Tennis Corruption Report Out Today

marc45

G.O.A.T.
includes re-organization of "professional" tennis

BBC:

Tennis match-fixing: Corruption review to be published on Wednesday

By Russell Fuller

BBC tennis correspondent
A long-awaited tennis corruption report is not expected to find that evidence of match-fixing has been suppressed.

The Independent Review Panel (IRP) was set up in January 2016 after a BBC and BuzzFeed News investigation uncovered suspected illegal betting.

The panel - which BBC Sport understands has cost close to £20m to fund - has interviewed more than 100 individuals from across the sport.

The report will be published on Wednesday.

Betting operators, gambling regulators, data supply companies and law enforcement agencies were also questioned as part of the review.

And although this interim report is not expected to uncover evidence of corruption at the elite level of the sport, the IRP is understood to have been at least exploring some radical ideas.

What are the difficulties?
One area of interest has been whether a player should automatically be suspended when a specified number of their matches attract suspicion.

This would be highly controversial, as a bookmaker or gambling regulator alerts the Tennis Integrity Unit (TIU), which was set up to police the sport, whenever they detect unusual betting patterns.

These can arise for many reasons - such as incorrect odd-setting or player injury - and are not on their own evidence of match-fixing.

The panel, chaired by Adam Lewis QC, is also said to have been investigating 'tanking' - the term used when a player, for whatever reason, fails to give the "best efforts" required by the rulebook.

Is tanking a straightforward offence?
Under current rules, both the umpire and supervisor have the power - though its rarely used - to penalise players points or even games, but it appears the IRP has been exploring whether this should be viewed as corruption, and therefore investigated by the TIU.

This is another area fraught with difficulty, as players may decide to reduce effort levels in one given set to conserve energy for later in the match.

And although it is an issue for spectators if a player withholds their best effort in a doubles match - perhaps because they have been knocked out of the singles and want to move on - should that be classed as corruption?

Nick Kyrgios is a recent example of someone who has been penalised by the existing rules.

The Australian was fined a total of $41,500 (£29,700) and suspended for three weeks by the ATP for "conduct contrary to the integrity of the game" at the 2016 Shanghai Masters.

At one point, Kyrgios hit a gentle serve across the net and walked to his chair before his opponent, Mischa Zverev, had even returned the ball.

What changes have already been made?
The TIU describes itself as an "operationally independent organisation" and is funded by the International Tennis Federation (ITF), the ATP, the WTA and the four Grand Slams.

The IRP has been examining the body's level of independence, including whether the unit should distance itself physically from the ITF, which is based on the same site in Roehampton, south west London.

The IRP might be more likely to propose that the heads of integrity at the various governing bodies no longer have the power to decide whether an anti-corruption investigation should proceed to a full hearing.

It may also recommend that anti-doping and anti-corruption are policed by one expanded organisation in future.

The TIU already looks very different to how it did when this review was commissioned two and a quarter years ago. The budget has increased by about 25% per year and the staff doubled in size from five to 10 in 2016 alone - it now stands at 17.

Since March 2017, players have been required to complete an online anti-corruption training module every two years, and the unit has started publishing an annual review, as well as quarterly updates on the number of match alerts it receives.

The TIU has also recently gained access to a fraud detection system run by sports data specialists Sportradar AG. A deal struck by the ITF gives the TIU another way to monitor betting patterns across more than 50,000 ITF Pro Circuit matches.

What could be done to stop match-fixing?
The IRP's thoughts on tennis' relationship to gambling will be fascinating.

The governing body already had a lucrative, long-term agreement with Sportradar, which allows the Switzerland-based company to act as the official and exclusive worldwide distributor of the ITF's data.

It argues this enhances integrity by reducing the "unauthorised collection and dissemination of official or erroneous data" - but it has also led to a huge increase in betting on entry-level tournaments in recent years.

Putting a stop to all betting on matches on the Futures Tour could, in theory, eradicate the problem of match-fixing. But even if this were deemed possible, a black market would very likely spring up in its place.

Instead, the ITF is pinning its hopes on the introduction of a new global Transition Tour in 2019.

This aims to offer a pathway into professional tennis, while radically reducing the number of professional players at the same time.

The ITF estimates there are 14,000 players trying to make a living from the sport, half of whom do not make any money at all. The aim in future is to have a professional group of no more than 750 men and 750 women.

This interim report had been expected in the first quarter of 2017, but after 27 months of work involving great expense, its conclusions remain eagerly anticipated - especially as the sport's governing bodies have pledged to "implement and fund" all of the IRP's recommendations.

.........

report out, NYT article below
 
Last edited:

marc45

G.O.A.T.
"The aim in future is to have a professional group of no more than 750 men and 750 women."


so, 14,000 people trying to make a living at tennis, only half make any money

and as we keep dividing down we know how few really make a nice one...tough sport, we enjoy it at a distance more I suppose
 

marc45

G.O.A.T.
NYT:

Review Finds ‘Tsunami’ of Fixed Matches in Lower Levels of Tennis


Professional tennis has created an environment ripe for corruption at the sport’s lowest levels and needs reform to combat the problem, an independent task force reported on Wednesday, after a two-year investigation.

The review panel, made up of three prominent lawyers, found that there was a “tsunami” of fixed matches at the lower levels of the game, but that there was no conspiracy or collusion among the sport’s governing bodies to cover it up.

Scarred by reports of match fixing, tennis leaders created the panel in January 2016 and announced they would implement all of its recommendations.

The panel interviewed more than 200 tennis stakeholders and surveyed more than 3,200 players for its interim report, which cost more than $20 million to compile. The final report will be released in the fall after the panel receives feedback from tennis officials.

The panel recommended that the International Tennis Federation end its ongoing data-rights deal with the Swiss company Sportradar, at least as it concerns the lowest tiers of professional tennis. The five-year, $70 million agreement, which was signed in 2015, involves I.T.F. events ranging from the Davis Cup, a men’s team tennis event, to Futures tournaments, the lowest rung on the professional tennis ladder. The expansion of live data rights to those lowest, most vulnerable levels of competition has incubated corruption, the report said, adding that the risks of the deal were not adequately considered.

“Whilst these deals have generated considerable funds for the sport, they have also greatly expanded the available markets for betting on the lowest levels of professional tennis,” the panel said. “The I.T.F. did not appropriately assess the potential adverse effects of these agreements before entering into them.”

The dissolution of that deal was the first and most direct of the 12 recommendations contained in the report.

“Discontinuing the sale of official data at these lowest levels of tennis is a necessary, pragmatic and effective approach to containing betting-related breaches of integrity,” the report concluded.

The panel also recommended empowering the Tennis Integrity Unit, established in 2008 to investigate betting-related corruption, to further restrict data sales at tournaments at higher levels where systems were “insufficient to protect players from would-be corrupters.”

David Haggerty, president of the I.T.F., has said that the Sportradar deal is a symbiotic arrangement that helps increase oversight of betting patterns in the sport. He has argued that it is as much in the betting companies’ interest to eliminate corruption as it is in tennis’s interest.

But the review panel disagreed, citing the increased volume of betting on the lower levels of the sport, which has proved to be the most vulnerable to match fixing. It also suggested that the sport at large should help compensate the I.T.F. for the lost revenue if it does follow the panel’s recommendation and end the Sportradar deal.

The panel insisted that the lucrative nature of the data sales should not be used as justification to continue the practice, saying, “the resolution of significant integrity concerns cannot be driven by the question of financial return — even when much of it is redistributed to the sport.”

The panel also recommended eliminating sponsorships from betting companies.

The report said the Tennis Integrity Unit should be reorganized to give it independent oversight, apart from the sport’s governing bodies: the ATP, the WTA, the I.T.F. and the four Grand Slam tournaments.

A statement released on behalf of those governing bodies said, “We confirm our agreement in principle with the package of measures and recommendations.”

The panel called for the Tennis Integrity Unit to have greater transparency in its proceedings and better cooperation with law enforcement. It also criticized the T.I.U. for lacking personnel with expertise in betting or tennis; many employees of the integrity unit are former police officers.

The panel also recommended wider training for players, better security around players at tournaments, and methods to prevent online abuse. There were also recommendations to reform the pathway players take through the lower tiers of tennis to shore up “incentive problems” that exist when players earning little prize money are vulnerable to selling matches. Several reforms for the lowest levels of the sport are already set to be implemented in the 2019 season.

In the two years since the panel was created, the T.I.U. has already increased its staff and its budget, and has begun regularly releasing information about its activities in an effort to be more transparent.
 

Aussie Darcy

Bionic Poster
Wish they would name and shame those they knew who fixed matches. Been quite a while since a player was outed for such behaviour (Oliver Anderson or those Italian guys are the ones that come to mind). I’m sure there’s people in the the top 300 who do or have done. The BBC’s story claimed even slam champions had, seems tennis wants to protect its image though and keep quiet.
 

sredna42

Hall of Fame
i-am-jacks-complete-lack-of-surprise.gif


They need to really scrutinize the umpires IMO. Some of them are undoubtedly corrupt.
 

Aussie Darcy

Bionic Poster
Wish they would name and shame those they knew who fixed matches. Been quite a while since a player was outed for such behaviour (Oliver Anderson or those Italian guys are the ones that come to mind). I’m sure there’s people in the the top 300 who do or have done. The BBC’s story claimed even slam champions had, seems tennis wants to protect its image though and keep quiet.

I remember this from the investigation:

One of these matches had been flagged to the Tennis Integrity Unit by the Scotland Yard detectives in 2008, after they noted that a suspicious group of Russian betting accounts had made more than £100,000 betting on this player to lose. His name had been on the list of 28 players they advised the new unit to investigate along with Bracciali and Starace.
They match they are refereing to is the infamous and dodgy match between Davydenko and Arguello where Davydenko won the first set yet the low ranked Arguello was the heavy betting favourite to win the match against the former #3 which made no sense. Davydenko went on to lose the 2nd set and retire in the 3rd. Their names were on the list along with the two Italians. All other names are unknown though.
 

Poisoned Slice

Bionic Poster
3 unknowns have been found placing illegal bets and the other 2000 will still not be found out. Up next on this historic review.
 
Top