Tennis
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
These 120 comments are related to the topic:
Courtsider arrested - Aussie Open
Courtsider arrested - Aussie Open
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 120
|
By:
of course if OZ punters are allowed to bet online live on sprts events like the tennis the national wealth and prosperity is protected and preserved far more but these activities still create an unfair advantage IMO due to the timing and knowledge gain
|
|
By:
When I said that betting on horse racing is permitted "in play" in Oz I meant online, without the need to use on the phone.
Also as an OZ punter, me and most others using Betfair think the government regulations suck, and severely reduce our opportunities to compete on overseas markets on a level playing field due to the delay in having to make a phone call, not to mention the cost of constantly having to make overseas phone calls to place bets "in play". So wildone why do you suppose that we are allowed to bet on horse races both here and overseas without needing to phone up. Perhaps our authorities are happy to protect our so called national interest, wealth and prosperity while exploiting the wealth of other countries without paying any taxes. Are you Senator Nick Xenophon by any chance? |
|
By:
sleepless, pretty sure we can't be live online with the horses . once the horses in a race jumps the market goes in play and one in OZ has to ring up, you cannot put a bet on online when the market is in play, but youcan put a bet on in running over the phone.
I think the reason they do not allow online gambling is to protect national betting organizations revenues , and protect tax revenues , largely a left argument. but the decision makers probably have no idea of the real world based on free will of the people who know what they want in free and fair markets. That or they are just playing politics until they can get a substitute national online exchange provider. In the long run online live betting has to come in and any protection against it is purely protection of the elite through the repression of the broader public. The wealth and prosperity of Australia is dependent on fair free markets otherwise participants will not buy/sell or invest and the economy will die. It is the same forces behind the car industry dying, retail down etc..., the average joe do not appreciate being slaves to the powerful exploiting them The free will of the people seems to want the best to survive, similar to law of the jungle which is 'I want the best fair chance to succeed(fair cause in the jungle if a predator thinks you are f.. with you they will try and kill you) which is why ACT tabs lately look like going up for sale because the public is not prepared to be screwed over a few abusing a power position providing reduced prices when there are superior substitutes like online bookies and exchanges even in a location that is in love with the left and a sense of entitlement due to a lot of dependancy on it to the detriment of the majority of the rest of Australia. |
|
By:
sleepless, btw I am pretty far from being Nick X
 I am just an average joe that thinks he understands the real world  and is pretty far from the political game just trying to survive in a perceived power driven world these days |
|
By:
Wildone, horse racing and some trots have in play via internet.The govt.considers these not to be sports so allows in play.Just more bizarre policy from those least informed to enact law.
|
|
By:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/tennis/australian
open/10575346/Sport-on-alert-after-first-arrest-for-courtsiding.html |
|
By:
kt22 in 35 min race 1 at Sale.
Pretty confident it will go in play at 12.00 and i will not be able to bet on it . lets do a bit of trial an error |
|
By:
kt22I stand correct tried to get on the fav and it let me get on live although I wasn't matched.
Kt22 when did that get allowed? I am sure you were not able to do it before!  Tell you what not happy you can do it on the horses but not sports!!!!  |
|
By:
Good luck with your trial wildone, for I know what your response will be after race 1.
As far as government. policy, in my opinion they have a lot more to gain by taking the high moral ground and being seen to do what is perceived to be the right thing, because they will get many more votes doing that than by pleasing a few gamblers. The past government/s has also needed the likes of Nick X and independents and would never have their support by being seen to approve of gambling. Of course I am sure that the yanks disapproval played some sort of part because we can not do anything without copying them to some degree, |
|
By:
kt22 the allowance of racing but not sports, is that a state based regulation or federal?
|
|
By:
Wildone, it is federal. I would consider horse racing to be a lot more dubious than sports but the whole beef centres around the fact that the government does not approve of the perception that on Betfair we can bet on something to lose. Obviously this is due to their lack of knowledge because by backing someone to win in a 2 horse race, you are obviously betting that the opponent will lose.
|
|
By:
sleepless , don't understand your argument?
Allowing online live betting on sports is the moral high ground and the righteous!!! Not allowing online live betting fuels corruption and exploitation like courtsiding because the greater delays create greater room for exploitation via power plays supporting tyrannies of evil!! Any economist worth their salt argues for fair and free markets and not exploitation by big business!!! Why would moral crusaders endorse slavery and compromise human rights by blocking live online investing on sports?? I think a class action on the basis of discrimination may eventuate! |
|
By:
sleepless what has online live betting on sports have anything to do with a option backing a future to lose when those options already exist in substitute mechanisms including shorting stocks etc..??
Sounds like a reduction of human rights and fueling a mechanism for the powerful elite to exploit the many to me!! sounds like blatant discrimination to me!! |
|
By:
Perhaps I am not being clear. Taking the moral high ground is anti gambling in all forms, but the government can't afford to ban gambling due to revenue and jobs created and the overall uproar it will create.
The government is just looking to get on their soapbox when incidents like this occur(even if it is caused sometimes by their stupid laws) to justify their decisions, and that match fixing does exist, regardless of how infrequent it may be. The press then jump on the bandwagon because it sells newspapers. As I recall it was a newspaper in Melbourne that had Daq closed down in Oz due to them finding out that they did not have an Australian License |
|
By:
Don't shoot the messenger wildone, that is just my understanding on why we are not allowed to bet "in play" online, because the government has to protect us from match fixing because it is their ill informed perception that being able to back a horse/team/player to lose encourages corruption.
|
|
By:
perhaps, I am not being clear, what is the difference with investing on sports and the stockmarket. Why does the moral high ground regard one as gambling and the other an investment vehicle?
I remember getting a vibe from US that some where perturbed by our focus on sports versus corporate culture of the US. Now it appears in the next 10 years the US economy has a high probability of going belly up!! Do we have a left driven dumbed down society that have been brain washed into thinking sports futures are riskier than the stock market like thinking high property values are good for the economy with low interest rates, big govt and markets dominated by a few corporate giants? Is the moral high ground a perpetuated myth to promote the politics of a few? What is the moral high ground based on anyway? Is the press dependent on big govt and power driven markets promoting advertising investments? What is the statistical record of stock futures versus other forms of investment? |
|
By:
I am not shooting anyone, I just don't like the powerful few stopping my fair right to have a go and succeed and live!!!
|
|
By:
You just hit the nail on the head. To you and I there is very little difference between betfair and the stockmarket in concept(just more volatile), but the government says otherwise because it is in their interest to, because they will never convince the uneducated and they will lose many votes and their power by trying.
The high moral ground is based on the perception that gambling is evil, destroys families, causes homelessness blah, blah. If they were to be honest with themselves so does the stockmarket, which also causes suicides, insider trading etc. For some reason the stockmarket is perceived to be a genuine business whereas gambling is considered to be an addiction and blight on society. As far as I am concerned their is a lot more knowledge required in sports betting, but the government and clubs love pokies and lotto due to revenue returns and because they can not lose. |
|
By:
Read this article, this man at least knows what he is talking about (as do you DStyle, tip of the cap to you sir)
http://www.sportismadeforbetting.com/2014/01/courtsiders-at-aussie-open-has-nothing.html?spref=tw&m=1 |
|
By:
That article is exactly right. At best the guy could probably be ejected from the event, but he has not committed a crime. He is simply being used as a scapegoat and the do-gooders and press are running rampant with their hysteria for their own agenda's, which is pretty much what I said in my original post many hours ago, before the conversation turned to other issues in Oz, which I tried to clarify, but not very well it appears.
|
|
By:
From the horse's mouth
http://www.sportingdata.co.uk/ |
|
By:
I think the reason they do not allow online gambling is to protect national betting organizations revenues , and protect tax revenues , largely a left argument.
Wildone, the Act was intended to protect us poor souls from online casinos. Unfortunately, the geniuses that wrote it later figured out the actual words meant you could no longer bet on sports. It's an anomaly, a bastardised piece of legislation, nothing more. Altering it however, can be used by the Opposition as painting the govt as PRO gambling, which to the uneducated, is pro suicide, pro families losing homes, pro divorce and pro whatever else. In the court of public opinion, it's a risk to revert it, and with not much to gain, no one will take it on. |
|
By:
good luck to the defense trying to explain to the magistrate that probably more often than not this fast data is used to cancel unmatched bets
|
|
By:
Agree this guy has not broken the law. If you read the law he has done nothing wrong. Charged with fixing basically and there was no element of player involvement. The streams for this AO are less than 5 secs behind the market, so i don't see how he could be beating the bookies unless they are bookies who either don't pay for streams or are too slow to correct their prices - fair play to him if he did that, although I'm not sure if people doing what he did is a good thing, I wouldn't mind if he was just having a bet himself. It could be argued that bookies are defrauding the public by not updating their prices at times. No law against that though of course.
What I have noticed is that for unstreamed courts, courtsiders are beating both Slamtracker and the 365 Scoreboard quite often, so maybe he was on these courts. Scoreboards should be just as fast as streams but they are lethargic for this tournament for some reason. We also have what appears to be the organised and deliberate slowing of pictures for all ATP Masters 1000 events for betting purposes. This has been the case for at least 2 years now and somebody within the TV streaming companies or perhaps even within the ATP is involved in this ring. |
|
By:
perhaps it's possible in AO because of the distance from bookies' servers but the scoreboards should not be further behind than streams, so perhaps enetpulse should be asked a few questions
|
|
By:
Scott Ferguson has written a good blog on it.
|
|
By:
only just saw that statement from sporting data ^^. Could be a defamation case in this somewhere.
The aussie bookies seem to have a lot of power over there and are very protective of their industry. Isn't that why bf were only allowed in under a joint-venture with them? He is doing exactly what enetpulse do and the bookies get their info from enetpulse, so i can't see how he can beat the bookies here unless they are too slow in correcting prices or too cheap to pay for the fastest info. In any event, the bets appear to be placed on here, so it's only us mugs who are getting hoovered. |
|
By:
surely the streams/feeds from the aussie open are so up near live that it's not possible to gain an advantage, no more then a second or 2 behind live i would imagine , with the countdown theres no advantage , am i missing something ??
|
|
By:
No you're not missing anything. The feeds are there for everyone and no-one needs to get hoovered. Betfair has a 5 second delay and that is plenty.
|
|
By:
The live pictures are around 7 - 10 seconds delayed, so courtsiders get a few seconds advantage.
|
|
By:
They are up to 2 seconds ahead of the stream when they need to be
|
|
By:
having a look at some of this info I still think they could be in trouble.
Note, on the website they talk about using exchanges as opposed to Bookies. Well duh , of course they would because for the aloof they are not betting probably probably they are trading on tennis futures. The line about corrupting a market without influencing the market is balony to me. The market is the price mechanism at a crystalized point in time and this can be corrupted IMO by placing bets at that time when the person has accessed info unfairly compared with the rest of the market and thus influence that market at a point in time when the rest of the market is operating at a different point in time. Also trying to separate the transfer of info and the actual financial decision and the wager is a desperate move and laughable. The courtsider is an employee for a reason, part of the organization, part of the business, the business relies on the wager and it relies on the transfer of info, trying to detach the to activities is hollywood stuff .Some of these counter arguments are down right laughable. IMO if prosecutors botch this they are fools!! Fault 1 is circus material, one is talking about corrupting a betting outcome not corrupting the event. BTW it really is about corrupting a trading outcome by manipulating price movement supported by potentially unauthorized infomation access like the arguments against the banksters manipulating the silver market and other financial markets |
|
By:
note how the blogger talks about courtsiders getting boxes overseas , paying money for them and charging big fees to bookies for their service.
great, thats why us small players in OZ don't bet on these trimmed markets unless really astute Bottom line is it seems one does not have the authority to do that in OZ , which is probably a good thing, because in the long run it should bring more money to Australian sport over time, attract more traders and gamblers on the sports markets as well, particularly if they allow online live betting on sports in OZ since obviously it seems little evidence of corruption to an event or match fixing from online gambling live! |
|
By:
a good case in point is premier league match odd markets that get suspended when a goal is kicked.
Presumably Betfair want to prevent any timing abuses from such events to promote integrity in these markets to generate more turnover, confidence and interest in the betting markets . Frankly, I cannot blame them If most sports events had the liquidity and volume depth of the major premier league markets wouldn't betting and trading on all sports events be far more attractive and popular! |
|
By:
there is no way the AO streams are 7-10 secs delayed, unless there are absolutely no courtsiders betting whatsoever, not even one, and the fastest streams are delayed by 5-7 secs. That is what the ATP masters 1000 events are like. But for this AO the price changes 2-3 secs after the standard betting stream, meaning that the fastest money is moving 2-3 secs before you see the point end. Sometimes they beat the stream, yes, but i'd say they are placing bets before the point ends when that happens.
Far more likely is that there are indeed people betting courtside on every court and that the streams are only about 3 secs behind. I'd say it's more likely there is organised exclusive courtsiding by an insider group and that this individual may have been kicked out for trying to compete with them. |
|
By:
if the streams are delayed by 7-10 secs then the scoreboards are delayed by 10-13 secs. No way. The scoreboards are definitely delayed tho but not by that much.
|
|
By:
|
|
By:
The market is the price mechanism at a crystalized point in time and this can be corrupted IMO by placing bets at that time when the person has accessed info unfairly compared with the rest of the market and thus influence that market at a point in time when the rest of the market is operating at a different point in time.
you're living in cloud cuckoo land wildone. specifically the market is the price mechanism at a crystalised point in time where the price is 5 seconds after someone has concluded the point has ended. i.e. live subject to in play delays NOT , i repeat NOT, 5 seconds after the most commonly available broadcast. if IBM updated their software so that slam tracker delivered scores as fast as this guy in the stands, you seem to think that there would be no transgression because "the rest of the market", i.e. you, would be protected. i'll say it again. THE INFORMATION IS NOT PRIVILEGED AND LIVE IS THE BENCHMARK. the best the prosecutors can hope for is that they have broken section 44 of the Major Sporting Act 2009 in that they have broadcast without authorisation for which they could charge sporting data 2400 penalty units which is about $350,000 AUD. |
|
By:
jfc this is how I interpret the legislation.
The betting outcome has nothing to do with the tennis match itself except the futures result is related to the particular sport event itself. Just say the the users of this courtside service are using the betfair exchange. So the betting or trading outcome in my interpretation would be the financial result/outcome returned/derived within the betfair market as a participant for the sports event like match odds market. I assume the corruptive element is placing wagers in the markets from unauthorised info so the betting market in a sense is maybe interpreted by some as corrupted because some participants are wagering on the basis of 19.00 while others are wagering on the basis of 19.03. Note the legislation says nothing about match fixing, or affecting the result of an event. It talks about affecting the result of a betting outcome. It just so happens the betting outcome relates to an event, and the event could possibly not be a sport at all I assume if what is being displayed online is actually the legislation. The legislation appears to have nothing to do with match fixing as I interpret it so I am not sure why some seem to think some have been accused of match fixing |