|
By:
hard evidence of bracciali himself discussing a match is one thing.
a betting parlor owner having a b1tch, is no different to the mugs on here having a go. that andujar starace match showed no signs of being fixed on here: About 1.8mill matched, starace 1.8 sp, no significant market prescience. |
|
By:
*no significant market prescience during the match.
|
|
By:
Maybe nothing in that match but there were some serious threads on here about two matches involving Fognini (vs Vagnozzi) and Starace (vs Gimeno-Traver) just 8 and 9 days later respectively.
|
|
By:
that sort of confirms my point though jab.
those two matches you mention were both retirements where the markets clearly knew that fognini (who went a set and 2-0* up but was 2.4 to back off a 1.25 sp) would retire and that starace (gim 1.09 when 3-0 in the 2nd, one set down) would too. as is so often the case, the liquidity on here can rarely support the greed of those in the know, and there must be plenty of people, me included, who are happy to get on the sure thing, regardless of the odds if the signs are obvious, magnifying the effect. which is why i don't think it's unlikely that that final was dodgy because the market behaviour was consistent with the score and showed no knowledge of the outcome. |
|
By:
This match may not be suspicious but Starace is still no surprise to be mentioned, he was on the TIU's leaked blacklist about 3 years ago. This is still relatively low level stuff with fairly low level ranked players involved, who are the most prolific f!xers in the top 50 is what I would want to know, matches where there is much more liquidity.
|
|
By:
^top 20 rather, speaking of blacklisters, Davydenko retired yesterday.
|
|
By:
Fognini should be investigated. That scum fixed some games as big favorites and let the big dogs win.
|
|
By:
As long he is nr 1 in Italia, they wont touch him. Otherwise they would open a breach, which could hurt ATP (& WTA) severely.
|