Betting Irregularities at Wimbledon

Tennis officials are investigating the possibility that a recent Wimbledon match-up was rigged.

Betting agencies said up to £300,000 ($750,281) of wagers were placed on Carlos Berlocq of Argentina, who is ranked 89th, to lose the match on Tuesday - just hours before his 6-1, 6-2, 6-2 defeat to Richard Bloomfield, who is ranked 170 places below him and only got into the draw as a wild card.

A big part of me wants to doubt the possibility that these guys would be that stupid. If I'm fixing an athletic contest, I would make damn sure that people got a decent show. Have the loser take a set or two, or at the very least win more than a combined five games. But this one comes across like prizefighter dive 30 seconds into a fight, on a punch that replays show didn't even connect.

In truth, the fact that there was an expected level of betting on a show-down between the 89th and 259th ranked players means that either tennis is more popular than I had realized or gamblers are more desperate for things to bet on than I had realized. The fact that the betting levels were 30 times normal for this kind of match-up means that either the fix was in or this guy's Mom really, really thinks the world of him.

Wimbledon betting plunge investigated [Sydney Morning Herald]

Recent Entries:
· Lotto Max Numbers Net Jackpot Win For Two
· Much Ado About Mats Sundin and PokerStars.net
· Misaligned Fruit Smash Scratch Cards Could Void Winnings