Gambling is one of the most popular forms of entertainment, with millions betting on sports every year. Despite a long history, there’s still debate over who can legally control gambling and how much power should be given to regulators.
The “sports gambling scandals” is the term for when people cheat in sports. The person who finds and catches cheaters is called a “Match Official.”
DURING A RECENT COLLEGE FOOTBALL BOWLS, analysts in Las Vegas charged with looking for suspicious behavior in sports betting noted a sudden, substantial shift in the line for one of the next day’s games. The odds for a club that had been a strong favorite were fast dwindling, and money was pouring into the game.
“We saw tens of millions of dollars pour in overnight,” said Matthew Holt, head of U.S. Integrity, a 14-person private organization that monitors betting lines and reports suspicious conduct on behalf of sportsbooks, institutions, leagues, conferences, and states.
The following morning, word came that numerous key players on the favorite side, including several starters, would be unable to participate due to COVID-19 procedures. According to Holt, further inquiry revealed that an equipment manager had disclosed the information to gamblers the day before, and their subsequent bets had shifted the line.
Holt would not reveal the school’s name. Because of confidentiality agreements between the persons involved and U.S. Integrity, no criminal charges were filed, and the details were never made public. However, according to Holt, the equipment manager was dismissed as a consequence of the incident.
In that one example, the system seemed to work. However, no one knows how many instances go unnoticed or how many are reported but never followed up on.
Since dozens of states made sports betting legal, it has grown into a multibillion-dollar industry in only four years, but no one institution is responsible for ensuring that the gambling is fair. The sports business successfully fought against legislation that would set federal standards or create a national organization for “integrity monitoring,” which involves detecting match-fixing, insider information leaks, athlete exploitation, and corrupt authorities.
So, on an ad hoc basis, U.S. Integrity and a few other private organizations and NGOs are seeking to fill the void. They must traverse a patchwork of contradictory legislation among states in the absence of federal standards. They must depend on their customers or law enforcement to track out and punish cheats in the absence of enforcement authorities. When integrity monitors discover evidence of manipulation, it’s unclear where that information goes and if it’s utilized to punish bad actors, making it hard for the public to know how often instances are suspected, investigated, or prosecuted.
Assistant professor John Holden of Oklahoma State University, who has published studies on match-fixing and other game manipulation as well as sports gaming legislation, thinks integrity monitors capture some but not all low-level match-fixing. And, according to Holden, a system that depends on private industry to evaluate gambling data rather than government enforcement has little hope of combating the sophisticated form of cheating that occurs often outside the United States.
“There are certain parts of sports betting that would benefit from federal government efficiency,” Holden said. “I believe it is fair to establish a federal organization to oversee market integrity and to undertake investigations across jurisdictions.”
While he said that he did not believe there was an issue, “”I think it’s absurd that we play — I don’t know — 4,000 college basketball games, and none of them would be manipulated,” he continued, referring to the current “epidemic of match-fixing.” I simply don’t believe it’s possible.”
Legalized betting, according to Holden, comes with the assumption that sports would be played “by a set of rules.”
“When it doesn’t,” he said, “they’re at a disadvantage because they’re missing a vital piece of knowledge that someone else benefited from.”
Analysts at U.S. Integrity look through betting data and other sources of information to see what’s changing the lines and look for suspect activity. Courtesy Integrity in the United States of America
US INTEGRITY IS UNIQUE AMONG FOR-PROFIT INTEGRITY MONITORING SERVICES IN THE UNITED STATES IN THAT IT DOESN’T ENGAGE IN OTHER GAMBLING-RELATED ACTIVITIES. For example, Sportradar and Genius Sports provide monitoring services as well as data feeds to clients such as bookmakers. There’s also the International Betting Integrity Association, a non-profit established by dues-paying sportsbook members that shares suspicious behavior information and sends out notifications. FanDuel and DraftKings are two of its most popular partners in the United States.
To determine what’s affecting betting lines, Holt said analysts for U.S. Integrity, which has more than 100 clients, examine raw betting data, athlete performance data, and officiating trends, as well as social media feeds and other sources of information.
They’ll look for links between unusual wagering and possible anomalies in actions by athletes, officials, or others, as well as whether news about injuries or player status was made public before or after bets began changing, which could indicate whether information was leaked to bettors prematurely.
Every situation is different, but when analysts find questionable behavior, Holt said the business notifies the clients involved and determines whether the material has to be shared with state regulators or criminal enforcement following further inquiry with those agencies. He claims that U.S. Integrity sends out roughly 15 suspicious behavior notifications every month on average, and that the most common occurrences involve the exploitation of inside knowledge.
“People who have access to the players themselves are the most prevalent, since they are the first to learn about injuries. It’s equipment managers and trainers because one of them gets a phone saying, “Hey, don’t bother waking up at 5 a.m. to tape these ankles or do this.” He’s not going to play tonight,’ says the narrator “Alternatively, an equipment manager may be directed not to prepare an athlete’s equipment, according to Holt.
In these data sources, analysts might identify correlations and anomalies that indicate to suspect behaviour. They may also get information from their sportsbook customers on who is putting bets, where they are placing bets, and how they are placing bets, and if the situation merits, analysts will alert the club, league, or association.
However, not every US Integrity report leads to the identification of the source of questionable line movement. The corporation has no legal power to take legal action or seek any form of penalty, and it isn’t always sure what happens when it issues an alert to clients and regulators, who have access to phone records, emails, and the ability to force individuals to speak.
Clients often opt to settle an issue by firing an employee rather than filing criminal charges. “This is often the case because it prevents reputational injury,” said Scott Sadin, chief operating officer of US Integrity. “You want to keep these matters as private and discreet as possible.”
Holden is concerned about rumors moving in just one direction, particularly when it comes to league contracts.
Sportsbooks, according to Matt Fowler, director of integrity at the International Betting Integrity Association, are financially driven to report suspicious conduct. “If they’ve spent a lot of money in getting their lines correct, but then they’re a victim of corruption, they’ll be the ones who lose money,” he added. “A match-fixing scandal would have a major negative effect on the image of a sports league or team.”
However, according to Holt, president of US Integrity, depending on sportsbooks to report suspicious behavior may result in just a few incidents being reported, particularly when they include big leagues that are their business partners. “Some ninth-tier tennis or sub sport in some far-off nation in some far-off region,” he said, “since it doesn’t insult their business partners.” According to its own statistics, the International Betting Integrity Association issued 39 suspicious behavior notifications in the United States between 2017 and 2021, but none involving college or professional leagues of major sports.
Commissioner Gloria Nevarez of the West Coast League, whose conference is a U.S. Integrity customer, says she depends on the business to uncover officiating discrepancies. USA TODAY Sports/Kyle Terada
The West Coast Conference is one of U.S. Integrity’s customers. Commissioner Gloria Nevarez said she depends on the firm to discover abnormalities that may indicate tampering with game results, as well as to monitor officiating, which the league has primary power over.
“If you go into the history of the official, you seek for any type of relationship with a common bettor, whether it’s via geography, prior interactions, or increasing cash purchases of expensive products,” she said. “It’s sometimes simply a statistical outlier. There could be something more there at other times.”
According to Nevarez, one official who had worked conference games for many years began making strange calls that altered game point spreads. There was a history of deception between that officer and a bettor in this instance. Nevarez claimed she couldn’t reveal what happened to that official or what action the conference did since she wasn’t allowed to. The WCC, like other sports conferences, is a not-for-profit organization that is not subject to open records requests.
The industry and states successfully fought proposed federal legislation that would have enforced countrywide integrity monitoring requirements after the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act was overturned in 2018 to enable states to provide sports gambling, according to Oklahoma State’s Holden.
Senators Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) and Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) co-sponsored the bill, which would have, among other things, added extortion and blackmail to federal match-fixing laws and imposed penalties for betting using improperly acquired nonpublic information. A provision for a national sports wagering clearinghouse was also included in the plan, which would have kept track of sports betting data and questionable transactions and notified federal and state law authorities to suspicious patterns and anomalies. The measure was presented in the United States Senate in December 2018, however it was never passed out of the judiciary committee.
“Too many states had already built out their own regulatory frameworks,” Holden said in an email, “and threatening to dismantle these new regulatory models or cut into predicted state tax collections was not going to be a politically palatable move.” “Another thing that worked against the measure was that it attempted to be proactive. There was no genuine impetus (other than lobbying, I suppose), no crisis of integrity that pushed Congress to act — it was just the federal government getting into the weeds of a new business.”
According to a representative for Schumer’s office, the Senator still believes government monitoring of sports betting is necessary, but “without a Republican co-sponsor,” he has no intentions to resubmit legislation.
Aside from federal rules against match-fixing, state regulations prohibiting illicit behavior differ, making integrity monitoring much more difficult, according to Holt. The restrictions are also inconsistently enforced; state gaming organizations, state and municipal police, universities, casinos, and sportsbooks are all involved in disciplining bad actors.
“Not only do we have to attempt to detect all of these things against individuals who are incredibly effective at disguising them, but we have to do it 50 different ways in 50 different jurisdictions,” Holt said, adding that he’d want to see the US adopt some national sports betting regulations.
In the instance of the dismissed equipment manager, Holt said the legislation in that state — which he wouldn’t identify to ESPN — wasn’t clear about whether such behavior was prohibited, and there wasn’t enough evidence to create a criminal case without demonstrating intent.
While some jurisdictions have laws prohibiting athletic-team personnel from participating in specific wagering activities, most states do not have sanctions for those who use their inside knowledge to make bets or sell it to someone else who is making bets. 23 states and Washington, D.C., according to statistics provided by LegalSportsReport, a website that follows sports betting trends and legislation, have rules prohibiting athletes from betting. According to the statistics, eight states and Washington, D.C. specifically prohibit the use of nonpublic information.
“What we don’t have are uniform regulations or legislation that state it’s against the law to exploit inside knowledge for the goal of earning from sports betting. In the financial services industry, we know that “According to Holt, insider trading rules apply. “I believe we’re still on first base in terms of enacting all of the necessary legislation and protections.”
According to U.S. Integrity president Matt Holt, equipment managers are a possible source of information leaks. Getty Images/Patrick Smith
To assist avoid potential for manipulation, states such as Tennessee implemented rules or restrictions. To prevent individuals from bribing or exploiting players, officials, or staff, some jurisdictions regulate or prohibit betting on particular teams or leagues or placing certain wagers — such as in-play bets in collegiate sports.
Sportsbooks must be members of an integrity monitoring group in Tennessee, according to Holt, which has better-than-average legislation. Sportsbooks must also notify the Tennessee Sports Wagering Advisory Council, which has regulatory jurisdiction but not law enforcement authority, within 24 hours of any questionable conduct. Sharing “nonpublic information for the purpose of gambling on a sports event” is also a criminal misdemeanor in Tennessee.
Mary Beth Thomas, the council’s executive director, formerly worked as the secretary of state’s general counsel, where she had some experience regulating daily fantasy sports in 2016. She claimed she’s spoken with local district attorneys and law enforcement officials to raise awareness about sports betting misconduct.
“‘Hey, you know, we’re here, we’re regulating this, regulating this business,’ just as a beginning point. And, if there is a problem that falls into law enforcement’s criminal scope, we’d want to be able to submit it to you,’ “she said
State laws could draw “brighter lines” to demarcate activity in which someone simply has an edge versus improper use of information that “calls into question… the fairness of the system,” according to Chris Cylke, senior vice president of government relations for the American Gaming Association, the trade group for the casino and sports betting industries.
Cylke believes the sector should consider tougher punishments for any wrongdoing. “We would always be open to discussing how to alter the rules or regulations to make it clearer and easier to prosecute someone who has done or is suspected of doing anything unlawful. Or, to put it another way, let’s define what’s good and what’s bad “he said
When Arizona allowed sports betting last year, Harold Wafer, an event wagering and fantasy sports administrator with the Arizona Department of Gaming, began his position as a regulator. Bob Gregorka and Muggsy Muniz, two of the industry’s biggest names, groomed him as a sportsbook operator. He learnt about “booking the faces” by working in the phone rooms and getting to know the clients and their wagering patterns by sight.
He, like many other regulators, depends on integrity monitors and sportsbooks, which are obligated by law to report suspicious conduct in certain circumstances — though he admits that this isn’t always clear. He claimed his own team doesn’t have the resources to conduct such job in an interview at the FanDuel sportsbook at the Footprint Center in Phoenix, home of the Suns and Mercury, where prospective bettors must pass through metal detectors and provide identification. When asked whether state laws might apply to criminal match fixing, he claimed he’d have to look into the “thick” gaming agreement legislation, raising his hand several inches off the table.
Wafer employs two agents, an analyst, and an auditor, and he claims that the Arizona industry has outgrown his team. To satisfy the present demand, he plans to hire an analyst and a few additional agents. He expects to require much more, given the Arizona Cardinals’ intentions for a stadium sportsbook and DraftKings’ ambitions to open a facility on a PGA Tour golf course in Scottsdale.
In a match-fixing case, Tim Donaghy, a former NBA referee, pled guilty in 2007 to conspiracy to commit wire fraud and sending wagering information over interstate commerce. Getty Images/Rick Maiman/Bloomberg
The FBI launched its Integrity in Sports and Gaming Program task force in 2018 in response to the expected expansion in state-by-state regulated gaming. The FBI has a lengthy history of catching match-fixers through enforcing laws against bribery, corruption, fraud, and interstate communications. Former NBA referee Tim Donaghy, who pled guilty in 2007 to conspiracy to commit wire fraud and distributing wagering information over interstate commerce in a match-fixing incident, was probed by the law enforcement agency.
According to two members of the FBI task force who talked to ESPN, the task force does not conduct its own research to find cheats, instead relying on tips, including those from commercial integrity monitoring organizations. They wouldn’t say how often they get tips, but when asked to name cases where the US Attorney’s Office took action, a spokeswoman mentioned two: one involving a man threatening athletes, but with no apparent attempt to influence betting or manipulate a game, and another involving Olympic doping issues.
“”We’re not in a position to comment on any patterns relating to our investigations,” FBI special agent Erin Omahen said, “but industry data indicates that gambling, both legal and criminal, has expanded substantially as a result of the epidemic.” There were a lot of people at home at that period, and there were stories of numerous brick-and-mortar casinos shutting.”
According to Sadin, U.S. Integrity’s chief operating officer, the business has reported at least three incidents to the FBI in the last several years. He added there had been “many additional” situations involving local cops, including athlete harassment on social media.
Sadin highlighted another instance in which a person was sacked from a job due to their sexual orientation “”We also considered there was enough proof to take things further,” she said of the “nefarious” betting activity. Because law enforcement did not believe there was a “smoking gun,” the property where we worked opted to close rather than pursue any further legal action “he said
ESPN CONTACTED REGULATORS IN ALL STATES THAT STARTED OFFERING SPORTS BETTING AFTER THE PROFESSIONAL AND AMATEURS SPORTS PROTECTION ACT WAS OVERTURNED IN MAY 2018 TO FIND OUT HOW MANY CASES THEY’VE HAD WITH SUSpicious Betting Behavior. There was no enforcement action or criminal charge brought by any of the 27 jurisdictions in response to an integrity issue raised with a U.S. sports event involving game manipulation or inappropriate use of inside knowledge.
That isn’t to say that a university, conference, sports organization, or professional league hasn’t imposed sanctions or punishments, as the NFL did in March when it banned Falcons wide receiver Calvin Ridley for at least the 2022 season after he was detected betting on professional football games.
Some state and tribal authorities did not reply to requests for a number of reports or enforcement actions, while others mentioned incidents that were being investigated, including one in Louisiana, but did not provide details. A spokeswoman from Indiana stated the state’s laws oblige it to keep the findings from its private integrity monitor secret, and advised contacting the monitoring firm, US Integrity, for further information. However, U.S. Integrity has confidentiality agreements in place with states, including Indiana, that preclude it from sharing information with Holt.
A spokeswoman for New Jersey, which was one of the first states to legalize sports betting in the summer of 2018, refused to furnish ESPN with any information. Inquiries should be sent to the International Betting Integrity Association instead. The spokesperson also stated that when information leads to public-facing action, the agency disseminates it, citing as an example a July 2020 ESPN story about potential match-fixing in Ukrainian table tennis, which was brought to regulators’ attention by an ESPN investigation published two months prior. “You have our answer,” the New Jersey Division of Gaming Enforcement representative said in an email when asked for further information on enforcement actions.
“I’m not sure why the gaming commissioners are so secretive,” Holden of Oklahoma State University remarked. “They refuse to answer almost all of my questions based on my own experience. They’re public entities, after all. Because you tell folks we’re catching people doing this, the assumption is that we’ll dissuade them. So, if anything, secrecy is a hindrance.”
Cylke, of the American Gaming Association, believes that increased openness would be beneficial. While instances may draw unfavorable attention, he believes “it’s beneficial from a deterrent aspect.”
This story was co-written by ESPN reporter David Purdum and researcher John Mastroberardino.
The “examples of gambling in sport” is a complicated process that has been going on for centuries. It’s not always easy to find and catch cheaters.
- athletes who got caught gambling
- biggest sports betting scandals
- point shaving scandals in sports
- nfl gambling scandal
- football betting scandal