A Tennis Integrity Unit told a review panel that match-fixing problems in lower levels of tennis were a “tsunami.” (Photo by Tom Dulat/Getty Images)
An independent review panel commissioned by tennis’ international governing bodies to investigate match-fixing and gambling-linked corruption revealed its preliminary findings on Wednesday with 12 recommendations, one of which was the partial cessation of a live data rights deal with Sportradar — to which the company offered an immediate rebuttal.
The interim report quoted one official deeming the scope of the match-fixing problem at the low levels of the sport to be a “tsunami,” noting that there are nominally 15,000 professional players, yet only 250 to 350 “earn enough money to break even.”
The 80-page document claimed a “a strong causal connection” between the availability of live scoring data and betting opportunities. Tennis gambling has broadened from wagers on the outcome of matches to a series of granular events within each match, with the report alleging that the availability of this data — stemming from a live-scoring agreement the International Tennis Federation made with Sportradar in 2011 (and extended in 2015) — was a culprit in worsening an existing problem. The panel charged that the “ITF did not appropriately assess the potential adverse effects of these agreements before entering into them.”
“The advent of online betting and the sale of official live scoring data have greatly exacerbated the problem,” the report said. “The data sale contracts have made tens of thousands of matches available for betting, creating greater opportunities for players and officials to bet or act corruptly. It is now possible to place online bets on a wide range of contingencies in matches played at levels of the sport that cannot accurately be described as professional, and at which the risk of integrity breaches, by players, officials, and others, is likely greatest.”
The three lawyers who prepared the report cautioned that there was “no simple solution or panacea” to the problem but said, “Discontinuing the sale of official data at these lowest levels of tennis is a necessary, pragmatic, and effective approach to containing betting-related breaches of integrity.”
A Sportradar spokesperson told SportTechie that the company would need a few days for a full review of the report and evidence but voiced its “most immediate concern” with the discontinuation of official live data at lower-rung events.
“On face value, this looks to be unrealistic, potentially unlawful and we would have serious reservations about the credibility of such a Recommendation,” the spokesperson wrote in an email. “Prohibition simply doesn’t work. Prohibiting data partnerships will not stop betting, live or otherwise, on these matches nor will it remove corruption risk at this level.
“Pre-match betting will remain available; unofficial data will be collected; generally available match statistics can be used by betting operators anyway; the risk of data fraud and ghost matches will increase; and there will be no clear contractual basis by which operators will be bound to reporting and transparency requirements. This will almost certainly encourage black market activity.”
The spokesperson added that Sportradar and the ITF began an integrity monitoring partnership last month, in which the Swiss data company would employ its Fraud Detection System to aid the Tennis Integrity Unit. Sportradar has long been an industry leader in this area, working with more than 70 sporting federations including FIFA, UEFA, the NBA, NHL and World Rugby.
“The aim of reducing or removing integrity risk in the sport is fully supported but there are clearly alternative ways of achieving those aims that are less draconian and more practicable and that plainly warrant proper impact assessment and evaluation,” the spokesperson wrote, adding: “Needless to say we will be actively engaging in the upcoming Consultation process to ensure that the final outcome on these issues better reflects a proportionate and targeted regulatory regime rather than an heavy-handed approach that potentially creates further risks to the sport.”
