EPTPinnacle voids Dark vs. San bets due to match manipulation…
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
Matchfixing is a very serious offence and accusations of matchfixing should not be made lightly. Please avoid making accusations against specific individuals unless you have substantial proof, or until further information is released. (0620 KST) | ||
|
calh
537 Posts
| ||
|
dsousa
United States1363 Posts
On January 21 2015 11:17 calh wrote: Pinnacle could have the clearest evidence ever, but it doesn't mean shit until they make it public. You just don't turn up to court and say "I could prove this guy stole my money, but I'd rather not". I'm actually more interested in reactions from the Korean scene. User was warned for this post | ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
| ||
|
icydergosu
528 Posts
If i win i stay quiet. If i lose i spread rumours of match fixing in hopes of voiding the bet. | ||
|
Darthsanta13
United States564 Posts
Here's an example of what an 80-20 matchup looks like: (2167) TaeJa 0-0 MiNiMaTh (1384) Estimated by Aligulac. Modify. I think this gives a better idea of how one-sided the odds would have to be for the betting line to make sense if it wasn't tampered with. Even if the evidence so far is circumstantial at best, it's unreasonable to not at least consider the possibility that something happened here. | ||
|
Karis Vas Ryaar
United States4396 Posts
On January 21 2015 11:11 lichter wrote: playing like crap isn't evidence San didn't even play that bad if it was then I can think of multiple games that Virus cheated xD. on topic is think its much more likely someone heard about how crappy he was playing/healthwise and bet a bunch of money on dark. | ||
|
showstealer1829
Australia3123 Posts
People are so quick to jump, what's next? Flash losing 11 matches in a row was match fixing? | ||
Whitewing
United States7483 Posts
Pinnacle only claimed there were problems in the betting, not that they believed there was matchfixing. | ||
|
IAMPRO
Afghanistan118 Posts
For a line to move like that despite huge counterbetting given the crazy good odds there must have been an insane amount of $ on Dark at completely illogically bad odds. It is like somebody betting $20,000 on BboongBboong as a 4-1 dog to beat Flash. It's completely ridiculous. I'm not gonna add my interpretation of the match because it's too subjective given the context. I'd recommend reading the LR thread for a priori opinions of how San played. *nb - it remains circumstantial. Whether this can be conclusively proved, though, is questionable. | ||
|
Clonester
Germany2808 Posts
On January 21 2015 12:15 IAMPRO wrote: The circumstantial evidence* is extremely damning. http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/40/sports-betting/esport-betting-1497866/index12.html For a line to move like that despite huge counterbetting given the crazy good odds there must have been an insane amount of $ on Dark at completely illogically bad odds. It is like somebody betting $20,000 on BboongBboong as a 4-1 dog to beat Flash. It's completely ridiculous. I'm not gonna add my interpretation of the match because it's too subjective given the context. I'd recommend reading the LR thread for a priori opinions of how San played. *nb - it remains circumstantial. Whether this can be conclusively proved, though, is questionable. Your link shows very good, that its not about someone losing money shitting on a player. Betters are professionals and now what they talk about. Something has gone on on the bets of this game but you cant say if it was inside informations about Sans wrist, San himself or something else. Accusing San is not the way to go, but accusing this game is right. | ||
|
mikumegurine
Canada3145 Posts
could this mean they acknowledge the possibility that it was insider information which made it not a fair bet, or are the completely saying that its matchfixing? | ||
|
Djzapz
Canada10681 Posts
If a few people happen to make very "eager" bets on a match and others see the trend and it snowballs more than it usually would (for whatever reason), then I can see why the numbers would look like the match is arranged. But it very well could be a false positive. Hopefully it is... | ||
lichter
1001 YEARS KESPAJAIL22272 Posts
On January 21 2015 12:15 IAMPRO wrote: I'm not gonna add my interpretation of the match because it's too subjective given the context. I'd recommend reading the LR thread for a priori opinions of how San played. based on the game, it was not fixed by the players | ||
|
Karis Vas Ryaar
United States4396 Posts
On January 21 2015 12:21 mikumegurine wrote: "not played on a fair basis" could this mean they acknowledge the possibility that it was insider information which made it not a fair bet, or are the completely saying that its matchfixing? I think it could be either. I'm pretty sure it's a blanket term for somethings weird and we're looking into it. Don't think the statement in itself is meant to point one way or the other | ||
|
lichter
1001 YEARS KESPAJAIL22272 Posts
| ||
|
bduddy
United States1326 Posts
On January 21 2015 12:41 lichter wrote: I'm not understanding what you're trying to say here. What other way of match fixing is there aside from one of the players intentionally losing the game?No one on pinnacle has accused any of the players. They are saying the match betting patterns appeared suspicious, not the match itself. They likely have no information other than the numbers. Trying to extrapolate that into evidence that players were involved is ridiculous. It could have been some idiot trying to make a scandal. It could have been someone with insider information. It could have been something else entirely. Anyone with a right mind can see that this "match fixing" was done in the most obvious and silly way possible. Until pinnacle release more info, there's no reason to suspect the players especially if you watched the game. | ||
|
Karis Vas Ryaar
United States4396 Posts
On January 21 2015 12:45 bduddy wrote: I'm not understanding what you're trying to say here. What other way of match fixing is there aside from one of the players intentionally losing the game? somone could had information they shouldn't have had about San's playing condition so they knew dark was incredibly heavily favored. or someone could have theoretically thrown thousands to tens of thousands of dollars betting on dark to try to move the betting line for some reason. both of these could have messed up the betting pattern. | ||
|
Lumi
United States1616 Posts
| ||
|
lichter
1001 YEARS KESPAJAIL22272 Posts
On January 21 2015 12:54 Lumi wrote: Here's what I'd like to know. How'd the betting go and did they lose money on it? If so, how much? Nobody is talking about how all of the betting for that match was voided, with this story being given as the reasoning for that. What if nothing happened and they're just trying to excuse themselves for scooping up lost money? Just a thought. All the bets on that match were voided. Meaning everyone was refunded for the bets they made and no money changed hands. Pinnacle is a big betting company and the match means nothing to their bottom line. The odds were moved because someone was betting large amounts of money on Dark. The amount of money being thrown at Dark was suspicious, and the bets were voided. It isn't a matter of finding excuses to void the bets on the match because, based on available information, it really did look weird. Pinnacle were right to void betting on the match, but people are trying to immediately turn it into a match fixing scandal without more evidence. | ||
|
Karis Vas Ryaar
United States4396 Posts
On January 21 2015 12:54 Lumi wrote: Here's what I'd like to know. How'd the betting go and did they lose money on it? If so, how much? Nobody is talking about how all of the betting for that match was voided, with this story being given as the reasoning for that. What if nothing happened and they're just trying to excuse themselves for scooping up lost money? Just a thought. It's been covered in the thread earlier but I'll summarize as best as I can. Pinnacle is one of the largest betting organizations in the world. They take huge amounts of money on sporting events all the time. There is pretty much no chance that their risking their entire reputation to save a few tens of thousands of money. That's like accusing Bill gates of making fake software in order to make a few grand. There's no way they'd risk there entire company to save a few thousand dollars. well its maybe not a perfect comparison because the bets were actually voided and the money was returned but you get the idea. the way the line moved was clearly fishy to anyone who has experience with these things. and people kept putting money on dark despite the absurd odds he ended up getting. | ||
| ||
