like somebody paid off players and or officials to decide the outcome of the game.
bad calls/decisions from the officials don't count...unless you think they did it on purpose.
and bad performances from players don't count...unless you think they did it on purpose.
this post is inspired by a groupme convo i'm in where cats swear up & down that the UNLV/Duke championship game was fixed cuz that's the only way to explain UNLV losing...
*** I ain't lyin. This shit i'm making up is true...
1. "Just the other night" In response to Reply # 0
Tor favored by 6
Biz clearly caught the rebound with about 2 seconds left up 5 and gets HACKED obviously. No call. Granted Biz still has to make 1 or 2 which is no sure thing, but it wasnt like right as the buzzer sounded, there was a good second and change they tried to foul him.
Those pt spread fixes happen a lot more frequently then big conspiracy fixes to change entire outcomes
--- "though time has passed, im still the future" (c) black thought
3. "2014 Men's US Open Semis / 2015 Women's US Open Final" In response to Reply # 0
No way in hell them two Nishikori and Cilic could BOTH beat powerhouses in the semis the way they did. Check this article to learn about the gambling odds at play. These odds are crazier than Leicester City
Frank Longo Member since Nov 18th 2003 86668 posts
Tue May-03-16 05:52 PM
6. "Came in knowing 1991 would be in either OP or Reply 1." In response to Reply # 0 Tue May-03-16 05:58 PM by Frank Longo
Was not disappointed. (Glad that the original poster didn't seem to be on board with the conspiracies tho.)
I'd be interested in knowing the Vegas odds on the Duke/UNLV 1991 game, because I'd imagine there are "bigger upsets" in the tournament nearly annually-- none that compare to the scope of that one or what was at stake, obviously, but more unlikely results from a spread perspective.
7. "Based on what I've read..." In response to Reply # 6
>I'd be interested in knowing the Vegas odds on the Duke/UNLV >1991 game, because I'd imagine there are "bigger upsets" in >the tournament nearly annually-- none that compare to the >scope of that one or what was at stake, obviously, but more >unlikely results from a spread perspective.
The game opened at +10 and there was enough action on Duke to push the line down to 4 or 5 by the tip-off. Not sure what the money line was.
**************** TBH the fact that you're even a mod here fits squarely within Jag's narrative of OK-sanctioned aggression, bullying, and toxicity. *shrug*
19. "I'd think it would be WAY more likely that random games" In response to Reply # 0
that aren't too important would be fixed than some of the huge games y'all are bringing up. In a championship or playoff game there's gonna be a great deal more people watching critically and paying attention to any shenanigans taking place. Also you'd have to pay the athletes or refs way more to throw a game that has so much meaning to them and their careers.
There is plenty of money to be made fixing games that aren't nearly as important. A random NBA game on a Tuesday night in January, a baseball game on the back end of a double header in June, etc.