Is the public being dooped?

So how and why is America different? One reason may be that foreign gambling syndicates are less interested in baseball and American football (scandals are rife in tennis). Another is that gambling-influenced corruption in sport has made Americans aware of its dangers. It used to be endemic in baseball in particular. Henry Chadwick, a writer known as the “father of baseball statistics”, declared in 1870 that “we claim to rank among our enemies…every professional gambler who aims to make rival clubs his tools”. The sport's most infamous match-fixing scandal happened in 1919, when eight members of the Chicago White Sox were accused of taking bribes to throw the World Series. Heavily favoured, the “Black Sox” lost to the Cincinnati Reds. Two years later the eight players were banned from the sport for life, despite having been acquitted by a jury.

That ban came at the hands of Kenesaw Mountain Landis, a federal judge whom baseball's owners hired as the sport's first commissioner to restore the game's integrity in the wake of the scandal. Since then, even minor infringements have attracted heavy sanctions. For placing bets on his own team in the 1980s, Pete Rose, a record-breaking hitter, remains outside the Hall of Fame (and cannot even set foot in a major league ground).

American sports' governing bodies tend to regard all gambling with disapproval. David Stern, who heads the National Basketball Association, says cautiously that legal betting on his sport “may be a huge opportunity”. He is an exception. Most other sporting big shots are less enthusiastic. The National Football League would rather not have any gambling at all, says Brian McCarthy, a spokesman. When Delaware tried amending its laws to allow sports betting, the NFL was strongly opposed. The league makes a strong anti-gambling pitch to new players, as does the National Collegiate Athletic Association, another oversight body. Violations are now rare. The NFL suspended two players for placing bets on games in 1963 and one for similar reasons in the 1980s.

That kind of tough stance is urgently needed in soccer and cricket, says Declan Hill, a specialist on the influence of gambling syndicates on sport. His research has involved clandestine recordings of matchfixers, and detailed statistical analysis of anomalous events and results. He describes corruption as a “tsunami” that has wrecked most Asian football leagues, and is now perverting European soccer.

He wants the gambling industry to finance an independent, international anti-corruption agency to collect information and conduct investigations, on the lines of the existing body that deals with doping in sport. Each national football association should set up independent integrity units, he says, with hotlines for players to report approaches and threats by match-fixers.

Tougher policing has certainly worked in America. But another reason is money. None of the eight “Black Sox” made more than $6,000 a year, and three made less than $3,000. In 2009 dollars that would be around $74,000 and $37,000 respectively. In 2009 the average major-league baseball salary was $3m—more than ten times the amount allegedly paid to corrupt three Pakistani cricketers playing against England. The highest-profile recent instance of corruption in American sports featured a low-paid basketball referee. Statistical analysis of college basketball also shows highly unlikely patterns of scoring.

American football and baseball players may not be more honest than their predecessors or counterparts. But at today's prices, few can afford to tempt them.

Exactly and bet they felt really shi.tty after hearing that report but yet those same people will come on here making those same on threads arguing why sports arent fixed all to make themselves feel better about betting but it is what it is

Ok, a few thoughts...

First, they have "suspected" 680 games were fixed. Nothing has been proven so far in all of them, but yes it has been proven in England in the '60's and Italy as far as last year.

Obviously, we know the NBA, boxing, some NCAAB and some MLB.

Whenever there are large amounts of money on games, you have to think someone will try to influence the outcome.

However, fixong a game like Kansas/TCU is, IMHO, impossibel to do. What will you give the players in that sitiuation that will not get attention? Also, if a game was fixed, it would involve the spread not the SU winner. Having TCU win outright is to obvious when you are talking about paying a team to throw a game. Shaving points, yes, but losing outright as a 17.5 point favorite? No way.

Now, remember a game in Vegas where Wisconsin was killing UNLV like 34-6 minus about 8 in the fourth q with 7 minutes left. The books in Vegas and Off Shore reported that %98 of the money was on Wisconsin.

So> Well with six minutes to go in the 4th q someone drives their car into the stadium transformer and the electricity to the whole stadium goes out. Game called and ALL the books invoke the 55 minute rule where no bet has to be paid out unless the game makes it to 55:00 minutes. Wow?!

Last, someone knows something, before the game, as evidenced tonight with the league leader Elon plays I think a one conf win Wofford. It opens at -3 and closes at -1 Elon. They lose by 8.

Somebody knows something and this week it hasnt been me! lol