You've got quite a few offshore books that say match is final if one match were completed. I'm looking at this fed match tomorrow you can get 34-1 odds down on zverev. Say you can get 500 bucks down on a few books, and probably way more at an exchange? Lets go conservative with 4 books 500 bucks each. 4*500*34= $68,000 (66,000 profit).
Pay off a kid $5,000 anonymously to shoot fed with a bb gun in 2nd set or run on court and go tanya harding on him or some stupid shit. Not hurt him, but make him be like fck I'm done playing this match and he retires. Or if you are real crafty get something in his water and pay off the right people. Who knows. My point is would books pay this bet if foul play was declared after the fact?
It just kind of occurred to me, that with money involved a guy like Fed really gotta be careful going up against a guy and getting 34-1 odds. I've been to some tennis matches. The security they have is laughable.
Everybody says these tennis players making hundreds of thousands to millions of dollars a year are throwing matches. Okay? Quite likely... But who's really got nothing to lose? A broke ass underage kid who can't really be sent to jail for life for breaking someones leg and an anonymous investor.
Tomorrow Zverev has 0 chance of beating federer unless fed gets injured or someone roofies him. So I sometimes wonder where they come up with 34-1 odds. I guess they figure it's 1/34 chance he gets injured or gets fcked with, and higher odds go the more chance he gets fcked with.
I think until offshore books get rid of this first set rule (at least for maybe over 10-1 odds), players at these odds should be a little worried unless the books set a precedence (like if guy gets injured by outside interference all bets are void). Tennis is very unique in their rules and ridiculous ML odds and one human on one human set up. It's literally a set up for something shady to happen. My personal opinion.
I know this is a fcked up thought, but it's reality. I think books need to get rid of 1st set rule before somebody fcked up out there comes up with this idea and does it.
Pay off a kid $5,000 anonymously to shoot fed with a bb gun in 2nd set or run on court and go tanya harding on him or some stupid shit. Not hurt him, but make him be like fck I'm done playing this match and he retires. Or if you are real crafty get something in his water and pay off the right people. Who knows. My point is would books pay this bet if foul play was declared after the fact?
It just kind of occurred to me, that with money involved a guy like Fed really gotta be careful going up against a guy and getting 34-1 odds. I've been to some tennis matches. The security they have is laughable.
Everybody says these tennis players making hundreds of thousands to millions of dollars a year are throwing matches. Okay? Quite likely... But who's really got nothing to lose? A broke ass underage kid who can't really be sent to jail for life for breaking someones leg and an anonymous investor.
Tomorrow Zverev has 0 chance of beating federer unless fed gets injured or someone roofies him. So I sometimes wonder where they come up with 34-1 odds. I guess they figure it's 1/34 chance he gets injured or gets fcked with, and higher odds go the more chance he gets fcked with.
I think until offshore books get rid of this first set rule (at least for maybe over 10-1 odds), players at these odds should be a little worried unless the books set a precedence (like if guy gets injured by outside interference all bets are void). Tennis is very unique in their rules and ridiculous ML odds and one human on one human set up. It's literally a set up for something shady to happen. My personal opinion.
I know this is a fcked up thought, but it's reality. I think books need to get rid of 1st set rule before somebody fcked up out there comes up with this idea and does it.
