It has been a bad week in the cradle of civilisation.
Last Saturday, the Greek national football team were hammered 4-1 by Turkey in a Euro 2008 Qualifier despite taking an early lead. The impact of this result is akin to the feelings in Germany following England's performance enhancing substance-inspired 5-1 victory in München in 2001 only multiplied by a magnitude as the animosity stretches back over centuries. The narrow 1-0 victory in Malta on Wednesday hardly lessened the feeling of desperation.
On Thursday, Olympiakos and Panathinaikos were to meet in a women's volleyball match. Only in Athens could such an event be the backdrop to pitched warfare between hooligans from the two sporting organisations. One death and numerous injuries later and government spokesman Theodore Roussopoulos announced the banning of all professional sports in Greece for the next two weeks.
As we have intimated in previous posts there are many parallels between the state of sport, and football in particular, in Greece and Italy. Indeed, there is a general attitude throughout Greek society that the two countries represent "two nations but one heart". These similarities are unfortunately not always the positive ones of music, culture, arts and philosophy. There is a general perception that their empires of long ago warrant a special status even to this day. And, in sport, the parallels are disturbing.
Firstly, hooliganism is out of control in both countries. The fans of the two big Athenian teams are particularly violent and their animosity is based on fundamental political differences - Olympiakos are representative of the working class port area of Piraeus while Panathinaikos are the capitalist outfit. Notorious groups like PAO-13 are similar to the ultras in Italy in both their attitudes and styles.
Secondly, match-fixing is also a major issue in the Hellenic Super League but the manipulation is not generally in response to betting market liabilities but sporting power. The refereeing of the two major Athenian teams is ludicrously biased and totally accepted as the norm by Greek society as a whole. All other teams are significantly handicapped.
Thirdly, nobody in control of their mental faculties would choose to visit Olympiakos or Panathinaikos as a visiting fan without supportive life insurance. You really would not choose to pick a dispute with these individuals and being on "their" territory represents potential conflict. Once again, in a similar fashion to Italy, the ultras have influence within the club hierarchies and in Greek society. Although there are laws in place to allow the imprisonment of convicted hooligans, a gentle slap on the wrist with some meaningless suspended sentence is the norm.
Fourthly, the owners of the big Greek clubs are the sort of people that you would be advised to count your fingers after shaking hands with. Corrupt, dodgy, psychopathic power merchants often with links to the underworld - think Milan's Berlusconi with a creative moustache and you'll get the picture.
The only pleasure in supporting a team in Greece is if you are either a glory hunter or really attached to your local team (see historical posts on AO Kerkyra and Pas Giannina).
So, will anything change? Tokenistic adjustments (again in the style of Italy) will undoubtedly follow but I don't think I'll be travelling down to the capital for either of Kerkyra's away games to the Big 2.
Saturday, 31 March 2007
Friday, 30 March 2007
A Long Time Dem A Fool Us
A few questions to ponder before today's World Cup cricket match between Ireland and it's former colonial occupier (although we must now forget all this since the Reverend (sic) Ian Paisley has decided that his legacy should be in the pages of history rather than those of palaeontology).
Just how long does it take a police force to examine CCTV footage covering a window of twelve hours?
Why, 45 years after independence, is the Jamaican police force headed by a white Londoner?
Where is the public information relating to the betting patterns on the Pakistan v Ireland and India v Bangladesh cricket matches?
What are the "sensitivities" that Mark Shields (the white Londoner) claims are being taken into account in the murder inquiry?
Why has there been virtually no press coverage of Lord Condon's remarks and the ensuing debate held in Britain's House of Lords on March 16th regarding corruption in sport (see: http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200607/ldhansrd/text/70316-0003.htm)? This debate was held two days prior to Woolmer's death.
Why is the focus solely on illegal sports betting and corruption in South Asia when British bookmakers and global sportsmen (and it is always men) are involved in this corruption in cricket and most other sports?
Why are bookmakers still allowed to create markets for the Cricket World Cup when, surely, a ban pending further investigation would be a preferable route to take?
Why is there no mention of Woolmer's death on Sky Television and why do Sky presenters talk about Inzaman Ul-Haq in revered terms?
I could go on as I am in a questioning mood this morning.
Our original assessment of the murder of Woolmer still stands. Some Pakistan players together with South Asian bookmakers deliberately underperformed in the match against Ireland. Separately, individual(s) outside the corrupt loop took major betting positions on a Pakistan win placing very large bets at very short odds. The result was a fleecing and a death.
The probability of Bangladesh and Ireland beating India and Pakistan on that fateful Saturday was around 800/1 and the betting positions taken in South Asia permeated through to the European bookmakers. Why are these layers not providing a proper public service by indicating these manipulations? The answer is that they too can profit out of the corruption. Indeed, so do we indirectly. The situation shares a parallel with financial markets where the leading investment bank, Goldman Sachs, clones the trading activities of leading hedge funds by proprietary analysis of their trading. Although this cloned approach is not at the core of the corruption, it may be utilised to gain profit if you are only a couple of informational levels away from the core or if you are a top notch analyst.
Although some Pakistan players and bookmakers from the sub-continent are indirectly responsible for Woolmer's death due to their corrupt activities, there has also been a racist aspect to the media coverage of the murder. In a similar manner that World Soccer magazine covers football corruption in every country in the world apart from England (William Hill's advertising being more important that the truth), the media have ignored the global nature of corruption in cricket. As we have said before, we can name three former England cricket captains who were involved in betting while they were captaining the national team and are still involved in the markets today. Any press coverage for this? No fucking chance...
There are reports emanating from Lahore that it wasn't a murder after all but smoke and mirrors are not going to change reality. There is considerable concern among certain Pakistan players that the murder inquiry will reveal their betting activities - bans and taxation are of greater concern than the mock tears relating to their coaches death.
Bob Woolmer was no saint. He took the apartheid-era rand when being part of the illegal team that broke ranks with the sporting sanctions against the racist regime and he publicly supported the cricketing return of Hansie Cronje after that particular player was banned for corrupt betting activities. But the man's devotion to money was offset to some degree by his devotion to unearthing the corruption in the game.
Our view is that his death will not be properly investigated as too many major operators would be affected by the outcome. I am no expert on Jamaican law but some charge like "murder by person or persons unknown" is the most likely outcome. Mark Shield's awareness of "sensitivities" will claim the day.
Lord Condon, Mark Shields, Lord Stevens...
We might get somewhere nearer the truth with an independent nature to such investigations. We expect Lord Shields is just round the corner - for services to the bookmaking sector, one assumes.
Just how long does it take a police force to examine CCTV footage covering a window of twelve hours?
Why, 45 years after independence, is the Jamaican police force headed by a white Londoner?
Where is the public information relating to the betting patterns on the Pakistan v Ireland and India v Bangladesh cricket matches?
What are the "sensitivities" that Mark Shields (the white Londoner) claims are being taken into account in the murder inquiry?
Why has there been virtually no press coverage of Lord Condon's remarks and the ensuing debate held in Britain's House of Lords on March 16th regarding corruption in sport (see: http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200607/ldhansrd/text/70316-0003.htm)? This debate was held two days prior to Woolmer's death.
Why is the focus solely on illegal sports betting and corruption in South Asia when British bookmakers and global sportsmen (and it is always men) are involved in this corruption in cricket and most other sports?
Why are bookmakers still allowed to create markets for the Cricket World Cup when, surely, a ban pending further investigation would be a preferable route to take?
Why is there no mention of Woolmer's death on Sky Television and why do Sky presenters talk about Inzaman Ul-Haq in revered terms?
I could go on as I am in a questioning mood this morning.
Our original assessment of the murder of Woolmer still stands. Some Pakistan players together with South Asian bookmakers deliberately underperformed in the match against Ireland. Separately, individual(s) outside the corrupt loop took major betting positions on a Pakistan win placing very large bets at very short odds. The result was a fleecing and a death.
The probability of Bangladesh and Ireland beating India and Pakistan on that fateful Saturday was around 800/1 and the betting positions taken in South Asia permeated through to the European bookmakers. Why are these layers not providing a proper public service by indicating these manipulations? The answer is that they too can profit out of the corruption. Indeed, so do we indirectly. The situation shares a parallel with financial markets where the leading investment bank, Goldman Sachs, clones the trading activities of leading hedge funds by proprietary analysis of their trading. Although this cloned approach is not at the core of the corruption, it may be utilised to gain profit if you are only a couple of informational levels away from the core or if you are a top notch analyst.
Although some Pakistan players and bookmakers from the sub-continent are indirectly responsible for Woolmer's death due to their corrupt activities, there has also been a racist aspect to the media coverage of the murder. In a similar manner that World Soccer magazine covers football corruption in every country in the world apart from England (William Hill's advertising being more important that the truth), the media have ignored the global nature of corruption in cricket. As we have said before, we can name three former England cricket captains who were involved in betting while they were captaining the national team and are still involved in the markets today. Any press coverage for this? No fucking chance...
There are reports emanating from Lahore that it wasn't a murder after all but smoke and mirrors are not going to change reality. There is considerable concern among certain Pakistan players that the murder inquiry will reveal their betting activities - bans and taxation are of greater concern than the mock tears relating to their coaches death.
Bob Woolmer was no saint. He took the apartheid-era rand when being part of the illegal team that broke ranks with the sporting sanctions against the racist regime and he publicly supported the cricketing return of Hansie Cronje after that particular player was banned for corrupt betting activities. But the man's devotion to money was offset to some degree by his devotion to unearthing the corruption in the game.
Our view is that his death will not be properly investigated as too many major operators would be affected by the outcome. I am no expert on Jamaican law but some charge like "murder by person or persons unknown" is the most likely outcome. Mark Shield's awareness of "sensitivities" will claim the day.
Lord Condon, Mark Shields, Lord Stevens...
We might get somewhere nearer the truth with an independent nature to such investigations. We expect Lord Shields is just round the corner - for services to the bookmaking sector, one assumes.
Wednesday, 28 March 2007
To Be Quite Frank Lampard
Frank Lampard is two things. He is an astonishingly talented midfielder who is capable of dominating a game against the highest class opposition (examples being the two games against Barcelona in this season's Champions League). Then there is the other Frank. In the last five seasons in 10 Premiership games against Liverpool and 9 against Manchester United and Arsenal, Mr Lampard has managed no goals (apart from one penalty). 28 games; one penalty!
Some players show a significant differential in performance against lower level teams compared to the upper level sides which is understandably explained by their inability to operate against top defences or a tendency to bully the weaker opponents. But this does not describe Lampard. If he can dominate Deco and Co so utterly and completely, one would think that he could have managed to achieve a similar motivational level of performance in just one of those 28 games.
Similar irregularities are exposed by looking at England internationals. Firstly, the data... In the last 13 competitive England games (ie World Cup and Euro), Frank has banked just one goal against Poland (plus one penalty). The only other international goals in the last two years are the ones that he managed against the mighty Jamaica and Greece in friendly games. In the World Cup Finals, Lampard had more shots on goal than the rest of the England squad put together. Goals? Zero... The vast majority of his efforts troubled Row Z more than the opposition keeper. Secondly, the visuals... In Saturday's farce of a gambling agreed draw in Israel, my most lasting memory is of frank Frank beating the ground in mock anger after missing the best chance of the game.
Historically, we have detailed the manipulations involved in England games on numerous occasions and part of that overview included the fact that our Trading Team are CERTAIN of the involvement of three players in the corrupting of England matches. Two of those individuals are not currently in the squad due to injury and selection issues. This puts an incredible amount of pressure on the other operator (whoever he might be).
One of the prime reasons that England are so shit is because of Lampard's control of central midfield - McLaren's strategy seemingly being to place dodgy Frank in quarterback role and honest and brilliant Gerrard out on the wing where he can have as little influence as possible. The bookies worked hard to get McLaren into his job and they have been milking their profitable rewards ever since.
As Lampard is currently under pressure, I wouldn't be remotely surprised to see him dominate the amateurs of Andorra tonight (although I am out of the office today and am refusing to get involved in the midweek games so don't quote me on that).
Please note that none of this implies that we believe that Frank Lampard works with bookmakers to achieve optimal market returns on football betting markets.
However, Chelsea are correct to be avoiding offering any contract extension to Liability Lampard. How good would Chelsea be without him?
PS Lampard's fractured wrist has been spun to explain why he misses tonight's mismatch. There is no proof that the injury was caused by carrying his bars of gold... By the way, be wary of betting on England to be ahead at HT/FT. They will win but possibly/probably after a 0-0 H-T.
PPS By the way #2... If Israel had been extended by England at the weekend, would they have been able to beat Estonia today by 4-0 exhibiting excessive fitness in the process? I don't think so...
Some players show a significant differential in performance against lower level teams compared to the upper level sides which is understandably explained by their inability to operate against top defences or a tendency to bully the weaker opponents. But this does not describe Lampard. If he can dominate Deco and Co so utterly and completely, one would think that he could have managed to achieve a similar motivational level of performance in just one of those 28 games.
Similar irregularities are exposed by looking at England internationals. Firstly, the data... In the last 13 competitive England games (ie World Cup and Euro), Frank has banked just one goal against Poland (plus one penalty). The only other international goals in the last two years are the ones that he managed against the mighty Jamaica and Greece in friendly games. In the World Cup Finals, Lampard had more shots on goal than the rest of the England squad put together. Goals? Zero... The vast majority of his efforts troubled Row Z more than the opposition keeper. Secondly, the visuals... In Saturday's farce of a gambling agreed draw in Israel, my most lasting memory is of frank Frank beating the ground in mock anger after missing the best chance of the game.
Historically, we have detailed the manipulations involved in England games on numerous occasions and part of that overview included the fact that our Trading Team are CERTAIN of the involvement of three players in the corrupting of England matches. Two of those individuals are not currently in the squad due to injury and selection issues. This puts an incredible amount of pressure on the other operator (whoever he might be).
One of the prime reasons that England are so shit is because of Lampard's control of central midfield - McLaren's strategy seemingly being to place dodgy Frank in quarterback role and honest and brilliant Gerrard out on the wing where he can have as little influence as possible. The bookies worked hard to get McLaren into his job and they have been milking their profitable rewards ever since.
As Lampard is currently under pressure, I wouldn't be remotely surprised to see him dominate the amateurs of Andorra tonight (although I am out of the office today and am refusing to get involved in the midweek games so don't quote me on that).
Please note that none of this implies that we believe that Frank Lampard works with bookmakers to achieve optimal market returns on football betting markets.
However, Chelsea are correct to be avoiding offering any contract extension to Liability Lampard. How good would Chelsea be without him?
PS Lampard's fractured wrist has been spun to explain why he misses tonight's mismatch. There is no proof that the injury was caused by carrying his bars of gold... By the way, be wary of betting on England to be ahead at HT/FT. They will win but possibly/probably after a 0-0 H-T.
PPS By the way #2... If Israel had been extended by England at the weekend, would they have been able to beat Estonia today by 4-0 exhibiting excessive fitness in the process? I don't think so...
The Bum Ref Index - March Update
Based on The Economist's Big Mac Index which utilises the economic fallacy of purchasing power parity to determine which global currencies are over/under-valued, Football is Fixed introduced the Bum Ref Index in November. This assesses the negative impact that Premiership referees have on the games in which they officiate together with our proprietary individual psychological profiling.
The worst seven referees to date are listed below:
17th and Worst - Wiley 3.42
16th and Relegation - Riley 3.30
15th and Relegation - Webb 3.17
14th - Foy 3.11
13th - Rennie 3.10
12th - Poll 3.03
11th - Dowd 2.93
There are some interesting associated angles that should be addressed here.
Firstly, three of England's four UEFA referees (Poll, Webb and Riley) are among the six officials that have had the most volatile effect on match (and betting market) outcomes. The English referees have already been demoted in status within UEFA due to their collective decision making in the Champions League and UEFA Cup this season (as previously posted on this site).
Secondly, Wiley, Dowd, Webb and Poll have been selected by the PGMOB to officiate in a large number of the live televised events. Over the season to date, Webb and Wiley have each had 13 live games; Styles 12; Poll and Dowd 11. Indeed, Keith Hackett and the PGMOB need to explain why there are such discrepancies in the choice of officials for the live (mainly Sky) events. As a comparison, look at the table below which shows both the total number of games and the number of live games that individual referees have been chosen to officiate in.
Gallagher 10 games in total/0 live games
Rennie 13 games/ 2 live
Webb 24 games/13 live
Wiley 25 games/13 live
Dowd 17 games/11 live
Poll 22 games/11 live
Styles 21 games/12 live
Bennett 23 games/10 live
Dean 21 games/10 live
These totals are revealing in a number of ways. Gallagher was punished earlier this season with a two month ban for not only failing to send Thatcher off for his assault on Pedro Mendes but for getting in the way of some very serious professional insider trading that existed on that particular Man City versus Portsmouth match. We believe that Gallagher's ban was related to the latter rather than the former. Mike Dean was banned a couple of years back for his involvement in an online betting site but has evidently been forgiven to the extent that Sky are pressurising for him to be the ref for the Chelsea/United Cup Final. The only Black official is Uriah Rennie and the PGMOB has rewarded him with a couple of minor live games and yet Howard Webb who has exhibited a disturbing racist bias in his officiating in the last 15 months (as we have posted previously) is one of the two officials most prized for achieving the required outcomes in live events. And how Dowd with his intriguing bias profile can be "live" in a remarkable 65% of his officiated games is simply laughable.
Thirdly, four new officials have been introduced to the Premiership roster during season 2006/07 - Mason, Tanner, Probert and Stroud. We believe that no new official will be introduced unless they have exhibited a suitable level of acquiescence in their lower league officiating and the performances of this gang of four have revealed nothing to lead us to alter our opinions. In fact, Lee Mason is evidently being fast-tracked to a significantly higher status within the game as he has already been selected for three live games.
In that it matters, Halsey is the current Bum Ref Index leader with an index total of 2.24.
It simply should not matter who the referee is but, in the corrupt world of Premiership football, no other factor is so important as the choice of official. But don't just take our word for it. Monitor the global betting markets in the hours after the PGMOB has released it's selection of referees for any future round of games. The markets accommodate information at speed and considerable trading is undertaken based solely on this information.
Wait for Hackett and then back it!!!
The worst seven referees to date are listed below:
17th and Worst - Wiley 3.42
16th and Relegation - Riley 3.30
15th and Relegation - Webb 3.17
14th - Foy 3.11
13th - Rennie 3.10
12th - Poll 3.03
11th - Dowd 2.93
There are some interesting associated angles that should be addressed here.
Firstly, three of England's four UEFA referees (Poll, Webb and Riley) are among the six officials that have had the most volatile effect on match (and betting market) outcomes. The English referees have already been demoted in status within UEFA due to their collective decision making in the Champions League and UEFA Cup this season (as previously posted on this site).
Secondly, Wiley, Dowd, Webb and Poll have been selected by the PGMOB to officiate in a large number of the live televised events. Over the season to date, Webb and Wiley have each had 13 live games; Styles 12; Poll and Dowd 11. Indeed, Keith Hackett and the PGMOB need to explain why there are such discrepancies in the choice of officials for the live (mainly Sky) events. As a comparison, look at the table below which shows both the total number of games and the number of live games that individual referees have been chosen to officiate in.
Gallagher 10 games in total/0 live games
Rennie 13 games/ 2 live
Webb 24 games/13 live
Wiley 25 games/13 live
Dowd 17 games/11 live
Poll 22 games/11 live
Styles 21 games/12 live
Bennett 23 games/10 live
Dean 21 games/10 live
These totals are revealing in a number of ways. Gallagher was punished earlier this season with a two month ban for not only failing to send Thatcher off for his assault on Pedro Mendes but for getting in the way of some very serious professional insider trading that existed on that particular Man City versus Portsmouth match. We believe that Gallagher's ban was related to the latter rather than the former. Mike Dean was banned a couple of years back for his involvement in an online betting site but has evidently been forgiven to the extent that Sky are pressurising for him to be the ref for the Chelsea/United Cup Final. The only Black official is Uriah Rennie and the PGMOB has rewarded him with a couple of minor live games and yet Howard Webb who has exhibited a disturbing racist bias in his officiating in the last 15 months (as we have posted previously) is one of the two officials most prized for achieving the required outcomes in live events. And how Dowd with his intriguing bias profile can be "live" in a remarkable 65% of his officiated games is simply laughable.
Thirdly, four new officials have been introduced to the Premiership roster during season 2006/07 - Mason, Tanner, Probert and Stroud. We believe that no new official will be introduced unless they have exhibited a suitable level of acquiescence in their lower league officiating and the performances of this gang of four have revealed nothing to lead us to alter our opinions. In fact, Lee Mason is evidently being fast-tracked to a significantly higher status within the game as he has already been selected for three live games.
In that it matters, Halsey is the current Bum Ref Index leader with an index total of 2.24.
It simply should not matter who the referee is but, in the corrupt world of Premiership football, no other factor is so important as the choice of official. But don't just take our word for it. Monitor the global betting markets in the hours after the PGMOB has released it's selection of referees for any future round of games. The markets accommodate information at speed and considerable trading is undertaken based solely on this information.
Wait for Hackett and then back it!!!
Saturday, 24 March 2007
Betting Coalition of the Willing
Agreed draws are among the most unpalatable of football matches in that a percentage of the participants are merely going through the motions. Despite Ferdinand's assertion that "you can't pull the shirt on and say 'we'll draw this game'", such games exist and are tedious to watch. In this evening's Israel v England game, the only entertainment were the pre-match rantings of Jamie Redknapp as he thought up a multiplicity of reasons why viewers should bet on England and Martin Tyler who, desperately struggling to find a match to commentate on, resorted to the truly enlightening "national service is compulsory in Israel because there are troubles in the region". No? Really?
The England fans who started chanting "you don't know what you're doing" after 70 minutes of watching a training match were spot on in a footballing sense but not so accurate in a betting sense - some people most definitely knew what they were doing... It is a difficult skill to be non-competitive in a competitive sport without such underperformance being entirely evident to experienced observers (fans as well as market traders!) and not many professional footballers are able to pull it off.
In a week that saw the death of Bob Woolmer due to the impact of gambling and corruption in sport, it is shoddy in the extreme for some individuals close to the core to be fixing matches and manipulating betting markets for profit.
Euro 2008 Group E is an extremely manipulated section. Three of the biggest gambling centres in European football are Russia, Israel and England - these territories share some common agendas and ground but also operate independently. Croatian bookmakers were involved in the refereeing scandal in Germany where senior official Robert Hoyzer took money to adjust results and Greek colleagues tell me that Macedonian markets are fairly entertaining too. There are some complicated hidden strategies in this group and leisure punters should steer well clear.
Dietrological have made a tidy sum betting on the corruption in the Israel v England game today (as did our clients and colleagues) but it does leave a slightly sour taste in the mouth.
In Vietnam, the authorities imprison players for what went on in Tel Aviv this evening...
The England fans who started chanting "you don't know what you're doing" after 70 minutes of watching a training match were spot on in a footballing sense but not so accurate in a betting sense - some people most definitely knew what they were doing... It is a difficult skill to be non-competitive in a competitive sport without such underperformance being entirely evident to experienced observers (fans as well as market traders!) and not many professional footballers are able to pull it off.
In a week that saw the death of Bob Woolmer due to the impact of gambling and corruption in sport, it is shoddy in the extreme for some individuals close to the core to be fixing matches and manipulating betting markets for profit.
Euro 2008 Group E is an extremely manipulated section. Three of the biggest gambling centres in European football are Russia, Israel and England - these territories share some common agendas and ground but also operate independently. Croatian bookmakers were involved in the refereeing scandal in Germany where senior official Robert Hoyzer took money to adjust results and Greek colleagues tell me that Macedonian markets are fairly entertaining too. There are some complicated hidden strategies in this group and leisure punters should steer well clear.
Dietrological have made a tidy sum betting on the corruption in the Israel v England game today (as did our clients and colleagues) but it does leave a slightly sour taste in the mouth.
In Vietnam, the authorities imprison players for what went on in Tel Aviv this evening...
Friday, 23 March 2007
It's Just Not Cricket
Although it might be considered distasteful for Football Is Fixed and Dietrological to gain kudos from the tragic murder of Pakistan cricket coach Bob Woolmer, it should be noted that we posted on Sunday at 07:31GMT that the Pakistan/Ireland game had been hijacked by some Pakistani players and South Asian bookmakers (see: http://footballisfixed.blogspot.com/2007/03/begosh-and-begorra.html) and on Monday at 13:12GMT we posted that the complicit players and bookmakers shared responsibility for Woolmer's death (see: http://footballisfixed.blogspot.com/2007/03/official-cause-of-death-south-asian.html).
Spectacular society released the news of suspicious death and the potential gambling ring involvement only on Wednesday and Thursday respectively. We warrant some respect for our clear holistic overview of what, after all, is not even our prime sport.
We now have two theories that may even co-exist once the police investigation is completed.
Firstly, the book that Woolmer was in the process of writing regarding corruption in cricket had been stolen and the man had failed to maintain a back-up copy. The contents would have lifted the lid on the criminal world of South Asian cricket bookmakers and their links both with international players (from all major countries) and British bookmakers. In the psychopathic world of betting markets this warrants strangulation.
Secondly, as we pointed out in the post released the morning after the cursed match, the probability of Ireland defeating Pakistan was remote. Many major gamblers/ gambling rings who are outside the loop on both an institutional and an analytical level (ie they have lots of cash, no contacts and no nous) undertake a trading strategy known as "Buying Money". Such individuals, often trading with laundered money, place mammoth positions on very short odds favourites (betting $20m to win $0.5m on a 1/40 shot for example). Being out of the loop, these operators would have been caught out by Pakistan's insider underperformance. Woolmer was targeted as a cultural revenge.
Professionals also undertake this form of trading but no professional analyst would go anywhere near a position on Pakistan in such an event. Crazy trading...
Our Trading Team expect that scenarios of this type will become far more frequent in a future of the semi-legal billion pound football betting markets that will arrive in the next two to five years. Individuals already reach a sticky end in the underground South East Asian street markets in Macau, Hong Kong, Thailand and Vietnam and all security conscious operations take into account such issues when establishing a business profile and structure.
This is neither the time nor place to provide public details of the extensive and layered security that Dietrological and myself utilise to protect ourselves both physically and informationally. But, any individual or organisation that wishes to actively participate in the illegal liquid football betting markets should use this awful death to provide momentum towards establishing a secure trading structure that allows you to sleep comfortably at night.
ICC Chief Executive Malcolm Speed at least admits that the sport of international cricket has a problem of corruption within the game. If only the English Premiership and their compliant authorities and institutions would be similarly enlightened...
Even if the ICC allow the tournament to continue, all betting on the competition should be banned out of respect for a good man.
Spectacular society released the news of suspicious death and the potential gambling ring involvement only on Wednesday and Thursday respectively. We warrant some respect for our clear holistic overview of what, after all, is not even our prime sport.
We now have two theories that may even co-exist once the police investigation is completed.
Firstly, the book that Woolmer was in the process of writing regarding corruption in cricket had been stolen and the man had failed to maintain a back-up copy. The contents would have lifted the lid on the criminal world of South Asian cricket bookmakers and their links both with international players (from all major countries) and British bookmakers. In the psychopathic world of betting markets this warrants strangulation.
Secondly, as we pointed out in the post released the morning after the cursed match, the probability of Ireland defeating Pakistan was remote. Many major gamblers/ gambling rings who are outside the loop on both an institutional and an analytical level (ie they have lots of cash, no contacts and no nous) undertake a trading strategy known as "Buying Money". Such individuals, often trading with laundered money, place mammoth positions on very short odds favourites (betting $20m to win $0.5m on a 1/40 shot for example). Being out of the loop, these operators would have been caught out by Pakistan's insider underperformance. Woolmer was targeted as a cultural revenge.
Professionals also undertake this form of trading but no professional analyst would go anywhere near a position on Pakistan in such an event. Crazy trading...
Our Trading Team expect that scenarios of this type will become far more frequent in a future of the semi-legal billion pound football betting markets that will arrive in the next two to five years. Individuals already reach a sticky end in the underground South East Asian street markets in Macau, Hong Kong, Thailand and Vietnam and all security conscious operations take into account such issues when establishing a business profile and structure.
This is neither the time nor place to provide public details of the extensive and layered security that Dietrological and myself utilise to protect ourselves both physically and informationally. But, any individual or organisation that wishes to actively participate in the illegal liquid football betting markets should use this awful death to provide momentum towards establishing a secure trading structure that allows you to sleep comfortably at night.
ICC Chief Executive Malcolm Speed at least admits that the sport of international cricket has a problem of corruption within the game. If only the English Premiership and their compliant authorities and institutions would be similarly enlightened...
Even if the ICC allow the tournament to continue, all betting on the competition should be banned out of respect for a good man.
Thursday, 22 March 2007
You Poor Take Courage, You Rich Take Care
In these volatile times, all traders must remain aware of the financial status of the bookmakers and market makers that one chooses to trade with.
Bookmakers that are excluded from the select global power bases are under pressure on a range of fronts.
Firstly, the US legislation undermining online gambling for American citizens is not only hammering profits (and share prices) but is also leaving management open to arrest. Some operators are even having trouble repatriating their profits that they chose to park in supposedly safe offshore territories only to later find out otherwise.
Secondly, the global cartels are involved in a double whammy - they not only control outcome in many events but they utilise this competitive (and corrupt) advantage to target lower tier bookmakers.
The cumulative impact of these inputs is clearly shown by the following example. One year ago, Premierbet (a lower tier British layer) traded at a premium of 29% over the FTSE AIM All-Share Index. Now Premierbet's share price lags that average by 44%. This corresponds to it's share price falling 6875 to 2750 (a year earlier, the price hovered around 13000).
Additionally, global fragmented cartelisation is resulting in entrenched regional territorial warfare over the control of football betting markets. Some layers in Asia will resort to underground professional trader only status as a direct consequence of this power struggle (see: http://footballisfixed.blogspot.com/2007/03/sun-tzu-versus-kray-twins.html).
Punters, both amateur and professional, must protect themselves in this environment. Gambling winnings are not enforceable under law (aside from specially contracted business arrangements or layers regulated by Britain's Financial Services Authority) and bettors obviously receive nil return from companies that go belly-up or that disappear from both their physical locations and cyberspace.
Below we provide some practices that can insure your trading against the criminality of the gambling sector:
a) Before opening an account, check the status of the company. This can be achieved in several ways. Googling the firm can reveal valuable info as can checking FuckedCompany.com (www.fuckedcompany.com). But the prime source of information has to be Sportsbook Review (http://www.sportsbookreview.com). Sportsbook Review serves the sports bettor by offering ratings and recommendations based on the evaluations of hundreds of online sportsbooks. The website also publishes reports on sportsbook features such as customer service, incentives and wager pricing. Currently only 9 bookies worldwide achieve the A+ ranking (including Pinnacle and Betfair for professionals and Ladbrokes for leisure punters who do not desire to win overall).
b) Always try to establish credit accounts with a high maximum. If deposit accounts are the only option then only transfer monies when placing a trade and withdraw winnings at speed.
c) The most awkward accounts to manage are non-contracted informational accounts with brokers and market makers. All professionals use these accounts to get volume trades on the Asian markets while bookmakers utilise such arrangements as a source of valuable market information. With such structures, one should build into financial projections that non-payment of winnings is often the result when such business interactions break down. One needs to ensure that one achieves value throughout the business process to off-set this potential loss - tactics like gaining preferential prices, closing out positions without penalty, no price scalping, access to privileged market information and creative reconciliation in accounting. You would be astonished at how many major global operators have accounting and IT deficiencies due to the criminal nature of their status. The Asian street markets are illegal and the whole purpose of professionals using brokers on a private level is to by-pass this illegality. Similarly, this illegality forces brokers to keep their Asian trading activities "off the book" away from prying eyes. Take advantage of this fact.
d) If a bookmaker is publicly listed then monitor the share prices and press releases as sources of information (although creative lateral thinking and realistic reading between the lines becomes a necessary talent here).
e) Never trade with any company that refuses to exhibit a physical address.
f) Always record all phone conversations related to placing trades and use a dictaphone for face-to-face interactions.
As government and the institutions do nothing to protect gamblers (professional or leisure), it is an imperative for you to protect yourself. This market free-for-all that represents the foundation of shareholder capitalism is particularly marked in all areas of the gambling sector. The bookmakers and their accomplices aim to take the piss out of you on a whole range of levels.
No bookmaker respects you and, similarly, you should treat them with disdain. Bet wisely, trust none of them and respect yourself.
Bookmakers that are excluded from the select global power bases are under pressure on a range of fronts.
Firstly, the US legislation undermining online gambling for American citizens is not only hammering profits (and share prices) but is also leaving management open to arrest. Some operators are even having trouble repatriating their profits that they chose to park in supposedly safe offshore territories only to later find out otherwise.
Secondly, the global cartels are involved in a double whammy - they not only control outcome in many events but they utilise this competitive (and corrupt) advantage to target lower tier bookmakers.
The cumulative impact of these inputs is clearly shown by the following example. One year ago, Premierbet (a lower tier British layer) traded at a premium of 29% over the FTSE AIM All-Share Index. Now Premierbet's share price lags that average by 44%. This corresponds to it's share price falling 6875 to 2750 (a year earlier, the price hovered around 13000).
Additionally, global fragmented cartelisation is resulting in entrenched regional territorial warfare over the control of football betting markets. Some layers in Asia will resort to underground professional trader only status as a direct consequence of this power struggle (see: http://footballisfixed.blogspot.com/2007/03/sun-tzu-versus-kray-twins.html).
Punters, both amateur and professional, must protect themselves in this environment. Gambling winnings are not enforceable under law (aside from specially contracted business arrangements or layers regulated by Britain's Financial Services Authority) and bettors obviously receive nil return from companies that go belly-up or that disappear from both their physical locations and cyberspace.
Below we provide some practices that can insure your trading against the criminality of the gambling sector:
a) Before opening an account, check the status of the company. This can be achieved in several ways. Googling the firm can reveal valuable info as can checking FuckedCompany.com (www.fuckedcompany.com). But the prime source of information has to be Sportsbook Review (http://www.sportsbookreview.com). Sportsbook Review serves the sports bettor by offering ratings and recommendations based on the evaluations of hundreds of online sportsbooks. The website also publishes reports on sportsbook features such as customer service, incentives and wager pricing. Currently only 9 bookies worldwide achieve the A+ ranking (including Pinnacle and Betfair for professionals and Ladbrokes for leisure punters who do not desire to win overall).
b) Always try to establish credit accounts with a high maximum. If deposit accounts are the only option then only transfer monies when placing a trade and withdraw winnings at speed.
c) The most awkward accounts to manage are non-contracted informational accounts with brokers and market makers. All professionals use these accounts to get volume trades on the Asian markets while bookmakers utilise such arrangements as a source of valuable market information. With such structures, one should build into financial projections that non-payment of winnings is often the result when such business interactions break down. One needs to ensure that one achieves value throughout the business process to off-set this potential loss - tactics like gaining preferential prices, closing out positions without penalty, no price scalping, access to privileged market information and creative reconciliation in accounting. You would be astonished at how many major global operators have accounting and IT deficiencies due to the criminal nature of their status. The Asian street markets are illegal and the whole purpose of professionals using brokers on a private level is to by-pass this illegality. Similarly, this illegality forces brokers to keep their Asian trading activities "off the book" away from prying eyes. Take advantage of this fact.
d) If a bookmaker is publicly listed then monitor the share prices and press releases as sources of information (although creative lateral thinking and realistic reading between the lines becomes a necessary talent here).
e) Never trade with any company that refuses to exhibit a physical address.
f) Always record all phone conversations related to placing trades and use a dictaphone for face-to-face interactions.
As government and the institutions do nothing to protect gamblers (professional or leisure), it is an imperative for you to protect yourself. This market free-for-all that represents the foundation of shareholder capitalism is particularly marked in all areas of the gambling sector. The bookmakers and their accomplices aim to take the piss out of you on a whole range of levels.
No bookmaker respects you and, similarly, you should treat them with disdain. Bet wisely, trust none of them and respect yourself.
Wednesday, 21 March 2007
The PGMOB - Market Manipulator?
The issue of late changes of referee in English football is becoming a serious manipulation in the marketplace (for historical posts, see http://footballisfixed.blogspot.com/2006/12/fundamentals-1-change-of-referee.html and
http://footballisfixed.blogspot.com/2007/01/weekend-premiership-round-up.html).
In other territories, an average of 0.25% of games suffer from this "adjustment"; in England, 5.25% of games are affected. What are the reasons and justifications behind this 20-fold differential?
Firstly, let's look at the impacts on the global football betting markets. Late referee changes frequently undermine professional trading positions for both non-cartel market makers and individual traders (particularly those positions undertaken in the Far East). There was significant difference, for example, in Sunday's Premiership match between Charlton and Newcastle being officiated by Graham Poll (as the PGMOB initially declared) and Dermot Gallagher. Any professional had to alter their trading profile on this event as soon as the change was released. If the change of referee is a few hours prior to kick off then it is easy enough to adjust staking level, terminate a position or address hedging strategies. When the referee is changed very late, it can be difficult off-setting very major earlier positions particularly if you are after a suitable market price. To address these issues, our Trading Team have been forced to limit our early market exposures. There are rumours around that insiders in the English football hierarchy are using this disinformation regarding referees to gain preferable prices for their hidden agenda trades (which are activated just prior to the press release of the alteration). This is similar to a strategy utilised by the Asian bookies in the 90's where they traded Team A around Europe in the early market phases causing the ignorant European layers to significantly adjust their markets. Then the Asians and European professionals would come in massively on Team B at a beneficial price.
Secondly, a very high percentage of these changes of officialdom occur on major turnover live events eg Arsenal versus Manchester United, Tottenham versus Chelsea and Blackburn versus Arsenal. Inevitably, the impact is much greater in such events from a betting market perspective.
Thirdly, the same referees keep cropping up in these events which would suggest that there is a small grouping of officials within the PGMOB roster who might be complicit in these trading manipulations.
Of course, a suitable explanation might be that English referees are simply 20 times more likely to get ill, have travel difficulties or get injured in the pre-match warm-up. Statistics suggest otherwise.
World Cup and Euro Qualifiers, Champions League and UEFA Cup matches involve extensive travelling, exposing oneself to the viruses and bugs of a foreign land and disruption to pre-match warm-ups routines due to climate, pitch condition etc. In the whole of the time that I have been trading these markets, I have never yet seen a change of referee. That's in 15 years...
This puts the two changes out of 12 English games over the weekend into perspective.
Perhaps there is a manipulative market opportunity here. The corrupted British layers could establish markets on who is going to officiate at the weekend's games. Then they can cream a profit off mugs as well as undermining professionals while retaining ultimate control of outcome. Perfect psychopathy...
http://footballisfixed.blogspot.com/2007/01/weekend-premiership-round-up.html).
In other territories, an average of 0.25% of games suffer from this "adjustment"; in England, 5.25% of games are affected. What are the reasons and justifications behind this 20-fold differential?
Firstly, let's look at the impacts on the global football betting markets. Late referee changes frequently undermine professional trading positions for both non-cartel market makers and individual traders (particularly those positions undertaken in the Far East). There was significant difference, for example, in Sunday's Premiership match between Charlton and Newcastle being officiated by Graham Poll (as the PGMOB initially declared) and Dermot Gallagher. Any professional had to alter their trading profile on this event as soon as the change was released. If the change of referee is a few hours prior to kick off then it is easy enough to adjust staking level, terminate a position or address hedging strategies. When the referee is changed very late, it can be difficult off-setting very major earlier positions particularly if you are after a suitable market price. To address these issues, our Trading Team have been forced to limit our early market exposures. There are rumours around that insiders in the English football hierarchy are using this disinformation regarding referees to gain preferable prices for their hidden agenda trades (which are activated just prior to the press release of the alteration). This is similar to a strategy utilised by the Asian bookies in the 90's where they traded Team A around Europe in the early market phases causing the ignorant European layers to significantly adjust their markets. Then the Asians and European professionals would come in massively on Team B at a beneficial price.
Secondly, a very high percentage of these changes of officialdom occur on major turnover live events eg Arsenal versus Manchester United, Tottenham versus Chelsea and Blackburn versus Arsenal. Inevitably, the impact is much greater in such events from a betting market perspective.
Thirdly, the same referees keep cropping up in these events which would suggest that there is a small grouping of officials within the PGMOB roster who might be complicit in these trading manipulations.
Of course, a suitable explanation might be that English referees are simply 20 times more likely to get ill, have travel difficulties or get injured in the pre-match warm-up. Statistics suggest otherwise.
World Cup and Euro Qualifiers, Champions League and UEFA Cup matches involve extensive travelling, exposing oneself to the viruses and bugs of a foreign land and disruption to pre-match warm-ups routines due to climate, pitch condition etc. In the whole of the time that I have been trading these markets, I have never yet seen a change of referee. That's in 15 years...
This puts the two changes out of 12 English games over the weekend into perspective.
Perhaps there is a manipulative market opportunity here. The corrupted British layers could establish markets on who is going to officiate at the weekend's games. Then they can cream a profit off mugs as well as undermining professionals while retaining ultimate control of outcome. Perfect psychopathy...
Tuesday, 20 March 2007
HawkEye To Mash Up The Markets
The exhilarating disclosure that the Premier League is to introduce HawkEye goal-line technology from 2008/09 is an incremental move in the right direction. Ignoring the pertinent fact that suitable technology has been around for years (we can send probes to Saturn but are unable to determine whether a football has moved across a line, apparently!), any potential implementation of the necessary adjustments to technology, rules, officiating, institutions etc that will make football more meritocratic and less corrupt have to be applauded. Clap clap...
HawkEye has been used in a peripheral manner in tennis and cricket for years but it's impending introduction to football provides real clout and status to the technology.
Our prime concern is with the software. Unless external independent inspection is available in real time from the development of the specific software to the activation in a year a half, there exists the potential for corrupt individuals to gain control of the process. There are currently rumours around certain trading circles that one of the reasons for the delay in introducing the technology was the corrupter's inability to control the technological advance either by personnel or programming.
There are two parallels worthy of consideration in other highly manipulated spectacular society presentations.
Firstly, there has been considerable analysis in the USA over the bias brought into recent American elections through the use of computerised voting machines. Leaving aside other anti-democratic manipulations like creative gerrymandering and allowing a controlled judiciary to determine the electoral outcomes in imperial nations, there has been a heated debate over the fact that the firm which developed the software not only make election donations to the Republican Party but also refuse to make their software open source. The potential for corruption is evident.
Secondly, horseracing has been utilising technology to determine the "results" of close races for many years. The corrupt nature of such photo finish technology is now very highly tuned. Put simply, the process originates with the collection of the images; the background is then removed leaving merely the horses and the track; a calibration indicating the apparent position of the finishing line etc is then created; next, a suitable line is produced in a suitable place to achieve a suitable result with respect to the racing and betting sector's interests. On occasions where there is no point where the horse who is required to "win" is actually ahead, the closest point is chosen and the suitable line is now created at a suitable non-90 degree angle to achieve a suitable dead heat or squeaky narrow victory. When I used to make my living travelling around the horserace betting rings of Britain, close photo finishes were a profitable source of income for the quick-thinking and acting contrary trader - just another way of making your living out of trading societal corruption.
This will not just be an issue with the introduction of this particular form of technology. At every point in the future when the institutions, authorities and government wish to bring technological advances to our existences, it must be up to such bodies to ensure that their techie stuff is clean.
Yeah right... I can see a process now of initial self-regulation reluctantly being replaced by the establishment of a toothless regulatory body after some future football betting/technology scandal.
Quoting Peter Larmour from the Australian National University "corruption is better tackled by reducing institutional opportunities for it, rather than by dictatorial crusades from a strong-arm regime that sets itself up as detective, judge and juror".
It is slightly disturbing that an academic opinion related to post-coup Fiji also applies to the corrupt nation of English Premiership football.
Yet another big thank you to Mr Murdoch.
HawkEye has been used in a peripheral manner in tennis and cricket for years but it's impending introduction to football provides real clout and status to the technology.
Our prime concern is with the software. Unless external independent inspection is available in real time from the development of the specific software to the activation in a year a half, there exists the potential for corrupt individuals to gain control of the process. There are currently rumours around certain trading circles that one of the reasons for the delay in introducing the technology was the corrupter's inability to control the technological advance either by personnel or programming.
There are two parallels worthy of consideration in other highly manipulated spectacular society presentations.
Firstly, there has been considerable analysis in the USA over the bias brought into recent American elections through the use of computerised voting machines. Leaving aside other anti-democratic manipulations like creative gerrymandering and allowing a controlled judiciary to determine the electoral outcomes in imperial nations, there has been a heated debate over the fact that the firm which developed the software not only make election donations to the Republican Party but also refuse to make their software open source. The potential for corruption is evident.
Secondly, horseracing has been utilising technology to determine the "results" of close races for many years. The corrupt nature of such photo finish technology is now very highly tuned. Put simply, the process originates with the collection of the images; the background is then removed leaving merely the horses and the track; a calibration indicating the apparent position of the finishing line etc is then created; next, a suitable line is produced in a suitable place to achieve a suitable result with respect to the racing and betting sector's interests. On occasions where there is no point where the horse who is required to "win" is actually ahead, the closest point is chosen and the suitable line is now created at a suitable non-90 degree angle to achieve a suitable dead heat or squeaky narrow victory. When I used to make my living travelling around the horserace betting rings of Britain, close photo finishes were a profitable source of income for the quick-thinking and acting contrary trader - just another way of making your living out of trading societal corruption.
This will not just be an issue with the introduction of this particular form of technology. At every point in the future when the institutions, authorities and government wish to bring technological advances to our existences, it must be up to such bodies to ensure that their techie stuff is clean.
Yeah right... I can see a process now of initial self-regulation reluctantly being replaced by the establishment of a toothless regulatory body after some future football betting/technology scandal.
Quoting Peter Larmour from the Australian National University "corruption is better tackled by reducing institutional opportunities for it, rather than by dictatorial crusades from a strong-arm regime that sets itself up as detective, judge and juror".
It is slightly disturbing that an academic opinion related to post-coup Fiji also applies to the corrupt nation of English Premiership football.
Yet another big thank you to Mr Murdoch.
Monday, 19 March 2007
The FA (Fixed Anachronistic) Cup 2006/07
As we have stated previously, an agenda exists to achieve a showcase FA Cup Final for the new Wembley but Robbie Savage destroyed any value in betting on a Chelsea/Manchester United FA Cup Final when he went public and said what everyone else was thinking.
Despite this, there may still be validity in taking a position as the market is effectively corrupted.
Market makers, for psychological and business reasons, always tend to set prices in close proximity to one another. This occurs even when some of these layers are certain that the market prices are inefficient and, consequently, incorrect. In these instances, the layers take advantage of their superior analysis/information to undertake proprietary trading against the inefficient price offered by their competitors.
Some markets are effectively impossible to price up realistically. Taking the FA Cup Final as a prime example. Assessing the non-manipulated market and taking into account the overbet nature of the big teams, the true odds for a Chelsea v Man Utd final should be between 5/2 and 3/1. All bookmaker's markets instead offer between 5/4 and 6/4 on this occurrence. This is a outrageous piece of price scalping. Some astute layers have decided that even this price represents value and are refusing to price up the market at all!
In a totally corrupt market, we are not dealing with a probability of a particular outcome but the CERTAINTY of a particular outcome instead. Consequently, if an individual has complete and total confidence in a Chelsea versus Manchester United Final, 6/4 represents considerable value on a market that effectively should be very short odds-on.
Throughout the short history of this blog, we have been sharing our insights on this year's FA Cup as the competition is of minimal interest to our South East Asian colleagues and we trade only on a peripheral level ourselves. The competition has allowed us to display instances without impinging on our proprietary isolationist stuff.
Without giving any details of our analysis, we develop a rating for each team that is left in the competition at the quarter final stage. Collating all valid information from the markets, the matches, the officiating, the draws etc, we can determine which teams have a hidden impetus in this most marketed and manipulated of tournaments. Below are our ratings for the last six teams in this year's tournament (100 = maximum rating and 0 = minimum).
Chelsea 100
Manchester United 82
Middlesbrough 81
Watford 55
Tottenham 54
Blackburn 38
Once again, without providing details of our conversion chart, we would be pricing the showpiece final at around Evens (offering an average return on investment of about 25%). This degree of edge is tradeable. Yet, this assessment only takes account of the corruption of the competition to date and does not take any account of manipulations yet to be foisted upon us (we don't do crystal balls).
Consequently, our advice would be to take the 6/4 prior to this evening's matches. This price is adequate in an honest market and excessive value in a corrupt one.
It must be this sort of thing that makes the FA Cup such an allegedly popular competition worldwide.
PS Post Match Update - Dean ensured United's progress and, over the two games, 'Boro were repeatedly robbed while a late change of referee (Atkinson for Webb) significantly enhanced Chelsea's hopes of success - the late penalty being irrelevant due to the west Londoner's significant fitness advantage. The job's a good'un...
Despite this, there may still be validity in taking a position as the market is effectively corrupted.
Market makers, for psychological and business reasons, always tend to set prices in close proximity to one another. This occurs even when some of these layers are certain that the market prices are inefficient and, consequently, incorrect. In these instances, the layers take advantage of their superior analysis/information to undertake proprietary trading against the inefficient price offered by their competitors.
Some markets are effectively impossible to price up realistically. Taking the FA Cup Final as a prime example. Assessing the non-manipulated market and taking into account the overbet nature of the big teams, the true odds for a Chelsea v Man Utd final should be between 5/2 and 3/1. All bookmaker's markets instead offer between 5/4 and 6/4 on this occurrence. This is a outrageous piece of price scalping. Some astute layers have decided that even this price represents value and are refusing to price up the market at all!
In a totally corrupt market, we are not dealing with a probability of a particular outcome but the CERTAINTY of a particular outcome instead. Consequently, if an individual has complete and total confidence in a Chelsea versus Manchester United Final, 6/4 represents considerable value on a market that effectively should be very short odds-on.
Throughout the short history of this blog, we have been sharing our insights on this year's FA Cup as the competition is of minimal interest to our South East Asian colleagues and we trade only on a peripheral level ourselves. The competition has allowed us to display instances without impinging on our proprietary isolationist stuff.
Without giving any details of our analysis, we develop a rating for each team that is left in the competition at the quarter final stage. Collating all valid information from the markets, the matches, the officiating, the draws etc, we can determine which teams have a hidden impetus in this most marketed and manipulated of tournaments. Below are our ratings for the last six teams in this year's tournament (100 = maximum rating and 0 = minimum).
Chelsea 100
Manchester United 82
Middlesbrough 81
Watford 55
Tottenham 54
Blackburn 38
Once again, without providing details of our conversion chart, we would be pricing the showpiece final at around Evens (offering an average return on investment of about 25%). This degree of edge is tradeable. Yet, this assessment only takes account of the corruption of the competition to date and does not take any account of manipulations yet to be foisted upon us (we don't do crystal balls).
Consequently, our advice would be to take the 6/4 prior to this evening's matches. This price is adequate in an honest market and excessive value in a corrupt one.
It must be this sort of thing that makes the FA Cup such an allegedly popular competition worldwide.
PS Post Match Update - Dean ensured United's progress and, over the two games, 'Boro were repeatedly robbed while a late change of referee (Atkinson for Webb) significantly enhanced Chelsea's hopes of success - the late penalty being irrelevant due to the west Londoner's significant fitness advantage. The job's a good'un...
Official Cause of Death: South Asian Bookmakers
At the weekend, we posted that a combination of certain South Asian bookmakers and certain cricketers in the Pakistani and Indian teams conspired to undertake a little bit of insider trading and short selling of their teams Saturday Cricket World Cup matches. On Sunday morning, Bob Woolmer, the Pakistan coach, was found dead in his hotel room. The probable cause was a heart attack as the man was known to be suffering from stress.
It seems that Woolmer was an honest tactician who would have been totally dumbfounded by the lack of effort that was being perpetrated at the wicket. Television images of Woolmer in the game's final stages showed a ruddy-faced state of incomprehension.
There are grounds here for developing a charge of corporate manslaughter - would Woolmer have died if the Pakistan players and bookmakers were not intent on privately profiting from the miseries of the mug punters?
Probably not...
It seems that Woolmer was an honest tactician who would have been totally dumbfounded by the lack of effort that was being perpetrated at the wicket. Television images of Woolmer in the game's final stages showed a ruddy-faced state of incomprehension.
There are grounds here for developing a charge of corporate manslaughter - would Woolmer have died if the Pakistan players and bookmakers were not intent on privately profiting from the miseries of the mug punters?
Probably not...
Sunday, 18 March 2007
Quick On The Draw
So, the elimination of the drawn football match is now on the agenda apparently. Where did this media item come from? It is frequently a fruitful area of attention to determine both who is behind these anonymous spectacular society agendas and, indeed, who gains most from their potential implementation.
It is our belief that the introduction of a penalty shootout in every drawn match would have the prime product of benefiting the bookmakers and insider traders. Below, we explore some of the reasons behind our assertion that we are willing to make public.
* The new structure, if given the go-ahead, will create numerous new markets and extensions to current betting market structures. For example, markets specific to the penalty shootout would be enhanced and developed while HT/FT markets could be extended to HT/FT/Pen ones.
* The easiest player to corrupt is the goalkeeper. One mistake by a keeper has a greater magnitude than any other position on the pitch. Additionally, the psychological profiles of many goalies are conducive to betting sector approaches. Keepers are often outsiders - who would play in net if they were good enough to play outfield? Goalkeepers would become highly significant operators in the new penalty markets that the bookmakers will establish. Outfield players and referees would have less influence and the bookies would soon own many of the penalty shootouts.
* Bookmakers resist small fields and books if they can help it - unless they possess ultimate control of such markets. These new betting opportunities would be privately handicapped markets entirely opaque to all but the slickest analysts - a licence to print money for the market makers.
* It is our view that the new structure would lead to an increased number of drawn matches as teams both took advantage of the extra earner of penalties and relied on the fallback position of a superiority in shootouts. Bookmakers like draws as very few leisure punters ever take draw positions due to behavioural reasons.
* The penalty shootouts would develop a similar betting formation to the last race on a horserace card. Mug punters often try to "get out" of their day's financial damage by chasing their losses in the final event. The highly manipulated penalty shootout would be this event...
* The proposed adjustments would flatten the hierarchy in the Premiership which is something else dear to bookmaker's hearts (sic). The gap between rich and poor has stretched in the Premiership in recent years and the bookies are always on the lookout for new randomising factors to make outcomes more volatile. It can only be a matter of time before some bookmaker hits on the idea of tying weights to the best teams!
* A draw is an anathema to the increasing number of corporate American owners of Premiership teams. Many of these operators have developed trading strategies for American sports that include an assessment of overtime. There is a desire to transfer their strategies to their new playthings.
Our contacts at Sky reckon Murdoch is behind this media spin. Penalty shootouts would favour Sky on a range of different levels - increased advertising for lengthened matches with guaranteed climaxes; more betting turnover for SkyBet; much greater degree of control of outcome of matches both in 90 minutes and on penalties; enhancement of income from television rights etc etc.
English football could have chosen are more palatable character to sell our beautiful game to - like virtually anyone else on the planet...
Just leave the game alone. It works.
** Originally posted for Dietrological Platinum and Gold clients on March 15th and 16th respectively.
It is our belief that the introduction of a penalty shootout in every drawn match would have the prime product of benefiting the bookmakers and insider traders. Below, we explore some of the reasons behind our assertion that we are willing to make public.
* The new structure, if given the go-ahead, will create numerous new markets and extensions to current betting market structures. For example, markets specific to the penalty shootout would be enhanced and developed while HT/FT markets could be extended to HT/FT/Pen ones.
* The easiest player to corrupt is the goalkeeper. One mistake by a keeper has a greater magnitude than any other position on the pitch. Additionally, the psychological profiles of many goalies are conducive to betting sector approaches. Keepers are often outsiders - who would play in net if they were good enough to play outfield? Goalkeepers would become highly significant operators in the new penalty markets that the bookmakers will establish. Outfield players and referees would have less influence and the bookies would soon own many of the penalty shootouts.
* Bookmakers resist small fields and books if they can help it - unless they possess ultimate control of such markets. These new betting opportunities would be privately handicapped markets entirely opaque to all but the slickest analysts - a licence to print money for the market makers.
* It is our view that the new structure would lead to an increased number of drawn matches as teams both took advantage of the extra earner of penalties and relied on the fallback position of a superiority in shootouts. Bookmakers like draws as very few leisure punters ever take draw positions due to behavioural reasons.
* The penalty shootouts would develop a similar betting formation to the last race on a horserace card. Mug punters often try to "get out" of their day's financial damage by chasing their losses in the final event. The highly manipulated penalty shootout would be this event...
* The proposed adjustments would flatten the hierarchy in the Premiership which is something else dear to bookmaker's hearts (sic). The gap between rich and poor has stretched in the Premiership in recent years and the bookies are always on the lookout for new randomising factors to make outcomes more volatile. It can only be a matter of time before some bookmaker hits on the idea of tying weights to the best teams!
* A draw is an anathema to the increasing number of corporate American owners of Premiership teams. Many of these operators have developed trading strategies for American sports that include an assessment of overtime. There is a desire to transfer their strategies to their new playthings.
Our contacts at Sky reckon Murdoch is behind this media spin. Penalty shootouts would favour Sky on a range of different levels - increased advertising for lengthened matches with guaranteed climaxes; more betting turnover for SkyBet; much greater degree of control of outcome of matches both in 90 minutes and on penalties; enhancement of income from television rights etc etc.
English football could have chosen are more palatable character to sell our beautiful game to - like virtually anyone else on the planet...
Just leave the game alone. It works.
** Originally posted for Dietrological Platinum and Gold clients on March 15th and 16th respectively.
Begosh And Begorra!
Yesterday was one of the biggest earning days ever for the South Asian cricket bookmakers (particularly in India).
The Cricket World Cup was suitably scheduled to ensure that Pakistan, Bangladesh and India had gambling events established on the first big betting Saturday of the competition.
Dravid started the nonsense by choosing to bat on a Trinidad wicket known for it's early liveliness and the Indians never recovered from their slovenly start. Interestingly only two players scored more than fifteen runs which is always suspicious when one of the world's leading teams is playing a junior ICC member. India fielded in a revealingly poor manner allowing a bunch of untried teenagers to merit an uplifting victory (despite the grubby fingers of the manipulating bookies).
But this was standard Cricket World Cup fare - India will qualify for the latter stages and Saturday's event was merely an earner.
Not so the Pakistanis!
I've had some pretty weird St Pat's but watching Ireland slaughter the mighty Pakistan at cricket while drinking seaweed beer certainly ranks up there... In the estimation of our Trading Team, we reckon that around half the Pakistan team were massively underperforming whether bookmaker-influenced or not. Inzamam-ul-Haq captained the team allegedly and, despite the best efforts of Sami, Gul and Iftikhar, Ireland deserved their astonishing triumph.
The South Asian bookmakers have been a dominant force in the global cricket betting markets for many years. A mixture of complicity and coercion allows complete control of the various South Asian national team's events. Similarly to the Chinese control of the football markets of the 1990's, the control has been absolute. Nowadays, things are not quite so clear but these bookmakers remain key global operators.
The massive devotion of the populations of Sri Lanka, India, Pakistan and Bangladesh to the game of cricket deserves better. These people receive no respect from the corrupting bookmakers.
But, reluctantly dealing with the realities... Via creative lateral thinking and holistic overview the Cricket World Cup is a significant source of profit. Corruption = cash for more than just the manipulators...
Incidentally, you can now get 20/1 in places on India winning the World Cup - this is not an advice but merely an observation...
The Cricket World Cup was suitably scheduled to ensure that Pakistan, Bangladesh and India had gambling events established on the first big betting Saturday of the competition.
Dravid started the nonsense by choosing to bat on a Trinidad wicket known for it's early liveliness and the Indians never recovered from their slovenly start. Interestingly only two players scored more than fifteen runs which is always suspicious when one of the world's leading teams is playing a junior ICC member. India fielded in a revealingly poor manner allowing a bunch of untried teenagers to merit an uplifting victory (despite the grubby fingers of the manipulating bookies).
But this was standard Cricket World Cup fare - India will qualify for the latter stages and Saturday's event was merely an earner.
Not so the Pakistanis!
I've had some pretty weird St Pat's but watching Ireland slaughter the mighty Pakistan at cricket while drinking seaweed beer certainly ranks up there... In the estimation of our Trading Team, we reckon that around half the Pakistan team were massively underperforming whether bookmaker-influenced or not. Inzamam-ul-Haq captained the team allegedly and, despite the best efforts of Sami, Gul and Iftikhar, Ireland deserved their astonishing triumph.
The South Asian bookmakers have been a dominant force in the global cricket betting markets for many years. A mixture of complicity and coercion allows complete control of the various South Asian national team's events. Similarly to the Chinese control of the football markets of the 1990's, the control has been absolute. Nowadays, things are not quite so clear but these bookmakers remain key global operators.
The massive devotion of the populations of Sri Lanka, India, Pakistan and Bangladesh to the game of cricket deserves better. These people receive no respect from the corrupting bookmakers.
But, reluctantly dealing with the realities... Via creative lateral thinking and holistic overview the Cricket World Cup is a significant source of profit. Corruption = cash for more than just the manipulators...
Incidentally, you can now get 20/1 in places on India winning the World Cup - this is not an advice but merely an observation...
Saturday, 17 March 2007
Sun Tzu Versus The Kray Twins
On January 16th, we warned that leading Asian bookmaker Pointbet was hovering between going underground and going out of existence in it's original form (see: http://footballisfixed.blogspot.com/2007/01/bettor-beware.html).
This week marked the final threshold and the operation is no longer out there. The domain is using a new server and IP address and was moved manually so we are not looking at a technical issue here. Pointbet have not been paying out leisure punters since December and have been illegally operating from Batam Island for the last year. Underground activities will continue utilising the millions stolen from gullible bettors.
Historically, all Asian bookies started at a street level and all are willing to return to trading on the move if global necessities so dictate.
The reaction of the European bookmakers to the few Asian operators who have explored market making possibilities outside their home region has been hostile and destabilising. The fragmented cartelisation of the global football betting industry is solidified by Europe's posturing. If the Europeans had put a longer term strategy ahead of their short term abusive market manipulation, they might have remained informationally competitive into the future. Short-termism is a basic characteristic of psychopathic operators. But so is hierarchical power and Europe is already in the process of self-undermining it's limited competitive advantage (see http://footballisfixed.blogspot.com/2007/01/psychopathic-personality-disorder.html).
We would continue to advise caution in leaving money deposited with the more vulnerable lower tier British bookies.
This week marked the final threshold and the operation is no longer out there. The domain is using a new server and IP address and was moved manually so we are not looking at a technical issue here. Pointbet have not been paying out leisure punters since December and have been illegally operating from Batam Island for the last year. Underground activities will continue utilising the millions stolen from gullible bettors.
Historically, all Asian bookies started at a street level and all are willing to return to trading on the move if global necessities so dictate.
The reaction of the European bookmakers to the few Asian operators who have explored market making possibilities outside their home region has been hostile and destabilising. The fragmented cartelisation of the global football betting industry is solidified by Europe's posturing. If the Europeans had put a longer term strategy ahead of their short term abusive market manipulation, they might have remained informationally competitive into the future. Short-termism is a basic characteristic of psychopathic operators. But so is hierarchical power and Europe is already in the process of self-undermining it's limited competitive advantage (see http://footballisfixed.blogspot.com/2007/01/psychopathic-personality-disorder.html).
We would continue to advise caution in leaving money deposited with the more vulnerable lower tier British bookies.
Thursday, 15 March 2007
Insider Trading and the Cricket World Cup
Six weeks is the duration of this year's Cricket World Cup in the Caribbean. I'm already bored after two days. Only a combination of my trading portfolio and the knowledge that the West Indies will be allowed a few weeks of party time are keeping me entertained.
To professional traders, all major sporting competitions are prime profit opportunities. Despite individual tournaments having their own specific structure, there are common analytical similarities present in all such competitions.
There are two prime types of manipulation in these trading windows - institutional and gambling.
The former is typical of all tournaments and part of any trader's initial analysis of a competition must be to determine what the hierarchy require from their event. Success in these competitions is partially meritocratic but only if such an outcome accommodates the template that the organisers desire. The most obvious example of this form of creativity is the necessity for the host nation(s) to enjoy a suitable level of progression and achievement. There are numerous other aspects to a organiser's hidden agenda but we'll not approach these matters here.
Gambling turnover is always significant on these major global one-off competitions. Global television coverage and global betting markets operate in tandem to develop markets with deep liquidity. Such markets are perfect for corruption. Aside from market makers and professional traders, there are two other conspicuous participants in the global betting markets for the Cricket World Cup.
Insider trading by both privileged insiders and players is a key feature of all betting markets but reaches new heights when there is increased depth to the markets. Think about it. If an individual makes the choice to take the corrupt dollar then one should expect that this same individual might just wish to optimise his returns from his corruption.
Simple... Fiddle the liquid events for greater financial returns with less risk.
Cricket offers a good example of two of the types of manipulative processes at work.
Firstly, take a corrupt batsman. It's a first round World Cup game against irrelevant opposition. All the key games are ahead. Short-selling himself on all available markets, he retains total control of outcome and, indeed, makes greater profit the sooner he gets the job done. There are numerous such players that our Trading Team are closely monitoring from the moment they appear on the pavilion steps. Additionally, some teams have groupings of individuals that work together to achieve specific market aims and it is not unknown for particularly tightly knit XI's to operate as a complete betting market entity.
Secondly, lets look at any given former England captain on the Sky team of reporters. Aside from the general "from the horses mouth" type of privileged information that these betting icons receive, they are also able to utilise Sky technology to gain further edge. In one of the games in the recent Ashes series, the Aussies were about 2673 for five wickets. The markets were set considerably above this level and, yet, there was the issue of a declaration. Sky cameras were trained on the Australian dressing room waiting for the first muscle twitch that might indicate that the pads were coming off the Australian No 8 batsman. Having utilised this inside information to whatever effect he desired, a breathless Ian Botham shared his little coup with the world exhibiting the arrogance of the untouchable. The only upside is that Ponting probably got on first and at a much better price.
I could but won't provide a whole spectrum of similar issues with regard to manipulation of the markets in the Cricket World Cup. I need to make my living, after all.
But, I will add that the types of manipulation available in cricket is unusual in it's variety of potential corruptions. The liquid global cricket markets can be a choppy environment to trade if you are out of your depth. Some of these markets are multiple and non-correlatory in their forms of corruption.
Personally, I restrict myself to the markets where I possess an edge. I will trade on individuals batting runs markets if I have inside info or if I am able to read the player quickly enough but there are more profitable fields to harvest. Incidentally, the issues relating to individual batsmen may also be applied to a whole range of other individual sports - darts, snooker, horseracing, pool, baseball, boxing, cycling, golf, formula one etc etc.
The taint of corruption exists across every major event in every major sport nowadays. The bookmakers have a colossal amount to answer for...
PS This post was written prior to the memorable tied match between Zimbabwe 2nd XI and Ireland. However, this event was an anomaly.
To professional traders, all major sporting competitions are prime profit opportunities. Despite individual tournaments having their own specific structure, there are common analytical similarities present in all such competitions.
There are two prime types of manipulation in these trading windows - institutional and gambling.
The former is typical of all tournaments and part of any trader's initial analysis of a competition must be to determine what the hierarchy require from their event. Success in these competitions is partially meritocratic but only if such an outcome accommodates the template that the organisers desire. The most obvious example of this form of creativity is the necessity for the host nation(s) to enjoy a suitable level of progression and achievement. There are numerous other aspects to a organiser's hidden agenda but we'll not approach these matters here.
Gambling turnover is always significant on these major global one-off competitions. Global television coverage and global betting markets operate in tandem to develop markets with deep liquidity. Such markets are perfect for corruption. Aside from market makers and professional traders, there are two other conspicuous participants in the global betting markets for the Cricket World Cup.
Insider trading by both privileged insiders and players is a key feature of all betting markets but reaches new heights when there is increased depth to the markets. Think about it. If an individual makes the choice to take the corrupt dollar then one should expect that this same individual might just wish to optimise his returns from his corruption.
Simple... Fiddle the liquid events for greater financial returns with less risk.
Cricket offers a good example of two of the types of manipulative processes at work.
Firstly, take a corrupt batsman. It's a first round World Cup game against irrelevant opposition. All the key games are ahead. Short-selling himself on all available markets, he retains total control of outcome and, indeed, makes greater profit the sooner he gets the job done. There are numerous such players that our Trading Team are closely monitoring from the moment they appear on the pavilion steps. Additionally, some teams have groupings of individuals that work together to achieve specific market aims and it is not unknown for particularly tightly knit XI's to operate as a complete betting market entity.
Secondly, lets look at any given former England captain on the Sky team of reporters. Aside from the general "from the horses mouth" type of privileged information that these betting icons receive, they are also able to utilise Sky technology to gain further edge. In one of the games in the recent Ashes series, the Aussies were about 2673 for five wickets. The markets were set considerably above this level and, yet, there was the issue of a declaration. Sky cameras were trained on the Australian dressing room waiting for the first muscle twitch that might indicate that the pads were coming off the Australian No 8 batsman. Having utilised this inside information to whatever effect he desired, a breathless Ian Botham shared his little coup with the world exhibiting the arrogance of the untouchable. The only upside is that Ponting probably got on first and at a much better price.
I could but won't provide a whole spectrum of similar issues with regard to manipulation of the markets in the Cricket World Cup. I need to make my living, after all.
But, I will add that the types of manipulation available in cricket is unusual in it's variety of potential corruptions. The liquid global cricket markets can be a choppy environment to trade if you are out of your depth. Some of these markets are multiple and non-correlatory in their forms of corruption.
Personally, I restrict myself to the markets where I possess an edge. I will trade on individuals batting runs markets if I have inside info or if I am able to read the player quickly enough but there are more profitable fields to harvest. Incidentally, the issues relating to individual batsmen may also be applied to a whole range of other individual sports - darts, snooker, horseracing, pool, baseball, boxing, cycling, golf, formula one etc etc.
The taint of corruption exists across every major event in every major sport nowadays. The bookmakers have a colossal amount to answer for...
PS This post was written prior to the memorable tied match between Zimbabwe 2nd XI and Ireland. However, this event was an anomaly.
Wednesday, 14 March 2007
1000 Ways To Piss Off Shareholder Capitalism #7
#7 Getting Rid of Shares Prior to the Oncoming Recession
The markets are turning. The systemic risk caused by climate change together with numerous feedback loops on both a microeconomic and macroeconomic level ensure that short selling the markets is the prime trading strategy in the immediate period on the financial markets.
The unanimous assessment of our Trading Team is that the Stern Report underplayed both the implications of the various feedback loops with respect to climate change AND the short-medium term negative impact on an economic system/markets that rely on growth for their sustainability. Capitalism thrives on risk and brinkmanship. This spiralling monster of a globalised marketplace would be fine and dandy for the global manipulators if it weren't for the fact that the systemic risk of climate change is absolute. Greenwash ensures that this reality is merely at the stage of being marketed for immediate competitive advantage (this applies to both business and politics). The short-termists simply haven't grasped or refuse to grasp the futility of peripheral market tinkering in the face of the coming economic tsunami. The markets are beginning their decline. The sophisticated operators are getting involved. When Bernanke and Greenspan are providing conflicting analyses, who would you rather side with?
We have been advising clients to get out of the FTSE and DJIA markets both generally and specifically since the former hit 6400.
The skill is to determine where best to put your money and how to hedge your potential exposures in the current and projected global financial climate and that is not a concern of this post.
If you own shares, sell... Not only will there be a correction of 10-20% from recent highs but the eventual recovery will be gradual. It is difficult to envisage a near future bull market set against the very real backcloth of global warming. The only other scenario is a serious correction due to both psychological market overreaction and institutional prompting - this possibility would yield a "Depression" beyond a simple recession.
The markets are turning. The systemic risk caused by climate change together with numerous feedback loops on both a microeconomic and macroeconomic level ensure that short selling the markets is the prime trading strategy in the immediate period on the financial markets.
The unanimous assessment of our Trading Team is that the Stern Report underplayed both the implications of the various feedback loops with respect to climate change AND the short-medium term negative impact on an economic system/markets that rely on growth for their sustainability. Capitalism thrives on risk and brinkmanship. This spiralling monster of a globalised marketplace would be fine and dandy for the global manipulators if it weren't for the fact that the systemic risk of climate change is absolute. Greenwash ensures that this reality is merely at the stage of being marketed for immediate competitive advantage (this applies to both business and politics). The short-termists simply haven't grasped or refuse to grasp the futility of peripheral market tinkering in the face of the coming economic tsunami. The markets are beginning their decline. The sophisticated operators are getting involved. When Bernanke and Greenspan are providing conflicting analyses, who would you rather side with?
We have been advising clients to get out of the FTSE and DJIA markets both generally and specifically since the former hit 6400.
The skill is to determine where best to put your money and how to hedge your potential exposures in the current and projected global financial climate and that is not a concern of this post.
If you own shares, sell... Not only will there be a correction of 10-20% from recent highs but the eventual recovery will be gradual. It is difficult to envisage a near future bull market set against the very real backcloth of global warming. The only other scenario is a serious correction due to both psychological market overreaction and institutional prompting - this possibility would yield a "Depression" beyond a simple recession.
Tuesday, 13 March 2007
The Deparment of Corruption Manipulation and Sport
As the British government continues it's inexorable slide into the arms of the gambling industry, Sports Minister Richard Caborn has announced that restrictions on gambling advertising on TV and radio are to be relaxed. Excellent! Just what we need...
Caborn assures us (and we believe him, really) that the government is going to monitor the situation and step in itself or via the Gambling Commission if it detects any worrying developments. Like what? An increase in problem gambling perhaps?
Apparently, the adverts must not show gamblers behaving in a way that could result in "financial, social or emotional harm". Exactly what is the purpose of the gambling sector advertising it's addictive wares if not to create this "financial, social or emotional harm" which the industry views as profits and returns to shareholders?
Caborn redraws the lines of engagement to suit his twisted perspective of the frontline and grey areas between sports and gambling. The new regulations simply legalise the pushing of corruption via advertising. Dressing it up in terms of "acceptable advertising practice" is throwing a veil over the real point that such addictive and corrupt products should not be allowed to be advertised. Full stop... Would Caborn be as excited by the prospects of crack cocaine adverts being legalised so long as such adverts fell within Advertising Standard Authority guidelines? Actually, he probably would if it enhanced his career in some manner.
Anyway, at long last, the adverts during football matches will be representative of the "sport" that we are being offered.
Indeedy, the FA Cup Semi Finals already are indicative of the advertising/gambling/"sport" linkages that we can expect. The climax of this year's competition has drawn Abramovich or Mansion Bookmakers-backed Spurs against Blackburn Rovers who are sponsored by Bet24. The other game features 888casino supported 'Boro or AIG/Glazers United against Loans.co.uk's Watford. These mock battles will preface the glorious reopening of Wembley featuring Man Utd and Chelsea.
Marketing heaven...
Caborn assures us (and we believe him, really) that the government is going to monitor the situation and step in itself or via the Gambling Commission if it detects any worrying developments. Like what? An increase in problem gambling perhaps?
Apparently, the adverts must not show gamblers behaving in a way that could result in "financial, social or emotional harm". Exactly what is the purpose of the gambling sector advertising it's addictive wares if not to create this "financial, social or emotional harm" which the industry views as profits and returns to shareholders?
Caborn redraws the lines of engagement to suit his twisted perspective of the frontline and grey areas between sports and gambling. The new regulations simply legalise the pushing of corruption via advertising. Dressing it up in terms of "acceptable advertising practice" is throwing a veil over the real point that such addictive and corrupt products should not be allowed to be advertised. Full stop... Would Caborn be as excited by the prospects of crack cocaine adverts being legalised so long as such adverts fell within Advertising Standard Authority guidelines? Actually, he probably would if it enhanced his career in some manner.
Anyway, at long last, the adverts during football matches will be representative of the "sport" that we are being offered.
Indeedy, the FA Cup Semi Finals already are indicative of the advertising/gambling/"sport" linkages that we can expect. The climax of this year's competition has drawn Abramovich or Mansion Bookmakers-backed Spurs against Blackburn Rovers who are sponsored by Bet24. The other game features 888casino supported 'Boro or AIG/Glazers United against Loans.co.uk's Watford. These mock battles will preface the glorious reopening of Wembley featuring Man Utd and Chelsea.
Marketing heaven...
Ride On
Today sees the start of that most peculiar of phenomena - the Cheltenham Horse Abuse Festival. Apart from the issues related to class, tricolours and cruelty, all punters should keep in mind a few simple and overwhelming rules and apply these rules to any potential positions (if you must get involved).
* Never bet on the Irish in the handicap races and never bet on the British in the non-handicaps.
* At major meetings, the bookies work harder than ever to prevent favourites winning and punters should check out the betting exchanges and be looking to lay favourites in manipulated British-controlled events.
* Observe the disinformation put out by media and individuals who one knows to be corrupt. Bet accordingly.
* Never bet solely on nationalistic grounds and be particularly wary of horses with names like "Paddy's Luck" or "Rebel Country"!
* Avoid alcohol while betting - the Guinness tent is responsible for many debts...
* Be highly selective in your trading and it is possible to earn serious money at Cheltenham.
* Cheltenham is more meritocratic than your average race meeting as the kudos of winning, say, the Gold Cup, is greater than any payoff that Ladbrokes might be willing to provide in return for underperformance. The non-prime races are always the most manipulated.
* Never back horses from the betting/criminal/corrupt yards unless you are privy to their hidden agenda.
* Avoid steamers unless Irish, non-handicap with media suppression of the information.
* Carefully assess the psychological profiles and public utterances of jockeys, trainers and owners as these people are inbred, not very bright or corrupt (or sometimes all three).
* Expect a profusion of losing favourites at shortish odds at the secondary meetings at Sedgefield and Southwell. Attending these secondary meetings and selective trading is an earner.
* Either bet in the ring, on the rails or with the betting exchanges. Absolutely don't bet with the the standard bookmakers as they offer considerably poorer prices. In the Smurfit, for instance, Betfair offer Brave Inca at 5/1 while Ladbrokes go 10/3 and Premierbet 3/1. Why would anyone accept £300 return on a winning £100 bet when you can get £500? No-brainer...
* Record all trades placed in the betting ring on a dictaphone.
Enjoy the exuberance of the Irish winners and look forward to St Pat's but remember that it should be regarded as a political act to ensure that you cream some profit off the British bookmakers and establishment. Bet wisely...
* Never bet on the Irish in the handicap races and never bet on the British in the non-handicaps.
* At major meetings, the bookies work harder than ever to prevent favourites winning and punters should check out the betting exchanges and be looking to lay favourites in manipulated British-controlled events.
* Observe the disinformation put out by media and individuals who one knows to be corrupt. Bet accordingly.
* Never bet solely on nationalistic grounds and be particularly wary of horses with names like "Paddy's Luck" or "Rebel Country"!
* Avoid alcohol while betting - the Guinness tent is responsible for many debts...
* Be highly selective in your trading and it is possible to earn serious money at Cheltenham.
* Cheltenham is more meritocratic than your average race meeting as the kudos of winning, say, the Gold Cup, is greater than any payoff that Ladbrokes might be willing to provide in return for underperformance. The non-prime races are always the most manipulated.
* Never back horses from the betting/criminal/corrupt yards unless you are privy to their hidden agenda.
* Avoid steamers unless Irish, non-handicap with media suppression of the information.
* Carefully assess the psychological profiles and public utterances of jockeys, trainers and owners as these people are inbred, not very bright or corrupt (or sometimes all three).
* Expect a profusion of losing favourites at shortish odds at the secondary meetings at Sedgefield and Southwell. Attending these secondary meetings and selective trading is an earner.
* Either bet in the ring, on the rails or with the betting exchanges. Absolutely don't bet with the the standard bookmakers as they offer considerably poorer prices. In the Smurfit, for instance, Betfair offer Brave Inca at 5/1 while Ladbrokes go 10/3 and Premierbet 3/1. Why would anyone accept £300 return on a winning £100 bet when you can get £500? No-brainer...
* Record all trades placed in the betting ring on a dictaphone.
Enjoy the exuberance of the Irish winners and look forward to St Pat's but remember that it should be regarded as a political act to ensure that you cream some profit off the British bookmakers and establishment. Bet wisely...
Monday, 12 March 2007
Clean It Up Before It Becomes A Clean Up
In the last week, the games between Milan/Celtic, 'Boro/Man Utd and Chelsea/Spurs enjoyed a shared common thread apart from the entertainment. Three penalty decisions were made by the officials which altered the outcomes of each match - all three decisions were handballs which makes comparison easier.
The shortest ball-to-hand distance resulted in Boateng being penalised by Styles and United grabbed a replay from the penalty spot. Maldini's and Carvalho's handballs were at significantly greater ball-to-hand distance and yet neither were given as penalties. The power teams in each of these games got the benefit of any doubt and such benefits were absolute in that the level of validity for the decisions was irrelevant. Instead of 'Boro and Spurs being in the FA Cup Semi Finals, the agenda remains for a Chelsea versus Man Utd spectacular first final at the new Wembley. Do you really believe that the powers-that-be would prefer Middlesbrough against Blackburn for such a globally marketable event?
Additionally, Celtic have been denied significant income from a Champions League Quarter Final place due to the machinations of Galliani and the Milanese manipulators. They join a long long list who have reasons to diss Berlusconi...
Three tense and exciting games; three penalty decisions; three false results. Until football addresses the issue of omnipotent referee control, the most that the game can achieve is spectacular entertainment but not a competitive meritocratic sport.
Before anyone claims that the excitement and tension outweighs the justice of a fair outcome, check out a couple of other games this weekend. Barcelona and Real Madrid played out a thrilling and honest 3-3 draw with great goals and, moreover, great natural improvised spontaneous entertainment. Remove the word "great" and the same definition applies to AO Kerkyra's 4-3 victory in Kriti that massively improves the Corfiot's chances of staying in the Hellenic Super League. Each were meritocratic matches where the influence of betting patterns and/or hierarchical power concerns were conspicuous by their absence. Spain and non-Athenian Greece has not yet gone down the route that leads to pre-match team talks including issues about winning the game but being level at half time etc etc.
As a comparison with a different sport, look at the conclusion of the Italy versus Wales 6 Nations Rugby International. This was also mired in controversy as official Chris White provided erroneous information to the Wales team which directly resulted in their 23-20 loss. The reaction has been swift. Because the referee was on open mike, all the evidence is available. The referee has accepted his error and even released a press release apologising to the Welsh team. The only aspect that remains disturbingly unaffected is the impact on the betting markets. White's action prevented Wales drawing or even potentially winning the game. There was no redress for punters.
The best structure to cover all angles remains as follows (as outlined in earlier posts):
a) Two referees for all events.
b) A large pool of available officials for competitions.
c) Prevention of referees working with the same officials repeatedly.
d) Referees to officiate each team no more than once per season.
e) Open mike access to referees conversations on the pitch and to any fourth/fifth official on the sidelines.
f) Video evidence for all borderline key decisions (penalties, offsides, sendings off, ball crossing the line etc).
g) Making it illegal for football insiders to bet on the outcomes of games.
h) Referees having to publicly explain their errors.
i) Punishment and demotion for substandard officials.
j) No links between sports teams and bookmakers.
The shortest ball-to-hand distance resulted in Boateng being penalised by Styles and United grabbed a replay from the penalty spot. Maldini's and Carvalho's handballs were at significantly greater ball-to-hand distance and yet neither were given as penalties. The power teams in each of these games got the benefit of any doubt and such benefits were absolute in that the level of validity for the decisions was irrelevant. Instead of 'Boro and Spurs being in the FA Cup Semi Finals, the agenda remains for a Chelsea versus Man Utd spectacular first final at the new Wembley. Do you really believe that the powers-that-be would prefer Middlesbrough against Blackburn for such a globally marketable event?
Additionally, Celtic have been denied significant income from a Champions League Quarter Final place due to the machinations of Galliani and the Milanese manipulators. They join a long long list who have reasons to diss Berlusconi...
Three tense and exciting games; three penalty decisions; three false results. Until football addresses the issue of omnipotent referee control, the most that the game can achieve is spectacular entertainment but not a competitive meritocratic sport.
Before anyone claims that the excitement and tension outweighs the justice of a fair outcome, check out a couple of other games this weekend. Barcelona and Real Madrid played out a thrilling and honest 3-3 draw with great goals and, moreover, great natural improvised spontaneous entertainment. Remove the word "great" and the same definition applies to AO Kerkyra's 4-3 victory in Kriti that massively improves the Corfiot's chances of staying in the Hellenic Super League. Each were meritocratic matches where the influence of betting patterns and/or hierarchical power concerns were conspicuous by their absence. Spain and non-Athenian Greece has not yet gone down the route that leads to pre-match team talks including issues about winning the game but being level at half time etc etc.
As a comparison with a different sport, look at the conclusion of the Italy versus Wales 6 Nations Rugby International. This was also mired in controversy as official Chris White provided erroneous information to the Wales team which directly resulted in their 23-20 loss. The reaction has been swift. Because the referee was on open mike, all the evidence is available. The referee has accepted his error and even released a press release apologising to the Welsh team. The only aspect that remains disturbingly unaffected is the impact on the betting markets. White's action prevented Wales drawing or even potentially winning the game. There was no redress for punters.
The best structure to cover all angles remains as follows (as outlined in earlier posts):
a) Two referees for all events.
b) A large pool of available officials for competitions.
c) Prevention of referees working with the same officials repeatedly.
d) Referees to officiate each team no more than once per season.
e) Open mike access to referees conversations on the pitch and to any fourth/fifth official on the sidelines.
f) Video evidence for all borderline key decisions (penalties, offsides, sendings off, ball crossing the line etc).
g) Making it illegal for football insiders to bet on the outcomes of games.
h) Referees having to publicly explain their errors.
i) Punishment and demotion for substandard officials.
j) No links between sports teams and bookmakers.
Sunday, 11 March 2007
An FA Cup Update
Over the season, we have kept you informed with our FA Cup advices. Our main positions on the indices were supportive of Tottenham, Chelsea, Man City, Fulham, Middlesbrough and West Ham (we have closed out Fulham and Man City as winning positions) and we were against Arsenal. Only our West Ham position was a loser.
Due to Dietrological and trading considerations, we are not publicly updating our advices for the Quarter Finals although, as a riddle without solution, we will inform you that only one of our positions remains open prior to this weekend's ties.
Due to Dietrological and trading considerations, we are not publicly updating our advices for the Quarter Finals although, as a riddle without solution, we will inform you that only one of our positions remains open prior to this weekend's ties.
Saturday, 10 March 2007
Let's Hear What They've Got To Say
Listening to the miked up referees in the 6 Nations Rugby Union makes you long for a similar situation in football.
The authorities had the option of being open mike when the PGMOB decided that voice contact between officials on and off the pitch was a necessity for adequate match control. Unfortunately, they chose secrecy.
Many dubious decisions would achieve greater clarity with either verbal explanations or unintended referee vocal output. And I guess that this latter aspect is the reason that we will never hear what Graham Poll has got to say about his choice of decision.
Shame...
The authorities had the option of being open mike when the PGMOB decided that voice contact between officials on and off the pitch was a necessity for adequate match control. Unfortunately, they chose secrecy.
Many dubious decisions would achieve greater clarity with either verbal explanations or unintended referee vocal output. And I guess that this latter aspect is the reason that we will never hear what Graham Poll has got to say about his choice of decision.
Shame...
Thursday, 8 March 2007
We Request A Re-Quest
The latest layer of whitewash was added to the bungs affair yesterday when the Premier League released it's eagerly awaited update.
We didn't hold our collective breaths. We were right...
The inquiry is being "cornered" by the Premier League and Quest and none of the pertinent information is going to leak beyond this threshold of control. Indeed, the key aspect of this latest update was the sidelining of the Football Association's role in the affair.
The commentators who declared that we should be patient and allow Lord Stevens to undertake his investigations are looking increasingly naive.
As we stated at the time, this corruption will be quietly swept under the carpet over a period of time. The only impact on any of the individuals fingered in the BBC Panorama programme is that Kevin Bond became manager of Bournemouth (back in Redknapp's territory). The only future impact will be Mike Newell's slow disappearance into obscurity for having the temerity to confront corruption in the first place.
The three key facts relating to this scandal (and it is a scandal) are i) limiting the inquiry to 2 years prevented large numbers of senior operators in the game from being investigated, ii) the FA has lost it's compliance role for football and iii) the investigation is a whitewash.
The Free Dictionary definition of quest is "the act or an instance of seeking or pursuing something; a search".
It's a pity that that something wasn't the truth.
We didn't hold our collective breaths. We were right...
The inquiry is being "cornered" by the Premier League and Quest and none of the pertinent information is going to leak beyond this threshold of control. Indeed, the key aspect of this latest update was the sidelining of the Football Association's role in the affair.
The commentators who declared that we should be patient and allow Lord Stevens to undertake his investigations are looking increasingly naive.
As we stated at the time, this corruption will be quietly swept under the carpet over a period of time. The only impact on any of the individuals fingered in the BBC Panorama programme is that Kevin Bond became manager of Bournemouth (back in Redknapp's territory). The only future impact will be Mike Newell's slow disappearance into obscurity for having the temerity to confront corruption in the first place.
The three key facts relating to this scandal (and it is a scandal) are i) limiting the inquiry to 2 years prevented large numbers of senior operators in the game from being investigated, ii) the FA has lost it's compliance role for football and iii) the investigation is a whitewash.
The Free Dictionary definition of quest is "the act or an instance of seeking or pursuing something; a search".
It's a pity that that something wasn't the truth.
Tuesday, 6 March 2007
Why Why Why Do They Lie? Psychopathy...
Yesterday's decision by ITV to suspend premium phone-ins to television shows is to be welcomed - it is just a pity that the company is self-regulating as opposed to having pressure applied by government watchdog bodies.
Premium phone-ins are one of the beacons of abusive mechanisms that have been imposed on the British population without any real external monitoring in recent years. Recorded shows like Deal Or No Deal encourage viewers to phone for prizes that have already been decided and Eckoh, the company behind the ITV operations, have been found guilty of overcharging X-Factor viewers by £200,000. The BBC is refusing to take equivalent action which is typical of an organisation that wants to have it's financial cake (the licence fee) and eat it (premium rate nonsense).
Similarly corrupt structures are increasingly a part of the gambling landscape. Where is the government regulation of the crooked internet poker sites or bookmaker's virtual racing and sports games? Why aren't viewers provided with the real odds of success when they take part in premium phone-ins? Why are layers allowed to offer one-sided markets eg snow falling on xmas day when they will not allow punters to trade on there not being any precipitation? Why can bookies refuse to reveal their true profits in relation to their overround percentages on particular sports (this disguises abusive and corrupt markets)? Why are the real probabilities of winning on National Lottery games disguised? Why is significant research undertaken to determine the prime graphical layout of Lottery game cards to engender betting and addiction? Why has the insurance industry been able to develop into a bookmaking industry that effectively decides if and when it will pay out on losing positions (ie claims) while utilising government decree to make such insurance compulsory? How did your health become a betting market (how risky is it not to have health insurance at any given age?)? Why is insider trading allowed in both sports and financial markets? Why don't casinos and bookmakers allow winning clients?
All of these corrupt structures are effectively forms of voluntary taxation - it is British society preying on your fears and addictions in order to profit.
And, while digesting the self-regulation of both the premium phone-in industry and the gambling sector with government nowhere in sight, up pop Blair and Brown with an onslaught on single mothers???
Why would anybody put up with this systemic sham?
Move abroad!
Premium phone-ins are one of the beacons of abusive mechanisms that have been imposed on the British population without any real external monitoring in recent years. Recorded shows like Deal Or No Deal encourage viewers to phone for prizes that have already been decided and Eckoh, the company behind the ITV operations, have been found guilty of overcharging X-Factor viewers by £200,000. The BBC is refusing to take equivalent action which is typical of an organisation that wants to have it's financial cake (the licence fee) and eat it (premium rate nonsense).
Similarly corrupt structures are increasingly a part of the gambling landscape. Where is the government regulation of the crooked internet poker sites or bookmaker's virtual racing and sports games? Why aren't viewers provided with the real odds of success when they take part in premium phone-ins? Why are layers allowed to offer one-sided markets eg snow falling on xmas day when they will not allow punters to trade on there not being any precipitation? Why can bookies refuse to reveal their true profits in relation to their overround percentages on particular sports (this disguises abusive and corrupt markets)? Why are the real probabilities of winning on National Lottery games disguised? Why is significant research undertaken to determine the prime graphical layout of Lottery game cards to engender betting and addiction? Why has the insurance industry been able to develop into a bookmaking industry that effectively decides if and when it will pay out on losing positions (ie claims) while utilising government decree to make such insurance compulsory? How did your health become a betting market (how risky is it not to have health insurance at any given age?)? Why is insider trading allowed in both sports and financial markets? Why don't casinos and bookmakers allow winning clients?
All of these corrupt structures are effectively forms of voluntary taxation - it is British society preying on your fears and addictions in order to profit.
And, while digesting the self-regulation of both the premium phone-in industry and the gambling sector with government nowhere in sight, up pop Blair and Brown with an onslaught on single mothers???
Why would anybody put up with this systemic sham?
Move abroad!
1000 Ways To Piss Off Shareholder Capitalism #1
#1 Taking Advantage of the Bundling of Communications
The holy grail for all communications companies is to offer customers bundled packages providing television, broadband, landline and mobile phone(s). Communications companies are currently willing to offer major discounts on any of these services should a customer threaten to take their business to a competitor. These businesses make free movement problematic by the unsubtle placement of practical time-consuming obstacles and they are also aware that the vast majority of their customers simply do not have the time to keep moving from provider to provider. Consequently, such companies are now willing to offer the temptation of massive cuts in the price of broadband, for example, in the knowledge that they will achieve deferred gratification on a profit level via bundled packages in the future.
Take advantage of the short term saving but continue to monitor for the best overall service. Annual savings of up to £250 can be achieved with minimal effort.
The holy grail for all communications companies is to offer customers bundled packages providing television, broadband, landline and mobile phone(s). Communications companies are currently willing to offer major discounts on any of these services should a customer threaten to take their business to a competitor. These businesses make free movement problematic by the unsubtle placement of practical time-consuming obstacles and they are also aware that the vast majority of their customers simply do not have the time to keep moving from provider to provider. Consequently, such companies are now willing to offer the temptation of massive cuts in the price of broadband, for example, in the knowledge that they will achieve deferred gratification on a profit level via bundled packages in the future.
Take advantage of the short term saving but continue to monitor for the best overall service. Annual savings of up to £250 can be achieved with minimal effort.
Monday, 5 March 2007
Forever Blowing Financial Bubbles?
West Ham United are one of the Premiership clubs that our Trading Team has no routes to inside information within so we are reluctant to comment on the spectacular society "news" leakage from East London.
But, our suspicion is that there is an institutional issue with Eggert Magnusson and/or Alan Curbishley at play here.
Last season, West Ham received very favourable officiating both in the league and in their progression to the FA Cup Final. Such biases continued in 2006/07 until mid-December when Curbishley was brought in. Apart from Dowd's myopia in Curbishley's first game in charge, the referees have turned against West Ham big style. The Hammers have had their degree of favouritism slashed from joint best in the Premiership to, by some distance, the least favoured since mid-December.
There is much that never reached the media about Curbishley's departure from Charlton at the end of last season. As we have intimated previously, our legal people have suggested we avoid discussing the scenario on this blog.
It would be our guesstimation that it is Curbishley that is being targeted as a hidden agenda punishment for whatever it is that allegedly went on leading to his resignation at Charlton.
The combination of Magnusson (who hails from the no holds barred world of capitalism that arose in Russia after Glasnost), Curbishley and Day, a structure that not only leaks stories like a sieve, but also both encourages xenophobic/racist cliques and abusive gambling, suggests that the Hammers will struggle to survive this year. A lack of team spirit together with hierarchical dysfunctionalities, brinksmanship management style and psychopathic ownership does not augur well.
But, our suspicion is that there is an institutional issue with Eggert Magnusson and/or Alan Curbishley at play here.
Last season, West Ham received very favourable officiating both in the league and in their progression to the FA Cup Final. Such biases continued in 2006/07 until mid-December when Curbishley was brought in. Apart from Dowd's myopia in Curbishley's first game in charge, the referees have turned against West Ham big style. The Hammers have had their degree of favouritism slashed from joint best in the Premiership to, by some distance, the least favoured since mid-December.
There is much that never reached the media about Curbishley's departure from Charlton at the end of last season. As we have intimated previously, our legal people have suggested we avoid discussing the scenario on this blog.
It would be our guesstimation that it is Curbishley that is being targeted as a hidden agenda punishment for whatever it is that allegedly went on leading to his resignation at Charlton.
The combination of Magnusson (who hails from the no holds barred world of capitalism that arose in Russia after Glasnost), Curbishley and Day, a structure that not only leaks stories like a sieve, but also both encourages xenophobic/racist cliques and abusive gambling, suggests that the Hammers will struggle to survive this year. A lack of team spirit together with hierarchical dysfunctionalities, brinksmanship management style and psychopathic ownership does not augur well.
Sunday, 4 March 2007
How Has Ferguson Got Away With This One?
I wanted to be on United for the Liverpool game but the choice of Atkinson to officiate was a concern as the sending off of Scholes and the failure to give the Mancs a certain penalty proved. O'Shea's winner was still one of those timeless moments though...
With Foy in charge and Wenger on the warpath, Arsenal were always going to get a decision at some point of Saturday's game against Reading and Gilberto's penalty conversion for the foul on Clichy fitted the bill nicely. A good earner...
The rumour around the markets is that Portsmouth messed up a gamble in the Chelsea game although, inevitably, we're hearing several different market myths. There was certainly some interesting late disinformational money around and it was Redknapp's 60th.
Markets for all Portsmouth matches have to be analysed as entirely separate one-off events - there have been some events this season where there has been conflicting motivations within the club, for example. Sometimes, there simply isn't an analytical solution although our collective trading intuitions usually solve the market. Trading Portsmouth football matches is identical on an analytical level to my historical work addressing those 7 runner flat races where the family of Barry Hills "controlled" three of the horses.
Elsewhere, there is already an end of season feel to some of the games as the north east derby and Fulham versus Villa's agreed draws showed; Watford's lack of physical fitness was again their undoing; Man City's fans were dire although Howard Webb avoided sending off any Black players (he did deny Folan a penalty, however); Riley robbed Sheffield United this week and he is fast becoming a major liability in the market place.
You have to be quite selective to ensure choosing a competitive match in the English Premiership nowadays. If you don't know what's going on, your chances are roughly 50/50...
With Foy in charge and Wenger on the warpath, Arsenal were always going to get a decision at some point of Saturday's game against Reading and Gilberto's penalty conversion for the foul on Clichy fitted the bill nicely. A good earner...
The rumour around the markets is that Portsmouth messed up a gamble in the Chelsea game although, inevitably, we're hearing several different market myths. There was certainly some interesting late disinformational money around and it was Redknapp's 60th.
Markets for all Portsmouth matches have to be analysed as entirely separate one-off events - there have been some events this season where there has been conflicting motivations within the club, for example. Sometimes, there simply isn't an analytical solution although our collective trading intuitions usually solve the market. Trading Portsmouth football matches is identical on an analytical level to my historical work addressing those 7 runner flat races where the family of Barry Hills "controlled" three of the horses.
Elsewhere, there is already an end of season feel to some of the games as the north east derby and Fulham versus Villa's agreed draws showed; Watford's lack of physical fitness was again their undoing; Man City's fans were dire although Howard Webb avoided sending off any Black players (he did deny Folan a penalty, however); Riley robbed Sheffield United this week and he is fast becoming a major liability in the market place.
You have to be quite selective to ensure choosing a competitive match in the English Premiership nowadays. If you don't know what's going on, your chances are roughly 50/50...
Thursday, 1 March 2007
PGMOB Defeat Arsenal Again
Mugged by Poll last night and by Webb (and his assistants) on Sunday and robbed of 15 points through refereeing decisions in the Premiership this season (see numerous previous posts detailed below), Arsène Wenger is correct to be reaching the end of his tether. To quote:
"I don't agree with the report of the linesman because, for me, he lies. Adebayor didn't punch anybody. So when the linesman says he punches someone, he lies."
"We could make a good tape [of similar incidents] since the beginning of the season. I can point out plenty of other games too when we have had bad luck like this. Tonight we had two reasonable claims and in the first game [against Blackburn] we had one that was 100 per cent. We shouldn't even be here at Ewood Park because it was so clear in the first game. I'm not a referee. But I just want the right decisions to be made, whether it's us or somebody else".
Couldn't agree more...
As we have stated historically, Arsenal are being directly targeted on a range of levels this season. We have no particular affinity with the Londoners, we merely observe market realities.
So what is the hidden agenda? Let's look at what Arsenal represent plus recent breakpoints and I'll leave it up to you to determine which of these factors play a part.
* Arsenal represent a local competitor to Abramovich's Chelsea.
* Arsenal are not controlled by nor closely linked to bookmakers and market makers.
* We have absolutely no evidence that Arsenal trade on their own events - this is unusual in the Premiership.
* The Arsenal team is a global village of footballing talent. The younger players now reaching their prime offer the Gooners the prospect of a window of considerable silverware ahead. All without having to buy success.
* By some distance, Arsène Wenger is the most strategically adept manager in the English game.
* David Dein is current bossman at both Arsenal and the G14(18).
* The Emirates Stadium is the largest club stadium in the capital.
* Arsenal reached the Champions League Final prior to the blossoming of the products of the youth system.
One other matter of concern is related to PGMOB official Howard Webb. The man appears, subconsciously or not, to have developed a racial element to his match officiating. Webb has sent off 8 players this season - 7 are Black players and the other is Senderos. In fact, one needs to go back to January 2006 to find the last occasion where Webb dismissed a white English player. The selective sendings off after the Chelsea v Arsenal mêlée emphasise this apparent racism. Why wasn't white English Lampard dismissed when he was evidently a key perpetrator?
Below are some of the posts relating to the manipulation of Arsenal games against their interest since we started this blog.
http://footballisfixed.blogspot.com/2006/12/breaking-news.html
http://footballisfixed.blogspot.com/2007/01/six-three-to-arsenal.html
http://footballisfixed.blogspot.com/2007/01/non-gooner-london-bias.html
http://footballisfixed.blogspot.com/2007/01/dont-criticise-refs-and-other.html
http://footballisfixed.blogspot.com/2007/01/weekend-premiership-round-up.html
http://footballisfixed.blogspot.com/2007/02/riley-wiley-make-bookmakers-smiley.html
http://footballisfixed.blogspot.com/2007/02/magic-of-fa-cup-revisited.html
"I don't agree with the report of the linesman because, for me, he lies. Adebayor didn't punch anybody. So when the linesman says he punches someone, he lies."
"We could make a good tape [of similar incidents] since the beginning of the season. I can point out plenty of other games too when we have had bad luck like this. Tonight we had two reasonable claims and in the first game [against Blackburn] we had one that was 100 per cent. We shouldn't even be here at Ewood Park because it was so clear in the first game. I'm not a referee. But I just want the right decisions to be made, whether it's us or somebody else".
Couldn't agree more...
As we have stated historically, Arsenal are being directly targeted on a range of levels this season. We have no particular affinity with the Londoners, we merely observe market realities.
So what is the hidden agenda? Let's look at what Arsenal represent plus recent breakpoints and I'll leave it up to you to determine which of these factors play a part.
* Arsenal represent a local competitor to Abramovich's Chelsea.
* Arsenal are not controlled by nor closely linked to bookmakers and market makers.
* We have absolutely no evidence that Arsenal trade on their own events - this is unusual in the Premiership.
* The Arsenal team is a global village of footballing talent. The younger players now reaching their prime offer the Gooners the prospect of a window of considerable silverware ahead. All without having to buy success.
* By some distance, Arsène Wenger is the most strategically adept manager in the English game.
* David Dein is current bossman at both Arsenal and the G14(18).
* The Emirates Stadium is the largest club stadium in the capital.
* Arsenal reached the Champions League Final prior to the blossoming of the products of the youth system.
One other matter of concern is related to PGMOB official Howard Webb. The man appears, subconsciously or not, to have developed a racial element to his match officiating. Webb has sent off 8 players this season - 7 are Black players and the other is Senderos. In fact, one needs to go back to January 2006 to find the last occasion where Webb dismissed a white English player. The selective sendings off after the Chelsea v Arsenal mêlée emphasise this apparent racism. Why wasn't white English Lampard dismissed when he was evidently a key perpetrator?
Below are some of the posts relating to the manipulation of Arsenal games against their interest since we started this blog.
http://footballisfixed.blogspot.com/2006/12/breaking-news.html
http://footballisfixed.blogspot.com/2007/01/six-three-to-arsenal.html
http://footballisfixed.blogspot.com/2007/01/non-gooner-london-bias.html
http://footballisfixed.blogspot.com/2007/01/dont-criticise-refs-and-other.html
http://footballisfixed.blogspot.com/2007/01/weekend-premiership-round-up.html
http://footballisfixed.blogspot.com/2007/02/riley-wiley-make-bookmakers-smiley.html
http://footballisfixed.blogspot.com/2007/02/magic-of-fa-cup-revisited.html
There's Only One Michael Owen! If Only...
So the Michael Owen marketing bandwagon has hit the road running...The excitement at his potential return to action is matched only by the intrigue of Newcastle's claim for £6/7m from FIFA as compensation for Owen's World Cup collapse.
Oh, how we have missed Michael Owen...
We, as a Trading Team, have an issue with any professional footballer who chooses to spend his leisure time around the types of individuals that frequent casinos. We would not state that such a hobby guarantees corruption but, at the very least, it significantly increases the probabilities. Alongside our visual monitoring of such players and our analytical assessment of their performances, we access the common knowledge within the game through our array of contacts in the clubs. The conclusion - certain players/managers like to dabble in the markets either on their own behalf or on behalf of others. Regular readers will be aware that our Traders very closely focus on the corrupt players, managers and officials in the game.
Our prime issue with dodgy football people isn't the disruption of the betting markets (although some of the operators that are very careful with where they place their money can lead to some markets becoming indecipherable analytically) but the fact that people are paying through the nose to watch men who earn tens of thousands of pounds per week take an extra little earner on board while the fans chant their names... Scum!
Which isn't to suggest that Michael Owen is anything other than a devoted professional footballer and family man etc etc...
And, while I've got a few minutes in this hectic week, all this stuff about compensation for World Cup injuries... FIFA are offering Newcastle under a million which is markedly less than their claim for £6/7m. One aspect of Newcastle's strategy (ie greed) is indicated by the fact that the total FIFA fund for such eventualities is, by chance, £6.5m. And we'll have it all for Newcastle plc, please.
The clubs always moan about injuries on international duty but they never acknowledge the impact that the increased profile and exposure has on a players market value. A strategic transfer policy yields oodles of cash for the thinking manager around World Cup/Euro windows. The financial interaction is considerably more complex than the club chairmen and G14(18) would have you believe - FIFA/UEFA should charge the clubs for a percentage of any enhancement of player value through exposure at their competitions.
Oh, how we have missed Michael Owen...
We, as a Trading Team, have an issue with any professional footballer who chooses to spend his leisure time around the types of individuals that frequent casinos. We would not state that such a hobby guarantees corruption but, at the very least, it significantly increases the probabilities. Alongside our visual monitoring of such players and our analytical assessment of their performances, we access the common knowledge within the game through our array of contacts in the clubs. The conclusion - certain players/managers like to dabble in the markets either on their own behalf or on behalf of others. Regular readers will be aware that our Traders very closely focus on the corrupt players, managers and officials in the game.
Our prime issue with dodgy football people isn't the disruption of the betting markets (although some of the operators that are very careful with where they place their money can lead to some markets becoming indecipherable analytically) but the fact that people are paying through the nose to watch men who earn tens of thousands of pounds per week take an extra little earner on board while the fans chant their names... Scum!
Which isn't to suggest that Michael Owen is anything other than a devoted professional footballer and family man etc etc...
And, while I've got a few minutes in this hectic week, all this stuff about compensation for World Cup injuries... FIFA are offering Newcastle under a million which is markedly less than their claim for £6/7m. One aspect of Newcastle's strategy (ie greed) is indicated by the fact that the total FIFA fund for such eventualities is, by chance, £6.5m. And we'll have it all for Newcastle plc, please.
The clubs always moan about injuries on international duty but they never acknowledge the impact that the increased profile and exposure has on a players market value. A strategic transfer policy yields oodles of cash for the thinking manager around World Cup/Euro windows. The financial interaction is considerably more complex than the club chairmen and G14(18) would have you believe - FIFA/UEFA should charge the clubs for a percentage of any enhancement of player value through exposure at their competitions.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)