Match-fixing is a big headache in the gambling industry. Whether it’s a player helping intentionally throw a game, or betting markets experiencing strange wager patterns, a lot of money is impacted by the integrity-lacking acts.
ESPN’s Dave Purdum was at the SBCAmericas conference earlier this month in which various gaming executives discussed the different ways limit the amount of illicit activities in the betting world. Specifically: “Is the sports betting industry doing everything it could to combat match-fixing?”
Purdum mentioned that less than one percent of sporting events find “suspicious betting patterns” and there are clear areas where misconduct is occuring:
The bulk of the events that attract suspicious betting are lower-level events, like minor-league tennis and soccer. The bad news is that regulated U.S. sportsbooks continue to offer betting on these vulnerable events, instead of distinguishing themselves from the unregulated market by refusing to offer things like low-level tennis, soccer and table tennis.
Jake Williams, a senior vice president of strategy and operations at PointsBet, wasn’t sure that removing those markets could actually lead to more integrity issues, essentially arguing that without major books monitoring these events, they become more accessible to bad actors.
“Is that going to push someone to the local bookie, to the offshore operator who does offer it?” Williams said. “I think there’s reasonable limits to these questions. I think there’s a healthy amount of debate that’s required to where the line is and where the line is blurry.”
Williams was joined on the panel by representatives from the NFL, the International Betting Integrity Association and the Global Lottery Monitoring System.
GLS president Ludovica Calvi also thinks banning markets altogether would be a mistake, and sees the good in keeping them open while teaching the public some signs of misconduct.
“As long as you can control and monitor within a regulated environment, you are in much safer conditions than having everything always under water,” Calvi said. “It’s not through banning that you achieve and find the solution. It’s education and prevention.”
Still, Purdum brings up the idea of international betting data companies simply not offering their odds to the smaller, independent sportsbook that lack the resources to create odds on lower-level sporting events.
“If those odds aren’t provided, it’s possible the books stop offering those events or, at minimum, reduce betting limits.”
