example. ‘I feel the Chiefs Broncos playoff game is fixed because the NFL wants Mahomes to advance’. I can see no way your bet on the Chiefs is not legit.
You are standing on a line to place a bet and you recognize a Chief’s players father betting big $$ AGAINST the Chiefs. This might be murky if you tail him.
And if it’s you had someone actually TELL you the game is fixed and you believe it’s credible you are probably guilty somehow.
Give us one example you are thinking of.
link to original post
link to original post
IANAL, but I think you would still be OK. Once again, in this case, the word ‘suspicious’ is very nuanced.
I once had ‘inside information’ on the health of an NFL player. I was his anesthesiologist and watched his surgery. Let’s say I was a regular $50-$200 bettor. How much would I have needed to bet on his ‘under yards receiving’ to qualify as ‘suspicious’? (I of course made no bets on that game, and would have been wrong anyway!)
link to original post
The good doctor knows of what he speaks. Never make the bets yourself when you can pass the information to your New York friends with crooked noses and take a cut. Soopoo wouldn't do that but others might.
link to original post
I guess no one here knows. Forget me. How much would ANYONE have to bet on a running back ‘under yards receiving’ or a pitcher ‘first pitch ball’ for it to be considered ‘suspicious’ enough for anyone to do any sort of investigation.
I told this particular player my son was a big fan and asked his permission to tell my son I took care of him. He said sure. But I didn’t tell my son until after the next game.
Quote: lilredrooster.
some of the powers that be in MLB are unhappy about prop betting which is now huge
it's hard for me to believe the MLB players would risk so much for so little (I don't think a person can make huge prop bets) but I guess the potential for human beings to be corrupted when money is involved, even if it's a relatively small amount, shouldn't be underestimated
from the link:
"“We’ve been on prop bets from the very beginning,” MLB Commissioner Rob Manfred said last year. “When we lobby in states, there’s always certain types of bets that we have lobbied against — I mean, the first pitch of the game, we really don’t want that available as a prop bet.”
MLB has put two pitchers for the Cleveland Guardians — Luis L. Ortiz and Emmanuel Clase — on paid administrative leave through the end of August while it conducts an investigation into their potential use of sports betting apps to bet on baseball.
In the case of Ortiz, he is being investigated for throwing two specific pitches in early June that line up with a pair of bets that were flagged by a sports betting integrity firm. Those pitches — each of them an uncommon first-pitch slider — align with patterns flagged by a betting integrity watchdog firm."
https://www.msnbc.com/opinion/msnbc-opinion/cleveland-guardians-luis-ortiz-emmanuel-clase-prop-betting-sports-rcna221850
link to original post
If I was the batter and the pitcher had a reputation for doing this, I would swing at the first pitch anyway, just for the pleasure of impoverishing his family.
Then when in his rage he hits me with a pitch I get on base anyway. Win-win!
Quote: SOOPOO
I guess no one here knows. Forget me. How much would ANYONE have to bet on a running back ‘under yards receiving’ or a pitcher ‘first pitch ball’ for it to be considered ‘suspicious’ enough for anyone to do any sort of investigation.
I told this particular player my son was a big fan and asked his permission to tell my son I took care of him. He said sure. But I didn’t tell my son until after the next game.
link to original post
I doubt there is a specific $ amount, more likely a standard deviation from what is a typical amount bet on those props. Probably 5 to 10 standard deviations would cause suspicion.
Quote: SOOPOOQuote: unJonQuote: SOOPOOQuote: billryanQuote: SOOPOOQuote: billryanIf it is proven that those players were involved, they should be banned. My concern is that most young pitchers don't call their own games so did the catcher call for it? How about the pitching coach?
link to original post
It doesn’t matter what was ‘called’. Any pitch can intentionally be thrown outside to be a ball. And the bets can be as simple as ‘ball, strike, or in play’.
Clase is making around $5 million a year for the next two years. If his performance didn’t drop he’d be in line for 8 figures a year in his next contract.
I’m interested in finding out HOW MUCH they think Clase profited from whatever he is being investigated for?
link to original post
The bet was the pitch would be a slider.
link to original post
Link!? Not saying that’s not true, just I’ve never seen that type of offer. I’ve heard announcers argue all the time whether a pitch was a ‘sweeper’, a ‘slurve’, or a ‘slider’, not to be confused with a ‘forkball’, a ‘ghost slider’, a fastball, or a fastball that’s actually a ‘sinker’, let alone a curveball that’s really a ‘knuckle curve’ , or a ‘changeup with motion’, or to go way back….. an Ephus pitch!
What I read about the other guy was he just threw the ball way outside so it would be a ball.
link to original post
Did you read the post? Bill Ryan was responding to LilRooster who posted it. Why would you ask Bill Ryan for the link? And there is a link in LR post, which I didn’t click.
link to original post
Huh? Bill Ryans post was one sentence. He posted ‘the bet was the pitch would be a slider’. I asked Bill if he had a link? I have no idea what YOU are referring to!
link to original post
Like just scroll up. It was LilRooster post saying it was a slider. That’s where Bill Ryan info came from. And LR had a link. It is all in this thread. You were brow beating the wrong person.
The bet was on the officially scored outcome of the first pitch of specified innings. As called by the umpire and entered into the record by the official scorer. What matters to the outcome is that it was so very clearly far out of the strike zone, and was therefore certain to be scored that way. Officially, as a "ball." The assertion that “slider” was more than an observation/opinion about how it looked, and instead was actually the bet is utter fantasy. Though like so many of these things I suspect it probably was truly believed the instant it emerged from someone’s garbled misreading, but is nothing but the usual sort of WoV forum factoid someone frequently cooks up here on all manner of things large and small as stuff gets diced, chopped, sauced, and baked to a crisp in their noggin.
https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/45843304/sources-guardians-emmanuel-clase-leave-gambling-probeQuote: ESPN, by Jeff PassanIn both cases, unusual amounts of money were wagered on the pitches being a ball or hit batsman from betting accounts in New York, New Jersey and Ohio, according to a copy of the IC360 alert obtained by ESPN.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/mlb/columnist/bob-nightengale/2025/07/28/emmanuel-clase-luis-ortiz-investigation-gambling/85415150007/Quote: USA Today, by Bob NightengaleGamblers wagered high amounts of money on whether those two pitches would result in a ball or hit batsmen.
And on, and on, from dozens of sources reporting on the specifics of the matter including The New York Times, Washington Post, The Athletic, Fox Sports, CBS Sports, CNN, LA Times… Someone *ahem* ‘misunderstood’ what they thought they remember they heard/read somewhere. Again. When someone never, ever provides a source for a constantly gushing flow of assertions and hyperactive geyser of stories, there is a reason for that. People who aren’t emotionally invested in the little clubhouse here, who don’t choose to sign on to post but do look in on the site for information & who make up the vast majority of its readers, can find it useful to take note. If a very active participant on the weird social-media forum side of the site says “today is Friday and tomorrow will be Saturday” you’d be wise to start doubting it.
