|
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) |
On January 24 2015 00:14 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +On January 23 2015 23:52 TheDwf wrote:On January 23 2015 23:46 Swoopae wrote:On January 23 2015 23:39 TheDwf wrote:On January 23 2015 23:35 Swoopae wrote:On January 23 2015 23:30 TheDwf wrote:
Is it known how much money was needed to manipulate the odds that way? Pinnacle know, the rest of us can speculate but given they have sharp accounts move the line further than square accounts its hard to tell exactly Any order of magnitude? Thousands of dollars? Dozens of thousands? More? When the lines open, hundreds will move it a small amount, thousands a large. On game day, thousands will move the line, and tens of thousands will move the line in extreme fashion like San vs Dark style. On a major tournament final (think Code s final) where lots of people are betting the numbers would be larger. OK, thanks. So, suppose a millionnaire (or more) blasé about life who relishes kicking the nest to watch the ants panicking; or whatever his reason is to become an agent of chaos. Such a guy could be responsible for this mess, triggering this "scandal" with absurd, random bets? If we look at the Innovation-example it doens't really make sense. Let's say your a random millionaire/bilionaire looking for some excitement in your favourite esport (Sc2). You see San vs Innovation, and you bet on San for the lulz. For some reason you bet on G1 and no the whole series, and after you have maxed out the bet and the line moves, you then chosoe to bet against on G1. Then you bet again and again untill the line has moved sufficiently. Why would you be so focussed on betting on G1 if you were a rich guy looking for some excitement? Why not get more excitement by also beting on G2 and G3 or the whole series? This just seems so unlikely compared to the other possiblity (matchfixing). Show nested quote +
We will definitely follow up with Pinnacle, but I would like to hear from Kespa first so both sides will already have said something about what they are doing.
I guess Kespa has an interesting in keeping the rumours down untill they can no longer be ignored. So I am really curious on how they willl react here. Either everything will go nuts or they will try to avoid/downplay the issue.
It also feels really unlikely that Innovation would match fix. One of the most hardworking and talented players who has earned so much by winning tournaments that it doesnt make sense for him to do it.
|
On January 24 2015 00:09 Nebuchad wrote:
So what the guy who called you a scumbag here wasn't a regular poster either and that didn't stop you from flaming us on 2+2.
Anyway your post doesn't really answer mine. There is a claim that the same pattern happened on Maru vs Life and despite that pattern Life ended up winning. If it's confirmed that this is correct, to me that speaks against player involvement, as it's evidence that certitude of victory isn't a necessity for the bets to occur. Now obviously the claim isn't confirmed but without a specific reason to dismiss it I think we have to take it into account.
It was about 10 people including a bunch of PMs on twitter threatening me etc. But whatever, that's irrelevant.
I can think of plenty of examples where I made a bet fading steam and my player won. That particular game is therefore pretty much certain not to be rigged. It doesn't mean anything about any other game.
At this stage only San vs Dark and Innovation vs Super Game 1 have been flagged as suspicious by Pinnacle. While i'm sure they're investigating, speculating about other games at this point is pointless (although I mentioned Innovation vs sOs and Hero in Hot6 as apparently having odd line movement because they involve a player who was in one of the two games Pinnacle flagged as suspicious). I don't have any comment on whether the line movement or games actually were, I simply forwarded the info I was given on twitter to Pinnacle so that people with access to accurate information can make an assessment.
At this point there's not much we can do until Kespa and/or Pinnacle make a statement, hopefully soon as we don't want to go on random witchhunts. Pinnacle declared two games suspicious, unless they increase the scope of their investigation we start there. We haven't even had a statement from Pinnacle about Super/Innovation game 1 yet.
|
On January 24 2015 00:17 Luolis wrote:Show nested quote +On January 24 2015 00:14 Hider wrote:On January 23 2015 23:52 TheDwf wrote:On January 23 2015 23:46 Swoopae wrote:On January 23 2015 23:39 TheDwf wrote:On January 23 2015 23:35 Swoopae wrote:On January 23 2015 23:30 TheDwf wrote:
Is it known how much money was needed to manipulate the odds that way? Pinnacle know, the rest of us can speculate but given they have sharp accounts move the line further than square accounts its hard to tell exactly Any order of magnitude? Thousands of dollars? Dozens of thousands? More? When the lines open, hundreds will move it a small amount, thousands a large. On game day, thousands will move the line, and tens of thousands will move the line in extreme fashion like San vs Dark style. On a major tournament final (think Code s final) where lots of people are betting the numbers would be larger. OK, thanks. So, suppose a millionnaire (or more) blasé about life who relishes kicking the nest to watch the ants panicking; or whatever his reason is to become an agent of chaos. Such a guy could be responsible for this mess, triggering this "scandal" with absurd, random bets? If we look at the Innovation-example it doens't really make sense. Let's say your a random millionaire/bilionaire looking for some excitement in your favourite esport (Sc2). You see San vs Innovation, and you bet on San for the lulz. For some reason you bet on G1 and no the whole series, and after you have maxed out the bet and the line moves, you then chosoe to bet against on G1. Then you bet again and again untill the line has moved sufficiently. Why would you be so focussed on betting on G1 if you were a rich guy looking for some excitement? Why not get more excitement by also beting on G2 and G3 or the whole series? This just seems so unlikely compared to the other possiblity (matchfixing).
We will definitely follow up with Pinnacle, but I would like to hear from Kespa first so both sides will already have said something about what they are doing.
I guess Kespa has an interesting in keeping the rumours down untill they can no longer be ignored. So I am really curious on how they willl react here. Either everything will go nuts or they will try to avoid/downplay the issue. It also feels really unlikely that Innovation would match fix. One of the most hardworking and talented players who has earned so much by winning tournaments that it doesnt make sense for him to do it.
Indeed, but I am sure people made said similar statements a milion times in comparable real-life situations. I really wonder how Savior-fans reacted when he was initally accused.
Some times greed just take overhand, and being a hardworking Sc2 player with a robot-mentality doesn't prevent him from also being vulnerable to accepting matchfixing offers.
Can't help but think of a comment from Sheldon Cooper as I watched big bang theory a couple of days ago. He referrenced Sherlock Holmes who made the following quote: "When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth".
Instead, I see the only real alternative that someone was messing with the line intentionally (for whatever reason that could be). Doesn't seem very likely to me either.
|
I now realize that you're being defensive and that's why you're not really answering. I'm sorry, this wasn't meant as an attack, I was just attempting to gather information and I asked you cause you know more than me.
|
On January 24 2015 00:17 Luolis wrote:Show nested quote +On January 24 2015 00:14 Hider wrote:On January 23 2015 23:52 TheDwf wrote:On January 23 2015 23:46 Swoopae wrote:On January 23 2015 23:39 TheDwf wrote:On January 23 2015 23:35 Swoopae wrote:On January 23 2015 23:30 TheDwf wrote:
Is it known how much money was needed to manipulate the odds that way? Pinnacle know, the rest of us can speculate but given they have sharp accounts move the line further than square accounts its hard to tell exactly Any order of magnitude? Thousands of dollars? Dozens of thousands? More? When the lines open, hundreds will move it a small amount, thousands a large. On game day, thousands will move the line, and tens of thousands will move the line in extreme fashion like San vs Dark style. On a major tournament final (think Code s final) where lots of people are betting the numbers would be larger. OK, thanks. So, suppose a millionnaire (or more) blasé about life who relishes kicking the nest to watch the ants panicking; or whatever his reason is to become an agent of chaos. Such a guy could be responsible for this mess, triggering this "scandal" with absurd, random bets? If we look at the Innovation-example it doens't really make sense. Let's say your a random millionaire/bilionaire looking for some excitement in your favourite esport (Sc2). You see San vs Innovation, and you bet on San for the lulz. For some reason you bet on G1 and no the whole series, and after you have maxed out the bet and the line moves, you then chosoe to bet against on G1. Then you bet again and again untill the line has moved sufficiently. Why would you be so focussed on betting on G1 if you were a rich guy looking for some excitement? Why not get more excitement by also beting on G2 and G3 or the whole series? This just seems so unlikely compared to the other possiblity (matchfixing).
We will definitely follow up with Pinnacle, but I would like to hear from Kespa first so both sides will already have said something about what they are doing.
I guess Kespa has an interesting in keeping the rumours down untill they can no longer be ignored. So I am really curious on how they willl react here. Either everything will go nuts or they will try to avoid/downplay the issue. It also feels really unlikely that Innovation would match fix. One of the most hardworking and talented players who has earned so much by winning tournaments that it doesnt make sense for him to do it.
Yeah, it's usually total scrubs like that Savior dude who matchfix.
|
On January 23 2015 23:52 TheDwf wrote:Show nested quote +On January 23 2015 23:46 Swoopae wrote:On January 23 2015 23:39 TheDwf wrote:On January 23 2015 23:35 Swoopae wrote:On January 23 2015 23:30 TheDwf wrote:
Is it known how much money was needed to manipulate the odds that way? Pinnacle know, the rest of us can speculate but given they have sharp accounts move the line further than square accounts its hard to tell exactly Any order of magnitude? Thousands of dollars? Dozens of thousands? More? When the lines open, hundreds will move it a small amount, thousands a large. On game day, thousands will move the line, and tens of thousands will move the line in extreme fashion like San vs Dark style. On a major tournament final (think Code s final) where lots of people are betting the numbers would be larger. OK, thanks. So, suppose a millionnaire (or more) blasé about life who relishes kicking the nest to watch the ants panicking; or whatever his reason is to become an agent of chaos. Such a guy could be responsible for this mess, triggering this "scandal" with absurd, random bets?
Perhaps aliens did it.
Anyway, why on earth would match fixers not spread their bets over multiple sites? It would stop the line moving so much while you have the same investment so there's less suspicion and more profit. And why would fixers involved with the Korean scene use a Western betting site? (I'm not informed about e-sports betting though)
|
I can think of plenty of examples where I made a bet fading steam and my player won. That particular game is therefore pretty much certain not to be rigged. It doesn't mean anything about any other game.
Euh, can you explain why this is the case? Why is it "ok" that there are weird line movements when the player with the money on loses?
Pretty much all the evidence for "match fixing" is that the player who had bad odds at the end (so the money was heavily betted on him) actually won, no?
If these odd line movements happen "regularly" and sometimes the player loses and sometimes the player wins, why is one case evidence and the other is not? Doesn't make sense to me Oo
|
East Gorteau22261 Posts
On January 24 2015 00:26 Broodwurst wrote:Show nested quote +On January 24 2015 00:17 Luolis wrote:On January 24 2015 00:14 Hider wrote:On January 23 2015 23:52 TheDwf wrote:On January 23 2015 23:46 Swoopae wrote:On January 23 2015 23:39 TheDwf wrote:On January 23 2015 23:35 Swoopae wrote:On January 23 2015 23:30 TheDwf wrote:
Is it known how much money was needed to manipulate the odds that way? Pinnacle know, the rest of us can speculate but given they have sharp accounts move the line further than square accounts its hard to tell exactly Any order of magnitude? Thousands of dollars? Dozens of thousands? More? When the lines open, hundreds will move it a small amount, thousands a large. On game day, thousands will move the line, and tens of thousands will move the line in extreme fashion like San vs Dark style. On a major tournament final (think Code s final) where lots of people are betting the numbers would be larger. OK, thanks. So, suppose a millionnaire (or more) blasé about life who relishes kicking the nest to watch the ants panicking; or whatever his reason is to become an agent of chaos. Such a guy could be responsible for this mess, triggering this "scandal" with absurd, random bets? If we look at the Innovation-example it doens't really make sense. Let's say your a random millionaire/bilionaire looking for some excitement in your favourite esport (Sc2). You see San vs Innovation, and you bet on San for the lulz. For some reason you bet on G1 and no the whole series, and after you have maxed out the bet and the line moves, you then chosoe to bet against on G1. Then you bet again and again untill the line has moved sufficiently. Why would you be so focussed on betting on G1 if you were a rich guy looking for some excitement? Why not get more excitement by also beting on G2 and G3 or the whole series? This just seems so unlikely compared to the other possiblity (matchfixing).
We will definitely follow up with Pinnacle, but I would like to hear from Kespa first so both sides will already have said something about what they are doing.
I guess Kespa has an interesting in keeping the rumours down untill they can no longer be ignored. So I am really curious on how they willl react here. Either everything will go nuts or they will try to avoid/downplay the issue. It also feels really unlikely that Innovation would match fix. One of the most hardworking and talented players who has earned so much by winning tournaments that it doesnt make sense for him to do it. Yeah, it's usually total scrubs like that Savior dude who matchfix.
I don't think saviOr was contending for multiple championships when his match fixing came to light, or that he was match fixing when he was at his peak (or near enough)
|
On January 24 2015 00:32 Zealously wrote:Show nested quote +On January 24 2015 00:26 Broodwurst wrote:On January 24 2015 00:17 Luolis wrote:On January 24 2015 00:14 Hider wrote:On January 23 2015 23:52 TheDwf wrote:On January 23 2015 23:46 Swoopae wrote:On January 23 2015 23:39 TheDwf wrote:On January 23 2015 23:35 Swoopae wrote:On January 23 2015 23:30 TheDwf wrote:
Is it known how much money was needed to manipulate the odds that way? Pinnacle know, the rest of us can speculate but given they have sharp accounts move the line further than square accounts its hard to tell exactly Any order of magnitude? Thousands of dollars? Dozens of thousands? More? When the lines open, hundreds will move it a small amount, thousands a large. On game day, thousands will move the line, and tens of thousands will move the line in extreme fashion like San vs Dark style. On a major tournament final (think Code s final) where lots of people are betting the numbers would be larger. OK, thanks. So, suppose a millionnaire (or more) blasé about life who relishes kicking the nest to watch the ants panicking; or whatever his reason is to become an agent of chaos. Such a guy could be responsible for this mess, triggering this "scandal" with absurd, random bets? If we look at the Innovation-example it doens't really make sense. Let's say your a random millionaire/bilionaire looking for some excitement in your favourite esport (Sc2). You see San vs Innovation, and you bet on San for the lulz. For some reason you bet on G1 and no the whole series, and after you have maxed out the bet and the line moves, you then chosoe to bet against on G1. Then you bet again and again untill the line has moved sufficiently. Why would you be so focussed on betting on G1 if you were a rich guy looking for some excitement? Why not get more excitement by also beting on G2 and G3 or the whole series? This just seems so unlikely compared to the other possiblity (matchfixing).
We will definitely follow up with Pinnacle, but I would like to hear from Kespa first so both sides will already have said something about what they are doing.
I guess Kespa has an interesting in keeping the rumours down untill they can no longer be ignored. So I am really curious on how they willl react here. Either everything will go nuts or they will try to avoid/downplay the issue. It also feels really unlikely that Innovation would match fix. One of the most hardworking and talented players who has earned so much by winning tournaments that it doesnt make sense for him to do it. Yeah, it's usually total scrubs like that Savior dude who matchfix. I don't think saviOr was contending for multiple championships when his match fixing came to light, or that he was match fixing when he was at his peak (or near enough)
But he was a big name and probably still got a lot of money only cause of that (correct me if i am wrong).
It simply doesn't matter if you have a lot of money/fame/whatever, it's a non argument in this case.
|
East Gorteau22261 Posts
On January 24 2015 00:40 The_Red_Viper wrote:Show nested quote +On January 24 2015 00:32 Zealously wrote:On January 24 2015 00:26 Broodwurst wrote:On January 24 2015 00:17 Luolis wrote:On January 24 2015 00:14 Hider wrote:On January 23 2015 23:52 TheDwf wrote:On January 23 2015 23:46 Swoopae wrote:On January 23 2015 23:39 TheDwf wrote:On January 23 2015 23:35 Swoopae wrote:On January 23 2015 23:30 TheDwf wrote:
Is it known how much money was needed to manipulate the odds that way? Pinnacle know, the rest of us can speculate but given they have sharp accounts move the line further than square accounts its hard to tell exactly Any order of magnitude? Thousands of dollars? Dozens of thousands? More? When the lines open, hundreds will move it a small amount, thousands a large. On game day, thousands will move the line, and tens of thousands will move the line in extreme fashion like San vs Dark style. On a major tournament final (think Code s final) where lots of people are betting the numbers would be larger. OK, thanks. So, suppose a millionnaire (or more) blasé about life who relishes kicking the nest to watch the ants panicking; or whatever his reason is to become an agent of chaos. Such a guy could be responsible for this mess, triggering this "scandal" with absurd, random bets? If we look at the Innovation-example it doens't really make sense. Let's say your a random millionaire/bilionaire looking for some excitement in your favourite esport (Sc2). You see San vs Innovation, and you bet on San for the lulz. For some reason you bet on G1 and no the whole series, and after you have maxed out the bet and the line moves, you then chosoe to bet against on G1. Then you bet again and again untill the line has moved sufficiently. Why would you be so focussed on betting on G1 if you were a rich guy looking for some excitement? Why not get more excitement by also beting on G2 and G3 or the whole series? This just seems so unlikely compared to the other possiblity (matchfixing).
We will definitely follow up with Pinnacle, but I would like to hear from Kespa first so both sides will already have said something about what they are doing.
I guess Kespa has an interesting in keeping the rumours down untill they can no longer be ignored. So I am really curious on how they willl react here. Either everything will go nuts or they will try to avoid/downplay the issue. It also feels really unlikely that Innovation would match fix. One of the most hardworking and talented players who has earned so much by winning tournaments that it doesnt make sense for him to do it. Yeah, it's usually total scrubs like that Savior dude who matchfix. I don't think saviOr was contending for multiple championships when his match fixing came to light, or that he was match fixing when he was at his peak (or near enough) But he was a big name and probably still got a lot of money only cause of that (correct me if i am wrong). It simply doesn't matter if you have a lot of money/fame/whatever, it's a non argument in this case.
Of course it matters. To say that it doesn't matter how much money you're making when someone asks you to fix/throw a match is ridiculous. You need incentive to even consider it.
|
On January 24 2015 00:23 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +On January 24 2015 00:17 Luolis wrote:On January 24 2015 00:14 Hider wrote:On January 23 2015 23:52 TheDwf wrote:On January 23 2015 23:46 Swoopae wrote:On January 23 2015 23:39 TheDwf wrote:On January 23 2015 23:35 Swoopae wrote:On January 23 2015 23:30 TheDwf wrote:
Is it known how much money was needed to manipulate the odds that way? Pinnacle know, the rest of us can speculate but given they have sharp accounts move the line further than square accounts its hard to tell exactly Any order of magnitude? Thousands of dollars? Dozens of thousands? More? When the lines open, hundreds will move it a small amount, thousands a large. On game day, thousands will move the line, and tens of thousands will move the line in extreme fashion like San vs Dark style. On a major tournament final (think Code s final) where lots of people are betting the numbers would be larger. OK, thanks. So, suppose a millionnaire (or more) blasé about life who relishes kicking the nest to watch the ants panicking; or whatever his reason is to become an agent of chaos. Such a guy could be responsible for this mess, triggering this "scandal" with absurd, random bets? If we look at the Innovation-example it doens't really make sense. Let's say your a random millionaire/bilionaire looking for some excitement in your favourite esport (Sc2). You see San vs Innovation, and you bet on San for the lulz. For some reason you bet on G1 and no the whole series, and after you have maxed out the bet and the line moves, you then chosoe to bet against on G1. Then you bet again and again untill the line has moved sufficiently. Why would you be so focussed on betting on G1 if you were a rich guy looking for some excitement? Why not get more excitement by also beting on G2 and G3 or the whole series? This just seems so unlikely compared to the other possiblity (matchfixing).
We will definitely follow up with Pinnacle, but I would like to hear from Kespa first so both sides will already have said something about what they are doing.
I guess Kespa has an interesting in keeping the rumours down untill they can no longer be ignored. So I am really curious on how they willl react here. Either everything will go nuts or they will try to avoid/downplay the issue. It also feels really unlikely that Innovation would match fix. One of the most hardworking and talented players who has earned so much by winning tournaments that it doesnt make sense for him to do it. Can't help but think of a comment from Sheldon Cooper as I watched big bang theory a couple of days ago. He referrenced Sherlock Holmes who made the following quote: "When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth". Instead, I see the only real alternative that someone was messing with the line intentionally (for whatever reason that could be). Doesn't seem very likely to me either.
Sherlock Holmes also said the following though:
"It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts."
Truth is that we don't really know anything other than two or three suspicious incidents. It's enough to speculate that something sinister is happening, but finding any certainty is difficult. I think the main point is that someone did, in fact, place those bets and I think it's very necessary to discover this person's identity lest players be vilified for every bad decision from now on.
|
On January 24 2015 00:28 The_Red_Viper wrote:Show nested quote +I can think of plenty of examples where I made a bet fading steam and my player won. That particular game is therefore pretty much certain not to be rigged. It doesn't mean anything about any other game. Euh, can you explain why this is the case? Why is it "ok" that there are weird line movements when the player with the money on loses?
Ok, i'll try and do so. As an informed esports bettor, there are lines that present value for sharp bettors because casual fan money is all on the other guy. The best examples of this are betting against Flash and Jaedong. Flash and Jaedong, especially Flash, almost always close at a shorter price than they open, regardless of form becase they have the biggest fanbases. Players like Dark and Super do not have these dedicated fanbases pouring constant money in on them.
An example from this season was the Prime vs CJ Entus game; using proper data analysis (think aligulac but more advanced) the Pinnacle opening line of -400 seemed sharp; yet Prime fans and casual bettors bet on Prime until they were -230ish. I faded this steam and took CJ at the closing line because the steam was not reflecting realistic probabilities to win the match. If Prime had been bet in until they were -300 favourites and then won; that would have been very suspicious. They were bet in a bit; but not such a huge amount it's unjustifiable because they were still solid underdogs.
The best example is Flash. If you want to bet on Flash you MUST catch the opening line because money ALWAYS come on him, win or lose, good or bad matchup, good or bad map, against any opponent no matter what. If Flash opens at -120, he will usually close at -180 or something regardless of what the 'true' line is.
This sort of line movement AGAINST innovation is very odd, because he is in a second tier of players below flash who almost always have the money come in on his side - if the money had come in ON innovation against super and he had won it would be less unusual given historic betting trends on him and super.
San and Dark both don't have a huge fanbase so the line should have stabilised around a fair price (say, Dark -120 without knowledge of San's injury, or even +100) or maybe -200 for Dark with knowledge San is out of form and not practicing well. -400 or more is just unjustifiable in a best of 1 and with 'real' line movement should in theory never happen. Super should practically never be bet in from a fair price (+160 to +220) to a substantial favourite over Innovation either given both the players history, skillsets etc.
Think of it this way - if you saw a betting line on CJ Hero against Ret, and it had both players at even money, who would you bet on? 90% of people or more would say Hero, so 90% of the money should come in on Hero. This will move the line until he is say -300 against Ret in a bo1, or -500 in a bo3, or -700 in a bo5 or more because that is the perceived 'true price' at which money will come in equally on both sides, when Ret is +270 and Hero is -300 in a best of 1 (these numbers are just rough examples to give you an idea, I didn't actually bother handicap Hero vs Ret accurately)
|
On January 24 2015 00:43 Zealously wrote:Show nested quote +On January 24 2015 00:40 The_Red_Viper wrote:On January 24 2015 00:32 Zealously wrote:On January 24 2015 00:26 Broodwurst wrote:On January 24 2015 00:17 Luolis wrote:On January 24 2015 00:14 Hider wrote:On January 23 2015 23:52 TheDwf wrote:On January 23 2015 23:46 Swoopae wrote:On January 23 2015 23:39 TheDwf wrote:On January 23 2015 23:35 Swoopae wrote:
[quote]
Pinnacle know, the rest of us can speculate but given they have sharp accounts move the line further than square accounts its hard to tell exactly Any order of magnitude? Thousands of dollars? Dozens of thousands? More? When the lines open, hundreds will move it a small amount, thousands a large. On game day, thousands will move the line, and tens of thousands will move the line in extreme fashion like San vs Dark style. On a major tournament final (think Code s final) where lots of people are betting the numbers would be larger. OK, thanks. So, suppose a millionnaire (or more) blasé about life who relishes kicking the nest to watch the ants panicking; or whatever his reason is to become an agent of chaos. Such a guy could be responsible for this mess, triggering this "scandal" with absurd, random bets? If we look at the Innovation-example it doens't really make sense. Let's say your a random millionaire/bilionaire looking for some excitement in your favourite esport (Sc2). You see San vs Innovation, and you bet on San for the lulz. For some reason you bet on G1 and no the whole series, and after you have maxed out the bet and the line moves, you then chosoe to bet against on G1. Then you bet again and again untill the line has moved sufficiently. Why would you be so focussed on betting on G1 if you were a rich guy looking for some excitement? Why not get more excitement by also beting on G2 and G3 or the whole series? This just seems so unlikely compared to the other possiblity (matchfixing).
We will definitely follow up with Pinnacle, but I would like to hear from Kespa first so both sides will already have said something about what they are doing.
I guess Kespa has an interesting in keeping the rumours down untill they can no longer be ignored. So I am really curious on how they willl react here. Either everything will go nuts or they will try to avoid/downplay the issue. It also feels really unlikely that Innovation would match fix. One of the most hardworking and talented players who has earned so much by winning tournaments that it doesnt make sense for him to do it. Yeah, it's usually total scrubs like that Savior dude who matchfix. I don't think saviOr was contending for multiple championships when his match fixing came to light, or that he was match fixing when he was at his peak (or near enough) But he was a big name and probably still got a lot of money only cause of that (correct me if i am wrong). It simply doesn't matter if you have a lot of money/fame/whatever, it's a non argument in this case. Of course it matters. To say that it doesn't matter how much money you're making when someone asks you to fix/throw a match is ridiculous. You need incentive to even consider it.
The motivation is greed. By your logic rich people shouldn't ever be greedy for more money, that's just not the case at all.
So no, it doesn't matter, "poor" and "rich" people both want more money than they currently have.
|
On January 24 2015 00:32 Zealously wrote:Show nested quote +On January 24 2015 00:26 Broodwurst wrote:On January 24 2015 00:17 Luolis wrote:On January 24 2015 00:14 Hider wrote:On January 23 2015 23:52 TheDwf wrote:On January 23 2015 23:46 Swoopae wrote:On January 23 2015 23:39 TheDwf wrote:On January 23 2015 23:35 Swoopae wrote:On January 23 2015 23:30 TheDwf wrote:
Is it known how much money was needed to manipulate the odds that way? Pinnacle know, the rest of us can speculate but given they have sharp accounts move the line further than square accounts its hard to tell exactly Any order of magnitude? Thousands of dollars? Dozens of thousands? More? When the lines open, hundreds will move it a small amount, thousands a large. On game day, thousands will move the line, and tens of thousands will move the line in extreme fashion like San vs Dark style. On a major tournament final (think Code s final) where lots of people are betting the numbers would be larger. OK, thanks. So, suppose a millionnaire (or more) blasé about life who relishes kicking the nest to watch the ants panicking; or whatever his reason is to become an agent of chaos. Such a guy could be responsible for this mess, triggering this "scandal" with absurd, random bets? If we look at the Innovation-example it doens't really make sense. Let's say your a random millionaire/bilionaire looking for some excitement in your favourite esport (Sc2). You see San vs Innovation, and you bet on San for the lulz. For some reason you bet on G1 and no the whole series, and after you have maxed out the bet and the line moves, you then chosoe to bet against on G1. Then you bet again and again untill the line has moved sufficiently. Why would you be so focussed on betting on G1 if you were a rich guy looking for some excitement? Why not get more excitement by also beting on G2 and G3 or the whole series? This just seems so unlikely compared to the other possiblity (matchfixing).
We will definitely follow up with Pinnacle, but I would like to hear from Kespa first so both sides will already have said something about what they are doing.
I guess Kespa has an interesting in keeping the rumours down untill they can no longer be ignored. So I am really curious on how they willl react here. Either everything will go nuts or they will try to avoid/downplay the issue. It also feels really unlikely that Innovation would match fix. One of the most hardworking and talented players who has earned so much by winning tournaments that it doesnt make sense for him to do it. Yeah, it's usually total scrubs like that Savior dude who matchfix. I don't think saviOr was contending for multiple championships when his match fixing came to light, or that he was match fixing when he was at his peak (or near enough)
Not in the least. He had began his slide into mediocrity by the beginning of 2007 and was demoted to CJ's B-Team in 2008. and the match-fixing was discovered in mid-2010. Most of the games that had been confirmed were in 2010, with several in late '09.
No matter what anybody wants to say, savior was completely irrelevant as a pro-BW player when he began match fixing. There was no big money coming in from his team, and he definitely wasn't winning prize money. Actually, he wasn't winning anything. Literally the only thing he had going for him was the match fixing.
|
Okay but the reference was Life vs Maru, you were the one to bring up Flash and Jaedong. Life getting to 3.7 vs Maru didn't happen because everyone loves Maru and hates Life...
|
On January 24 2015 00:45 Swoopae wrote:Show nested quote +On January 24 2015 00:28 The_Red_Viper wrote:I can think of plenty of examples where I made a bet fading steam and my player won. That particular game is therefore pretty much certain not to be rigged. It doesn't mean anything about any other game. Euh, can you explain why this is the case? Why is it "ok" that there are weird line movements when the player with the money on loses? Ok, i'll try and do so. As an informed esports bettor, there are lines that present value for sharp bettors because casual fan money is all on the other guy. The best examples of this are betting against Flash and Jaedong. Flash and Jaedong, especially Flash, almost always close at a shorter price than they open, regardless of form becase they have the biggest fanbases. Players like Dark and Super do not have these dedicated fanbases pouring constant money in on them. An example from this season was the Prime vs CJ Entus game; using proper data analysis (think aligulac but more advanced) the Pinnacle opening line of -400 seemed sharp; yet Prime fans and casual bettors bet on Prime until they were -230ish. I faded this steam and took CJ at the closing line because the steam was not reflecting realistic probabilities to win the match. If Prime had been bet in until they were -300 favourites and then won; that would have been very suspicious. They were bet in a bit; but not such a huge amount it's unjustifiable because they were still solid underdogs. The best example is Flash. If you want to bet on Flash you MUST catch the opening line because money ALWAYS come on him, win or lose, good or bad matchup, good or bad map, against any opponent no matter what. If Flash opens at -120, he will usually close at -180 or something regardless of what the 'true' line is. This sort of line movement AGAINST innovation is very odd, because he is in a second tier of players below flash who almost always have the money come in on his side - if the money had come in ON innovation against super and he had won it would be less unusual given historic betting trends on him and super. San and Dark both don't have a huge fanbase so the line should have stabilised around a fair price (say, Dark -120 without knowledge of San's injury, or even +100) or maybe -200 for Dark with knowledge San is out of form and not practicing well. -400 or more is just unjustifiable in a best of 1 and with 'real' line movement should in theory never happen. Super should practically never be bet in from a fair price (+160 to +220) to a substantial favourite over Innovation either given both the players history, skillsets etc. Think of it this way - if you saw a betting line on CJ Hero against Ret, and it had both players at even money, who would you bet on? 90% of people or more would say Hero, so 90% of the money should come in on Hero. This will move the line until he is say -300 against Ret in a bo1, or -500 in a bo3, or -700 in a bo5 or more because that is the perceived 'true price' at which money will come in equally on both sides, when Ret is +270 and Hero is -300 in a best of 1 (these numbers are just rough examples to give you an idea, I didn't actually bother handicap Hero vs Ret accurately)
Nah i understand that part (thx for asnwering nonetheless), but people kept mentioning Life vs Maru.
I don't see why there would be weird line movement here tbh, both should have a lot of fans and they both are very good players. So i don't understand why haveing weird odds here is ok (and the player with unfavorable odds even lost apparently). To me that looks like the same situation as dark/san for example, only that the guy(s) who betted big actually lost.
I basically would think this match should have been closed too then, even though the other player won.
|
On January 24 2015 00:44 Grumbels wrote:Show nested quote +On January 24 2015 00:23 Hider wrote:On January 24 2015 00:17 Luolis wrote:On January 24 2015 00:14 Hider wrote:On January 23 2015 23:52 TheDwf wrote:On January 23 2015 23:46 Swoopae wrote:On January 23 2015 23:39 TheDwf wrote:On January 23 2015 23:35 Swoopae wrote:On January 23 2015 23:30 TheDwf wrote:
Is it known how much money was needed to manipulate the odds that way? Pinnacle know, the rest of us can speculate but given they have sharp accounts move the line further than square accounts its hard to tell exactly Any order of magnitude? Thousands of dollars? Dozens of thousands? More? When the lines open, hundreds will move it a small amount, thousands a large. On game day, thousands will move the line, and tens of thousands will move the line in extreme fashion like San vs Dark style. On a major tournament final (think Code s final) where lots of people are betting the numbers would be larger. OK, thanks. So, suppose a millionnaire (or more) blasé about life who relishes kicking the nest to watch the ants panicking; or whatever his reason is to become an agent of chaos. Such a guy could be responsible for this mess, triggering this "scandal" with absurd, random bets? If we look at the Innovation-example it doens't really make sense. Let's say your a random millionaire/bilionaire looking for some excitement in your favourite esport (Sc2). You see San vs Innovation, and you bet on San for the lulz. For some reason you bet on G1 and no the whole series, and after you have maxed out the bet and the line moves, you then chosoe to bet against on G1. Then you bet again and again untill the line has moved sufficiently. Why would you be so focussed on betting on G1 if you were a rich guy looking for some excitement? Why not get more excitement by also beting on G2 and G3 or the whole series? This just seems so unlikely compared to the other possiblity (matchfixing).
We will definitely follow up with Pinnacle, but I would like to hear from Kespa first so both sides will already have said something about what they are doing.
I guess Kespa has an interesting in keeping the rumours down untill they can no longer be ignored. So I am really curious on how they willl react here. Either everything will go nuts or they will try to avoid/downplay the issue. It also feels really unlikely that Innovation would match fix. One of the most hardworking and talented players who has earned so much by winning tournaments that it doesnt make sense for him to do it. Can't help but think of a comment from Sheldon Cooper as I watched big bang theory a couple of days ago. He referrenced Sherlock Holmes who made the following quote: "When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth". Instead, I see the only real alternative that someone was messing with the line intentionally (for whatever reason that could be). Doesn't seem very likely to me either. Sherlock Holmes also said the following though: "It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts."Truth is that we don't really know anything other than two or three suspicious incidents. It's enough to speculate that something sinister is happening, but finding any certainty is difficult. I think the main point is that someone did, in fact, place those bets and I think it's very necessary to discover this person's identity lest players be vilified for every bad decision from now on.
We have data though: The line movements. In the quote Sherlock Holmes didn't say that we needed all the data in the world before we could theorize.
|
On January 24 2015 00:52 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +On January 24 2015 00:44 Grumbels wrote:On January 24 2015 00:23 Hider wrote:On January 24 2015 00:17 Luolis wrote:On January 24 2015 00:14 Hider wrote:On January 23 2015 23:52 TheDwf wrote:On January 23 2015 23:46 Swoopae wrote:On January 23 2015 23:39 TheDwf wrote:On January 23 2015 23:35 Swoopae wrote:On January 23 2015 23:30 TheDwf wrote:
Is it known how much money was needed to manipulate the odds that way? Pinnacle know, the rest of us can speculate but given they have sharp accounts move the line further than square accounts its hard to tell exactly Any order of magnitude? Thousands of dollars? Dozens of thousands? More? When the lines open, hundreds will move it a small amount, thousands a large. On game day, thousands will move the line, and tens of thousands will move the line in extreme fashion like San vs Dark style. On a major tournament final (think Code s final) where lots of people are betting the numbers would be larger. OK, thanks. So, suppose a millionnaire (or more) blasé about life who relishes kicking the nest to watch the ants panicking; or whatever his reason is to become an agent of chaos. Such a guy could be responsible for this mess, triggering this "scandal" with absurd, random bets? If we look at the Innovation-example it doens't really make sense. Let's say your a random millionaire/bilionaire looking for some excitement in your favourite esport (Sc2). You see San vs Innovation, and you bet on San for the lulz. For some reason you bet on G1 and no the whole series, and after you have maxed out the bet and the line moves, you then chosoe to bet against on G1. Then you bet again and again untill the line has moved sufficiently. Why would you be so focussed on betting on G1 if you were a rich guy looking for some excitement? Why not get more excitement by also beting on G2 and G3 or the whole series? This just seems so unlikely compared to the other possiblity (matchfixing).
We will definitely follow up with Pinnacle, but I would like to hear from Kespa first so both sides will already have said something about what they are doing.
I guess Kespa has an interesting in keeping the rumours down untill they can no longer be ignored. So I am really curious on how they willl react here. Either everything will go nuts or they will try to avoid/downplay the issue. It also feels really unlikely that Innovation would match fix. One of the most hardworking and talented players who has earned so much by winning tournaments that it doesnt make sense for him to do it. Can't help but think of a comment from Sheldon Cooper as I watched big bang theory a couple of days ago. He referrenced Sherlock Holmes who made the following quote: "When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth". Instead, I see the only real alternative that someone was messing with the line intentionally (for whatever reason that could be). Doesn't seem very likely to me either. Sherlock Holmes also said the following though: "It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts."Truth is that we don't really know anything other than two or three suspicious incidents. It's enough to speculate that something sinister is happening, but finding any certainty is difficult. I think the main point is that someone did, in fact, place those bets and I think it's very necessary to discover this person's identity lest players be vilified for every bad decision from now on. We have data though: The line movements. In the quote Sherlock Holmes didn't say that we needed all the data in the world before we could theorize.
Sherlock Holmes was never in a debate about balance in Starcraft 2 though, so he doesn't know what we know 
|
I don't think the world would be any worse off if sports betting went away.
|
On January 24 2015 00:48 VeNoM HaZ Skill wrote:Show nested quote +On January 24 2015 00:32 Zealously wrote:On January 24 2015 00:26 Broodwurst wrote:On January 24 2015 00:17 Luolis wrote:On January 24 2015 00:14 Hider wrote:On January 23 2015 23:52 TheDwf wrote:On January 23 2015 23:46 Swoopae wrote:On January 23 2015 23:39 TheDwf wrote:On January 23 2015 23:35 Swoopae wrote:On January 23 2015 23:30 TheDwf wrote:
Is it known how much money was needed to manipulate the odds that way? Pinnacle know, the rest of us can speculate but given they have sharp accounts move the line further than square accounts its hard to tell exactly Any order of magnitude? Thousands of dollars? Dozens of thousands? More? When the lines open, hundreds will move it a small amount, thousands a large. On game day, thousands will move the line, and tens of thousands will move the line in extreme fashion like San vs Dark style. On a major tournament final (think Code s final) where lots of people are betting the numbers would be larger. OK, thanks. So, suppose a millionnaire (or more) blasé about life who relishes kicking the nest to watch the ants panicking; or whatever his reason is to become an agent of chaos. Such a guy could be responsible for this mess, triggering this "scandal" with absurd, random bets? If we look at the Innovation-example it doens't really make sense. Let's say your a random millionaire/bilionaire looking for some excitement in your favourite esport (Sc2). You see San vs Innovation, and you bet on San for the lulz. For some reason you bet on G1 and no the whole series, and after you have maxed out the bet and the line moves, you then chosoe to bet against on G1. Then you bet again and again untill the line has moved sufficiently. Why would you be so focussed on betting on G1 if you were a rich guy looking for some excitement? Why not get more excitement by also beting on G2 and G3 or the whole series? This just seems so unlikely compared to the other possiblity (matchfixing).
We will definitely follow up with Pinnacle, but I would like to hear from Kespa first so both sides will already have said something about what they are doing.
I guess Kespa has an interesting in keeping the rumours down untill they can no longer be ignored. So I am really curious on how they willl react here. Either everything will go nuts or they will try to avoid/downplay the issue. It also feels really unlikely that Innovation would match fix. One of the most hardworking and talented players who has earned so much by winning tournaments that it doesnt make sense for him to do it. Yeah, it's usually total scrubs like that Savior dude who matchfix. I don't think saviOr was contending for multiple championships when his match fixing came to light, or that he was match fixing when he was at his peak (or near enough) Not in the least. He had began his slide into mediocrity by the beginning of 2007 and was demoted to CJ's B-Team in 2008. and the match-fixing was discovered in mid-2010. Most of the games that had been confirmed were in 2010, with several in late '09. No matter what anybody wants to say, savior was completely irrelevant as a pro-BW player when he began match fixing. There was no big money coming in from his team, and he definitely wasn't winning prize money. Actually, he wasn't winning anything. Literally the only thing he had going for him was the match fixing.
Eh, I got this from liqudipedia.
After Kwanro’s departure for Woongjin Stars in September 2009, CJ Entus was in need of a third Zerg, resulting in sAviOr being played more frequently alongside fellow CJ Zergs EffOrt and Hydra in the 2009–2010 Shinhan Bank Proleague. He finished the round with a solid 4 wins, 4 loss record, including a win over Jaedong, with one Ace match defeat to Hyvaa. He qualified for the 2009 Nate MSL and was placed in a group with Bisu in what many saw as an exciting group in which the two were expected to play in the Winner’s match. However, sAviOr lost his game to Bogus and had to wait until the loser’s match before he could play Bisu. sAviOr lost to Bisu again, and was knocked out 0–2 in what many saw as an upset.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
