The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Tue Apr 07, 2009, 02:40pm
Adam's Avatar
Keeper of the HAMMER
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: MST
Posts: 27,190
There are two issues of concern when it comes to athletes, coaches, and officials gambling.

1. Betting on the sport in which they participate. They would have to be Pete Rose stupid in order to do this, and it's easier to regulate against.

2. Betting too much money and getting into gambling debt. This is a much bigger and more realistic fear. It's the kind of thing that leads to point shaving and Tim Donaghy scandals. It's also harder to regulate against without a zero-tolerance policy.
__________________
Sprinkles are for winners.
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Tue Apr 07, 2009, 04:15pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: NE Ohio
Posts: 7,620
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snaqwells View Post
They would have to be Pete Rose stupid in order to do this....
__________________
Cheers,
mb
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Tue Apr 14, 2009, 03:09am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 15,029
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snaqwells View Post
There are two issues of concern when it comes to athletes, coaches, and officials gambling.

1. Betting on the sport in which they participate. They would have to be Pete Rose stupid in order to do this, and it's easier to regulate against.

2. Betting too much money and getting into gambling debt. This is a much bigger and more realistic fear. It's the kind of thing that leads to point shaving and Tim Donaghy scandals. It's also harder to regulate against without a zero-tolerance policy.
As long as the person is not participating in THAT PARTICULAR GAME, then what difference does it make?

To use the Pete Rose example, as long as he didn't bet on games involving the Reds, then what is the problem? He doesn't have any more control over such a contest than some random guy in Vegas, right?
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Tue Apr 14, 2009, 10:30am
9/11 - Never Forget
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 5,642
Send a message via Yahoo to grunewar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nevadaref View Post
As long as the person is not participating in THAT PARTICULAR GAME, then what difference does it make?

To use the Pete Rose example, as long as he didn't bet on games involving the Reds, then what is the problem? He doesn't have any more control over such a contest than some random guy in Vegas, right?
Nevada - I agree in principle, especially now. However, "back in the day" before the internet, ESPN, etc., a person with insider knowledge over who was injured or had a death in the family and would not play, may certainly have an advantage on the spread, over and under, or runs scored, etc....just sayin.

PS - I'm no Pete Rose fan. Go O's! Boo Big Red Machine!
__________________
There was the person who sent ten puns to friends, with the hope that at least one of the puns would make them laugh. No pun in ten did.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Stern's gambling comments... Splute Basketball 5 Fri Oct 26, 2007 01:49pm
Legally leaving the court.... ronny mulkey Basketball 16 Sat Dec 17, 2005 03:16pm
FP - Runners advance legally? DaNewGuy Softball 3 Tue Sep 06, 2005 11:28am
Gambling Study Timing Mark Dexter Basketball 13 Wed Apr 12, 2000 01:51pm
Gambling Bart Tyson Basketball 6 Fri Apr 07, 2000 02:41pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:04am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1