PRA (WNT governing body) suspends and investigates Kyle Amoroto for match fixing

1- match fixing needs to be considered unacceptable by all.

b. A man should be able to bet on himself. Aside from fighting, knocking som silly balls around a table for $$$ has gotta be one one of the oldest was to prove Man.

I know of a guy who bet $40k on himself to win 9b world champion...and and FN won.

are you thinking of thorsten? i think alex did the same thing the year after. confidence!
 
yep, out of character, but he did. and before alex too if my chronology is correct
This is madness.

Out of character is understatement!
Screenshot_20240927-133634.jpg
 
Sure they do. The world cup alone was 259K first prize. When you sign up for a league that pays that kind of money, you have to abide by the rules easy as that
i must be missing something but didnt the 2023 world cup first prize was only 30k to each of the two partners. and it was cancelled in 2024.

and if for a prize fund you arent even sure you will get close in, and you are willing to lower your principles for that i dont have much respect for the person. if you dont have those principles and are willing to let them hold a noose over your head go for it.
 
everyone here gambles every day decent money on bets. their own money.

they take out insurance. which is simply a bet you make that something will happen to you or something you own that and bet them it doesnt happen.

and do it for thousands every year. which for most is a sucker bet. that you will argue that it is right to do.
 
bookies dont break knee caps or use coercion to collect money as its a federal offense to do so. thats tv stuff. or mafia stuff from the 1950's

and they are very careful and dont take big bets on one on one sports. only on team and big field events. even then most limit your bet if the action is going one way. like on a horse race.

I agree with the vast majority of your posts but here you are applying US law and standards to what appears to be a Pacific rim country, probably the Philippines. As I am reminded over and over, life can be very cheap there. Two opposing political factions, the great cue builder Edwin Reyes got involved. He was one of the lowest men on the totem pole, lacking great wealth or political clout. He was assassinated in front of his children for what he said.

Where they were at fixing a match is much more dangerous than doing it in the lower forty-eight unless I am mistaken. However I know of a person killed for a $2000 bad debt here in the US, another killed for less than a thousand. The guy killed for $2000 was a mafia hit. Any time you are taking a person's money, legally or illegally, you need to know how they will react.

I do think a lifetime ban would be over the top. Suspension until a decision is reached is a bit rough in itself. The case seems cut and dried now especially with the apology but I believe the suspension came well before that. I believe a two to five year ban depending on details.

they take out insurance. which is simply a bet you make that something will happen to you or something you own that and bet them it doesnt happen.

and do it for thousands every year. which for most is a sucker bet. that you will argue that it is right to do.

Most people aren't really thinking about what they are doing when they buy life insurance. You are betting you will die younger than the average person in your position, they are betting you will live out your allotted time and then some.

I never liked the end of the bet I was taking! I knew a man that almost certainly killed himself for a two million dollar insurance policy. That was twenty-five years or so ago but I am sure his family would have much rather had him.

Hu
 
and yes hu, i was referring to the u.s. laws and practices. in other countries you have to watch your ass with whatever you do.

and of course you, unlike most, understand insurance as its merely just a bet.
 
The tricky aspect of calcuttas is that they are probably illegal. Maybe not for players betting on themselves (game of skill), but for the non-players I can’t see how they aren’t illegal. But I am no lawyer.

Legal and regulated in my state. Not sure of the logic since anyone can bid in the calcuttas. I think they won't last much longer after calcuttas topped a quarter million at a recent event. Casinos won't tolerate that level of drain, even shut down church bingo. They have been here over fifty years though, the calcuttas that is.

No particular logic. Gambling is illegal in my state. On the same page it says that gambling in a casino isn't gambling! Money talks!


Hu
 
.... On the same page it says that gambling in a casino isn't gambling! ....
Cause it's not gambling for the casino. ;) And at the Indiana Horseshoe Casino, it had to be on a boat to be moral and proper, until that was too much trouble and it moved to land.
 
The PRA is like another commission/committee that is set up for snooker. Not long ago a bunch -- like eight -- snooker players were found guilty of various levels of improper behavior and got suspensions of various lengths. I believe there was at least one lifetime ban.

Bookies are huge sponsors of snooker and it is in everyone's interest to have no hint of "issues". You can even bet on which color (after red) will be the first ball potted in a match.
 
The PRA is like another commission/committee that is set up for snooker. Not long ago a bunch -- like eight -- snooker players were found guilty of various levels of improper behavior and got suspensions of various lengths. I believe there was at least one lifetime ban.

Bookies are huge sponsors of snooker and it is in everyone's interest to have no hint of "issues". You can even bet on which color (after red) will be the first ball potted in a match.

The casinos had to be on water here too, to start with. Soon it was decided it was too dangerous to actually go out on the lake and they remained docked, then crept onshore. We were warned by other states that the casino owners would overrun local and state government but of course all politicians saw were dollar signs. Louisiana is owned by the casinos from governor to dog catchers!

In snooker they have found endless things to bet on. Not just match or frame, who will run a century first, probably a dozen things or more. It means a player can take a dive to win one bet without losing a match.

I don't remember details but it was too many gaff bets like who will pocket the five in the fifth frame coming home that got them hot on the snooker players' trail. That was the toe in the door for the fixers. Fortunately they were caught early. Once they had snooker players in their pockets they could use that leverage to force the players to do almost anything.

Hu
 
In snooker they have found endless things to bet on. Not just match or frame, who will run a century first, probably a dozen things or more. It means a player can take a dive to win one bet without losing a match.

I don't remember details but it was too many gaff bets like who will pocket the five in the fifth frame coming home that got them hot on the snooker players' trail. That was the toe in the door for the fixers. Fortunately they were caught early. Once they had snooker players in their pockets they could use that leverage to force the players to do almost anything.

Hu

it's like that in every sport here in europe, you can bet on many aspects of a match. but the bookies are big companies and rational actors, they have algorithms and analysts to track the sketchy stuff. if they catch an odd betting pattern they contact the sport/league federation and it gets investigated.
 
I agree with the vast majority of your posts but here you are applying US law and standards to what appears to be a Pacific rim country, probably the Philippines. As I am reminded over and over, life can be very cheap there. Two opposing political factions, the great cue builder Edwin Reyes got involved. He was one of the lowest men on the totem pole, lacking great wealth or political clout. He was assassinated in front of his children for what he said.

Where they were at fixing a match is much more dangerous than doing it in the lower forty-eight unless I am mistaken. However I know of a person killed for a $2000 bad debt here in the US, another killed for less than a thousand. The guy killed for $2000 was a mafia hit. Any time you are taking a person's money, legally or illegally, you need to know how they will react.

I do think a lifetime ban would be over the top. Suspension until a decision is reached is a bit rough in itself. The case seems cut and dried now especially with the apology but I believe the suspension came well before that. I believe a two to five year ban depending on details.



Most people aren't really thinking about what they are doing when they buy life insurance. You are betting you will die younger than the average person in your position, they are betting you will live out your allotted time and then some.

I never liked the end of the bet I was taking! I knew a man that almost certainly killed himself for a two million dollar insurance policy. That was twenty-five years or so ago but I am sure his family would have much rather had him.

Hu
Hu, my family would run over me w a bus for half of that!!!
 
if they allow insurance then they should allow gambling as they are exactly the same thing.

and many states allow personal gambling on things of skill not chance.

some allow unlimited betting between consenting parties which is best.

states with casinos or especially indian ones put immense pressure on politicians to only allow their kind of gambling. money talks to politicians.
 
Back
Top