IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New Trump:" Put Pete Rose in Hall of Fame"
http://national.suntimes.com/mlb/7/72/1464881/donald-trump-hall-of-fame-pete-rose-all-star-game


So a douchebag recommends that a cheater gets put into his sport's HOF. I am not surprised.




Satan (impatiently) to Newcomer: The trouble with you Chicago people is, that you think you are the best people down here; whereas you are merely the most numerous.
- - - Mark Twain, "Pudd'nhead Wilson's New Calendar" 1897
New cheater? he gambled, not threw games
Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 59 years. meep
New Wrong
He bet on himself to win.
New And he did it while he was the manager
which gave him the opportunity to manipulate the lineup to favor his bets.




Satan (impatiently) to Newcomer: The trouble with you Chicago people is, that you think you are the best people down here; whereas you are merely the most numerous.
- - - Mark Twain, "Pudd'nhead Wilson's New Calendar" 1897
New That was his job
"Manipulate" the lineup to push them to win. What would you have him do otherwise?
New Yup
I've never understood why betting on yourself to win was considered so bad.
--

Drew
New Presumably there was a point spread?
Gambling that isn't among friends seems to me to invite all kinds of corruption. It's bad news. Rose knew the rules - he can live with the consequences.

Cheers,
Scott.
New ^ What he said.
New no spread in baseball
Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 59 years. meep
New Wouldn't make sense
As soon as the home team is up by 1 in the ninth it's over.
--

Drew
New "Bet-at-home.com" advertises on tennis matches...
They seem to have a point spread for baseball.

https://www.bet-at-home.com/en/sport

Their web page doesn't seem to want users to be able to use direct links.

On the left, click:
Baseball
- USA
- MLB

They seem to have a variety of bet types. On the main part of the page, click the "Spread" tab and you can see the point spread for the various games today.

I don't know enough about this stuff to know if it applies to the things Rose is suspected of doing. I just thought I'd throw it out there in case anyone is interested.

Cheers,
Scott.
New He probably also bet against them at times
and that is definitely wrong in so many ways.




Satan (impatiently) to Newcomer: The trouble with you Chicago people is, that you think you are the best people down here; whereas you are merely the most numerous.
- - - Mark Twain, "Pudd'nhead Wilson's New Calendar" 1897
New Based on what?
--

Drew
New If you bet against your own people
what does that say about your confidence in them, not to mention that you're the guy in charge who can make whatever moves necessary to help ensure they lose and you win the bet?




Satan (impatiently) to Newcomer: The trouble with you Chicago people is, that you think you are the best people down here; whereas you are merely the most numerous.
- - - Mark Twain, "Pudd'nhead Wilson's New Calendar" 1897
New never mind, you withdrew the assertion below
I don't recall anyone of accusing him of betting against his team.
Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 59 years. meep
Expand Edited by boxley July 16, 2015, 12:00:40 PM EDT
New Guy who wrote the Dowd Report said it
that's what I remembered:


In December 2002, Dowd told the New York Post that he had reliable evidence that Rose bet against his team but didn't include it in his 225-page report because of time constraints. He later backed off of those statements. "I was never able to tie it down," Dowd said. "It was unreliable, and that's why I didn't include it in the report. I probably shouldn't have said it. I was not trying to start something here."



http://seanlahman.com/files/rose/rose-faq.html


Then again, this is as close to betting against your team as you can come without actually doing so:


According to the Dowd report, which included a diary of bets that Rose made on Reds games and many others — it listed bets on 390 games over all, 52 of them involving the Reds, in a three-month period in 1987 — Rose developed a consistency of not betting on certain contests.

In particular, Rose stopped betting on Reds games that Gullickson started. If Rose bet on his team to win other games but didn’t bet on Gullickson’s games, he was sending a signal to the bookies he was betting with that he, as manager of the team, didn’t think much of his team’s chances in those games.



http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/16/sports/baseball/16chass.html?_r=0

Not betting on your team to win when a certain pitcher is starting is damn near the same thing as betting against your team when that guy is pitching, especially when you're betting on the Reds to win almost every other game.




Satan (impatiently) to Newcomer: The trouble with you Chicago people is, that you think you are the best people down here; whereas you are merely the most numerous.
- - - Mark Twain, "Pudd'nhead Wilson's New Calendar" 1897
New Just like you probably beat your *****?
Really, 1st making an unsubstantiated accusation then stating how wrong it is, what the f is wrong with you?
New Re: Just like you probably beat your *****?
http://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2014/08/why-pete-rose-still-cant-be-absolved/378866/


I haven't been able to Google proof that he bet against his own team so I withdraw the claim that he did so. However, as the above story shows, how much he bet on his team to win signaled to the bookies his confidence level regarding the team's chances in that game:


It matters for two reasons. First, when Rose did not bet on the Reds, his inaction was a signal to his bookies that he wasn’t very confident in that game. Those bookies may have used this inside information to place a bet against the Reds. This doesn’t mean the game was fixed, but is reflective of Rose’s state of mind. He was compromised. Second, his wager on certain games, but not others, may have influenced the way he made decisions as a manager.

[...]

Differing bet amounts are telling. If he bet $100 one game and $1,000 another game, what message is he telling his team? Or his bookie? Or himself? It shows he had fluid levels of confidence in certain games versus others. This distinction is important. For example, according to John Dowd, when certain Reds’ pitchers took the mound, Rose didn’t bet at all.



Also, read the Dowd report for much more information: http://thedowdreport.com/




Satan (impatiently) to Newcomer: The trouble with you Chicago people is, that you think you are the best people down here; whereas you are merely the most numerous.
- - - Mark Twain, "Pudd'nhead Wilson's New Calendar" 1897
Expand Edited by lincoln July 16, 2015, 11:31:45 AM EDT
Expand Edited by lincoln July 16, 2015, 11:34:01 AM EDT
New Reading the entrails
I'm sure bookies watch interviews with coaches/managers before games and parse what they say to figure out how confident they are. "But they're doing that to signal to their players and the other team what they want them to believe." And couldn't that also be true of betting patterns?

So he didn't bet when certain pitchers were up. Probably because he knew they didn't win as often. Don't bookies have access to won/lost records, too?

The one possible accusation is that he would schedule a stronger pitcher in a mathematically unimportant late-season game rather than saving him for a division rival later in the week. But considering the bonuses teams usually get for post-season appearances, those would have to be pretty big bets to change his scheduling.
--

Drew
New And I accept this is a good point
I find it telling that you found it and used it after your previous argument was so easily discounted. Basically, you had a viewpoint based on assumptions, found the assumptions were invalid, then dug for someone else's opinion (not fact, opinion) that would help support your original viewpoint.

Note: as drook pointed out, reading the patterns MAY indicate something is up, or that the game could be manipulated. But it is all supposition. I don't really care either way, since it is entertainment, and I have no stake in it. I just hate when people badmouth other people based on assumptions. That is worth fighting over.
New You didn't prove my point wrong
I thought that I had heard he bet both ways. I posted that I didn't find proof that he did that.




Satan (impatiently) to Newcomer: The trouble with you Chicago people is, that you think you are the best people down here; whereas you are merely the most numerous.
- - - Mark Twain, "Pudd'nhead Wilson's New Calendar" 1897
     Trump:" Put Pete Rose in Hall of Fame" - (lincoln) - (20)
         cheater? he gambled, not threw games -NT - (boxley)
         Wrong - (crazy) - (18)
             And he did it while he was the manager - (lincoln) - (17)
                 That was his job - (crazy) - (16)
                     Yup - (drook) - (5)
                         Presumably there was a point spread? - (Another Scott) - (4)
                             ^ What he said. -NT - (mmoffitt)
                             no spread in baseball - (boxley) - (1)
                                 Wouldn't make sense - (drook)
                             "Bet-at-home.com" advertises on tennis matches... - (Another Scott)
                     He probably also bet against them at times - (lincoln) - (9)
                         Based on what? -NT - (drook) - (3)
                             If you bet against your own people - (lincoln) - (2)
                                 never mind, you withdrew the assertion below - (boxley) - (1)
                                     Guy who wrote the Dowd Report said it - (lincoln)
                         Just like you probably beat your *****? - (crazy) - (4)
                             Re: Just like you probably beat your *****? - (lincoln) - (3)
                                 Reading the entrails - (drook)
                                 And I accept this is a good point - (crazy) - (1)
                                     You didn't prove my point wrong - (lincoln)

Almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea.
152 ms