Sounds like a no doubter according to those who watched the match, saying Berlocq is a terrible actor. Huge money came in on Bloomfield, pushing him from -200 to supposedly -1000? I didn't track this match live or the odds, but that's nuts. From the sounds of it, this one may have been too obvious and some punishment might be in the near future.
-
-
When I first saw the line, Bloomfield was at -250 and Berlocq was at +230. I've never heard of Bloomfield so I was kind of surprised he was the favorite. I can't believe he would be
-1000. I can't even believe this match would be of any interest even to the avid tennis fan. These two guys are about as famous as you and I. No offense to Argentines, but I've heard that many Argentinian athletes are on the take and/or controlled by criminal elements. When Nalbandian lost badly to Ljubicic in Miami earlier this year, I really felt that David tanked that match.Comment -
Check the Betfair forum. There was over 300k placed on Bloomfield in a short amount of time, lol. A definite fix according to some people that I respect.Comment -
Idiot is going to get busted. The following is from SI/CNN:
Officials investigate betting plunge
WIMBLEDON, England (AP) -- Tennis officials were investigating reports Wednesday of irregular betting activity surrounding a first-round match at Wimbledon between a British player and a higher-ranked opponent who lost in straight sets.
British media said up to $546,000 of wagers were placed on No. 89 Carlos Berlocq of Argentina to lose the match Tuesday. He lost 6-1, 6-2, 6-2 to Richard Bloomfield, who is ranked 170 places below him and got into the draw as a wild card.
"In the Grand Slams, we have an agreement with them (betting agencies) to give us confidential information if unusual betting patterns take place," Grand Slam administrator Bill Babcock told The Associated Press. "It may be nothing or it may be something.
"Our rules at Grand Slams are that players cannot bet. We receive information and we have no more comment to make, unless there is something further in the way of a player offense."
London media said the bets on the match were about 30 times more than had been placed on similar British players and foreign opponents. The betting activity led online gambling company Betfair to slash the odds on Bloomfield winning the match from 1-2 to 1-10.
Betfair said it alerted the International Tennis Federation and Britain's Lawn Tennis Association to the unusual betting pattern.
"We contacted the ITF Grand Slam Committee and the LTA to make them aware of betting patterns before the match," Betfair spokesman Tony Calvin said.
"We have information-sharing agreements with both these bodies. Although the amounts involved were not unusual, the betting patterns were. Bloomfield was backed from an opening 1-2 on Betfair to a low of 1-10 pre-match, and this led us to contact the ITF."
Babcock would not confirm he had received information from bookmakers.
"We will not comment on information we receive unless there is something to report," he said. "Maybe just somebody was betting for a good reason."
The 23-year-old Bloomfield, who was knocked out in the first round at Wimbledon in 2003 and 2004, had never won a match on the main ATP Tour.
Berlocq, 23, who is more successful on clay courts than grass, was making his first appearance at Wimbledon. He told reporters after the match that he picked up a foot injury prior to last month's French Open, where he lost in the first round in straight sets to Ivan Ljubicic.
Bloomfield said he felt he had a good chance to win Tuesday because he plays a serve-and-volley game and Berlocq is primarily a baseliner.
Asked whether he had been confident enough to have bet on himself, he replied: "Definitely not, no. I'm not that kind of person. I'd actually hardly had a bet in my life. Don't know how to play poker. I'm not into that stuff."
Bloomfield was scheduled to play Germany's Tommy Haas on Wednesday in the second round.
What do you think??? All we know that Berlocq is crap on grass and against a grass specialist (but very low ranked) his chances was very low. I think that the betting agencies commited a huge error considering Berlocq as the favourite only for his highest rank without considering that he only can play on clay.Comment -
Interesting article. I didn't watch the match so I cannot really comment on whether or not Berlocq did tank the match. Bloomfield was the favorite when I first saw the moneyline and he won so I cannot really get too worked up about the outcome of this match. Anybody who would put money on these two nobodies is a little peculiar in my book.Comment -
Berlocq/Bloomfield match fixed?
ok owned, lets here your thoughts on this one.
I posted this over ten hours ago budWIMBLEDON, England (AP) -- Tennis officials were investigating reports Wednesday of irregular betting activity surrounding a first-round match at Wimbledon between a British player and a higher-ranked opponent who lost in straight sets.
British media said up to $546,000 of wagers were placed on No. 89 Carlos Berlocq of Argentina to lose the match Tuesday. He lost 6-1, 6-2, 6-2 to Richard Bloomfield, who is ranked 170 places below him and got into the draw as a wild card.
In the Grand Slams, we have an agreement with them (betting agencies) to give us confidential information if unusual betting patterns take place," Grand Slam administrator Bill Babcock told The Associated Press. "It may be nothing or it may be something.
"Our rules at Grand Slams are that players cannot bet. We receive information and we have no more comment to make, unless there is something further in the way of a player offense."
London media said the bets on the match were about 30 times more than had been placed on similar British players and foreign opponents. The betting activity led online gambling company Betfair to slash the odds on Bloomfield winning the match from 1-2 to 1-10.
Betfair said it alerted the International Tennis Federation and Britain's Lawn Tennis Association to the unusual betting pattern.
"We contacted the ITF Grand Slam Committee and the LTA to make them aware of betting patterns before the match," Betfair spokesman Tony Calvin said.
"We have information-sharing agreements with both these bodies. Although the amounts involved were not unusual, the betting patterns were. Bloomfield was backed from an opening 1-2 on Betfair to a low of 1-10 pre-match, and this led us to contact the ITF."
Babcock would not confirm he had received information from bookmakers.
"We will not comment on information we receive unless there is something to report," he said. "Maybe just somebody was betting for a good reason."
The 23-year-old Bloomfield, who was knocked out in the first round at Wimbledon in 2003 and 2004, had never won a match on the main ATP Tour.
Berlocq, 23, who is more successful on clay courts than grass, was making his first appearance at Wimbledon. He told reporters after the match that he picked up a foot injury prior to last month's French Open, where he lost in the first round in straight sets to Ivan Ljubicic.
Bloomfield said he felt he had a good chance to win Tuesday because he plays a serve-and-volley game and Berlocq is primarily a baseliner.
Asked whether he had been confident enough to have bet on himself, he replied: "Definitely not, no. I'm not that kind of person. I'd actually hardly had a bet in my life. Don't know how to play poker. I'm not into that stuff."
Bloomfield was scheduled to play Germany's Tommy Haas on Wednesday in the second round.
oops... i must have missed it
Comment -
Wimbledon betting plunge investigated, inside information?
Wimbledon betting plunge investigated
Email Print Normal font Large font June 29, 2006 - 1:44PM
Advertisement
AdvertisementTennis officials were looking into unusual betting activity surrounding a first-round match at Wimbledon between a British player and a higher-ranked opponent who lost in straight sets.
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.
"In the Grand Slams, we have an agreement with them (betting agencies) to give us confidential information if unusual betting patterns take place," Grand Slam administrator Bill Babcock told The Associated Press.
"It may be nothing or it may be something."
"Our rules at Grand Slams are that players cannot bet," he added.
"We receive information and we have no more comment to make, unless there is something further in the way of a player offence."
London media said the bets on the match were about 30 times more than had been placed on similar British players and foreign opponents.
The betting activity led online gambling company Betfair to slash the odds on Bloomfield winning the match from 1-2 to 1-10.
Betfair said it alerted the International Tennis Federation and Britain's Lawn Tennis Association to the unusual betting pattern.
"We contacted the ITF Grand Slam Committee and the LTA to make them aware of betting patterns before the match," Betfair spokesman Tony Calvin said.
"We have information-sharing agreements with both these bodies. Although the amounts involved were not unusual, the betting patterns were. Bloomfield was backed from an opening 1-2 on Betfair to a low of 1-10 pre-match, and this led us to contact the ITF."
Babcock would not confirm he had received information from bookmakers.
"We will not comment on information we receive unless there is something to report," he said.
"Maybe just somebody was betting for a good reason."
Graham Sharpe of William Hill bookmakers said the betting plunge seemed unusual.
"Our betting patterns on Bloomfield went from 2-5 to 1-7," said Sharpe.
"We're used to seeing support for British players to win at Wimbledon, but with these kind of odds, you'd expect the player to win would be someone like Roger Federer.
"If a bookmaker is only taking money on one side of a two-player sport, you know someone probably knows more than you do."
The 23-year-old Bloomfield, who was knocked out in the first round at Wimbledon in 2003 and 2004, had never won a match on the main ATP Tour.
Berlocq, 23, who is more successful on clay courts than grass, was making his first appearance at Wimbledon. He told reporters after the match that he picked up a foot injury prior to last month's French Open, where he lost in the first round in straight sets to Ivan Ljubicic.
Bloomfield dropped his second-round match Wednesday to Germany's Tommy Haas, losing 6-3, 6-4, 7-6 (7-4).
He said he had not been contacted by the tournament or Grand Slam officials.
"To be honest, other than the fact I played in a match against him (Berlocq), I don't think it has anything to with me," Bloomfield said.
"I didn't see any indication during the match of anything unusual. It seemed to me to be a normal match. It's a bit disappointing really, to win my first match at Wimbledon and to have this happen."
AP
Comment -
Ok, I think this is the forth time this has been posted. Do we need to use the search feature first before posting articles?
Merging again.
Comment -
I wonder if anyone who played big money on Bloomfield will have any difficulties getting their cash out! Some syndicate is sweating bullets right about now.Comment -
Berlocq with one match on grass before this, losing 0-6 0-2 ret against fukarek in 2003. Other than that, Bloomfield took set from Dancevic and Tipsarevic (decent grasscourters) in the weeks before Wimbledon. Not sure its something special with this result.Comment -
The result is only nominally special. The amount of action that was expecting the result was especially special.Comment -
Why was the amount so special? Ok it was huge, but it has happened before huge amounts has been traded on 1st/2nd round matches of less interest than with big gunners like Roddick, Federer, Nadal. The value in these rounds is in games where there are unknown players.Comment -
London media said the bets on the match were about 30 times more than had been placed on similar British players and foreign opponents. The betting activity led online gambling company Betfair to slash the odds on Bloomfield winning the match from 1-2 to 1-10.Originally posted by diamond
This is not just standard value play.Comment -
I think the market came out totally wrong.
Additionally in the past, media has a tendency to blow up these rumours of "fixed" events, its simply good news for them to sell.
But dont get me wrong, fixed matches DO happen. I have at least two players that have told me on MSN it does. The most notorius players involved according to media (not my sources!), is Labadze, Kafelnikov and some more. Especially Labadze has been under investigation by ATP numerous times, without being banned. The difference before now and before, is that ATP work closer with betting exchanges.Comment -
In the words of John Lennon, "Most peculiar, mama."Comment
