437:
that prediction markets for sports see large revenues (after payouts). This has been verified by Forbes magazine. My fourth claim is that it is mathematically unlikely for the bookmaker to consistently generate excessively large revenues (after payouts) in a prediction market that is based on events that are non deterministic (or random). This result comes from probability and logical reasoning. My fifth claim is that it is mathematically likely that there is bias present in the results/outcomes of the process that gives the bookmaker the ability to consistently generate excessively large revenues (after payouts) in a prediction market that is non deterministic. This claim is supported by Forbes magazine. The sixth claim is that there is bias present that predetermines outcomes in the prediction market in order to change a non deterministic system into a determistic system (or a fixed system). My seventh claim is that in sports, a deterministic system must be controlled and manipulated by the participants themselves (athletes, referees, coaches, etc.). My eighth claim is that the manipulation of outcomes in this manner is what we know and observe as point shaving.
388:
a lot of time. Also please do not remove a referenced source if information in a published wikipedia article is taken from that source. Also make sure to read the entire source article to find out if any information in the wikipedia article was taken from the original source ... in this particular case ... the original source for the "Other Sports" and "Current Use" sections is the PointShavers.com definition of Point
Shaving. Also, the third paragraph is not a claim ... it is merely a mathematical explanation for the observation of unlikely outcomes. It is intuitive to understand that unlikely outcomes would create huge swings in prediction markets so the average reader shouldn't need any more "hand holding" at this point.
81:
53:
202:
22:
141:
67:
405:
claim is that it is inflated due to point shaving, but it could also just be larger than the person claiming it is point shaving believes it should be. The source offers no evidence for this, it is just a bald claim. This might be okay if it was a very reliable source, but it isn't. Why do you think this is a
523:
It is copyright text, so I'm not going to add it but one sentence appears verbatim and another appears approximately. They are the first and last bit of the third paragraph on the linked site. However, now that I look at it again, it looks like the site might be claiming that they licensed that text
436:
So now I will use mathematics in order to answer your questions about point shaving. My first claim is that sports is non deterministic. That claim can be verified by observation. My second claim is that prediction markets exist for organized sports. This claim can also be verified. My third claim is
428:
It is easy for anyone to understand that criminal activity and corruption have no bounds. And, it would be naive to think that sports is immune to corruption. From our brief discussions here on
Knowledge, you seem to have the idea that sports is not corrupted and can never be corrupted. I'm wondering
387:
Hi. Sports is not the stock market. Sports does not have large deviations from the mean (in other words unlikely outcomes) "all the time". Please make sure that you are knowledgeable on the relevant subjet before making big changes to wikipedia articles containing that subject. It would save everyone
335:
I don't understand. There is no viewpoint on regulating the industry. Clearly, the industry is unregulated and I point that out. And clearly, the author is not proposing that the industry should be regulated or unregulated. I have no personal interest in regulating the industry because I have nothing
544:
Pointshavers.com is a one-page site with nothing but a definition of point shaving and a link to a blogger.com profile that links to a number of spammy links such as "free MLB picks" and "guaranteed picks". Worse, the writing on this one-page site is pulled directly from primary source articles like
551:
While a clever SEO tactic, this site is non-notable, non-encyclopedic, secondary, and this does not belong on
Knowledge. I would suggest the creator of the site spend less time spamming Knowledge and more time building up substantive content on your site so it becomes a legitimate citation source.
468:
Oh yeah, as far as the reliable source goes...the author ... Kevin
Luckerson ... has an M.S. degree in Electrical Engineering in Vanderbilt University and has done Grad Research on Determistic and Non Deterministic systems including a published paper on modeling various deterministic systems using
404:
Luckerkd, consider the sentence, "The observed deviation from the mean (or average) is what makes these outcomes so unlikely." It makes no sense. What does "these outcomes" refer to? There is also no support for the claim, and it is, essentially, not supportable. The process has a variance and the
275:
OK, if New
England Patriots are given a -13.5 point head start against the Giants in Super Bowl XLII(presumably same margin for the Crewe's team back then), for the Patriots to shave points, they would secure a 2-Touchdown lead, then let the Giants in, so the Patriots will never win by more than 2
424:
Hi. It is extremely difficult to prove that an athlete has been point shaving because the activity is often cleverly disguised. And yes, the process (sports) has a variance. However, the process (sports) has also been linked to criminal activity and fraud throughout its history. We have worldwide
425:
reports of point shaving and game fixing in all sports...the most recent reports here in the United States came in 2010. There is no denying that because we have factual documented evidence. If you still don't get it, just look up the convictions on the Toledo athletes accused of point shaving.
432:
Therefore I hope you can see that we have a situation where criminal activity can occur; however, it is extremely difficult to prove because of the variance of the process. But I can mathematically make claims about the variance based on probability theory, logical reasoning, and set theory.
372:
of the page appears to make no sense. Large deviations from the mean are totally normal. Consider the stock market, it has these all the time. There is no reason variation from the mean implies something is wrong. There is also no reliable source for these claims.
573:
I think what happened in
Germany was match-fixing not point shaving. Soccer is a low scoring game and so does not really lend itself to point shaving. On another issue,the section on American Football needs to either have at least one confirmed
429:
who or what gave you that impression? But it's not surprising considering what little insight you have brought to the topic. In addition to the fact that you are currently wasting my time which I consider extremely valuable.
464:
I'm waiting to see this proof come up somewhere in the news somewhere ... of course I will get no credit for it ... I'm the idiot ... of course ... I must be stupid and everyone else is much much smarter than me :)
470:
635:
507:
Which text are you talking about? Just use the
History tab and you will find out that Luckerkd has done the most recent organiztion and cleanup for the article.
225:
630:
131:
121:
471:
http://www.worldcat.org/title/state-based-software-verification-using-the-state-space-analysis-tool-and-the-statemate-software-library/oclc/52283052
640:
625:
321:
482:
97:
555:
300:
469:
state diagrams and developing state based software verification systems. And he has a paper published with
Vanderbilt University ...
546:
502:
272:
In the article, "from covering a published point spread" is hardly a useful explanation. What does it mean? What is point shaving?
516:
453:
397:
352:
88:
58:
235:
33:
475:
Is that OK for wikipedia...probably not...I'm sure because everyone else is much smarter than me and I know nothing.
247:
Japan section reads as though it was written by the gambling industry - quotes of 160% returns are 'citation needed'.
157:
201:
80:
52:
325:
21:
486:
304:
603:
600:
597:
589:
559:
284:
39:
478:
441:
340:
317:
296:
66:
593:
508:
445:
389:
344:
96:
on
Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
547:
http://articles.cnn.com/2007-08-15/us/nba.ref_1_bet-on-nba-games-guilty-plea-tim-donaghy?_s=PM:US
512:
449:
393:
348:
575:
501:
I also wondered if this text was taken from the reference website and started a discussion at
280:
607:
314:
In the modern day section, they only present one viewpoint when it comes to regulating.
606:
to the article evincing an idiosyncratic interpretation of what "point shaving" means.
619:
529:
414:
378:
406:
244:
The link to the
Missouri gambling site is now out of date and needs to be updated.
276:
TD's. Of course, this indirectly affects the total combined scores sometimes.
140:
525:
410:
374:
93:
610:
582:
563:
533:
490:
457:
418:
382:
356:
329:
308:
288:
279:
To disguise points shaving, the combined scores could be quite big.
15:
139:
231:
Tag the talk pages of Gambling-related articles with the
369:
192:
187:
182:
177:
92:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
368:The third paragraph of the other sports section of
503:Wikipedia_talk:Copyright_problems#point_shaving
8:
636:Knowledge requested photographs of gambling
19:
165:
47:
49:
7:
86:This article is within the scope of
226:Gambling articles needing attention
38:It is of interest to the following
14:
631:Low-importance Gambling articles
200:
148:An editor has requested that an
79:
65:
51:
20:
293:Mate, i still dont understand
126:This article has been rated as
357:20:37, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
106:Knowledge:WikiProject Gambling
1:
641:WikiProject Gambling articles
626:Start-Class Gambling articles
583:09:57, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
491:21:14, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
458:20:19, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
109:Template:WikiProject Gambling
100:and see a list of open tasks.
611:21:15, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
534:01:57, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
497:possible copyright violation
419:01:57, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
383:02:53, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
289:19:32, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
592:the section. It seems that
330:23:07, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
169:WikiProject Gambling To-do:
657:
309:11:52, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
132:project's importance scale
164:
147:
125:
74:
46:
564:19:21, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
364:statistical blatherskite
216:Improve an article to FA
219:Improve an article to A
210:Current collaborations:
596:(inactive since 2016)
540:PointShavers.Com links
144:
28:This article is rated
569:German soccer scandal
143:
236:WikiProject Gambling
89:WikiProject Gambling
145:
34:content assessment
481:comment added by
461:
444:comment added by
360:
343:comment added by
320:comment added by
311:
299:comment added by
265:
264:
261:
260:
257:
256:
253:
252:
112:Gambling articles
648:
580:
493:
460:
438:
359:
337:
332:
294:
240:
234:
205:
204:
166:
160:to this article.
114:
113:
110:
107:
104:
83:
76:
75:
70:
69:
68:
63:
55:
48:
31:
25:
24:
16:
656:
655:
651:
650:
649:
647:
646:
645:
616:
615:
576:
571:
542:
499:
476:
439:
407:reliable source
366:
338:
315:
270:
268:Opening comment
238:
232:
199:
197:
111:
108:
105:
102:
101:
64:
61:
32:on Knowledge's
29:
12:
11:
5:
654:
652:
644:
643:
638:
633:
628:
618:
617:
614:
613:
570:
567:
541:
538:
537:
536:
498:
495:
422:
421:
365:
362:
322:216.171.22.204
269:
266:
263:
262:
259:
258:
255:
254:
251:
250:
249:
248:
245:
242:
229:
224:Help with the
221:
220:
217:
213:
212:
196:
195:
190:
185:
180:
174:
171:
170:
162:
161:
146:
136:
135:
128:Low-importance
124:
118:
117:
115:
98:the discussion
84:
72:
71:
62:Low‑importance
56:
44:
43:
37:
26:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
653:
642:
639:
637:
634:
632:
629:
627:
624:
623:
621:
612:
609:
605:
602:
599:
595:
591:
588:I concur and
587:
586:
585:
584:
581:
579:
578:Tigerboy1966
568:
566:
565:
561:
557:
553:
549:
548:
539:
535:
531:
527:
522:
521:
520:
518:
514:
510:
505:
504:
496:
494:
492:
488:
484:
483:24.234.44.146
480:
473:
472:
466:
462:
459:
455:
451:
447:
443:
434:
430:
426:
420:
416:
412:
408:
403:
402:
401:
399:
395:
391:
385:
384:
380:
376:
371:
363:
361:
358:
354:
350:
346:
342:
333:
331:
327:
323:
319:
312:
310:
306:
302:
298:
291:
290:
286:
282:
277:
273:
267:
246:
243:
237:
230:
227:
223:
222:
218:
215:
214:
211:
208:
207:
206:
203:
194:
191:
189:
186:
184:
181:
179:
176:
175:
173:
172:
168:
167:
163:
159:
155:
151:
142:
138:
137:
133:
129:
123:
120:
119:
116:
99:
95:
91:
90:
85:
82:
78:
77:
73:
60:
57:
54:
50:
45:
41:
35:
27:
23:
18:
17:
590:I've removed
577:
572:
556:12.148.169.2
554:
550:
543:
506:
500:
477:— Preceding
474:
467:
463:
440:— Preceding
435:
431:
427:
423:
386:
370:this version
367:
339:— Preceding
334:
316:— Preceding
313:
301:60.229.34.42
292:
278:
274:
271:
209:
198:
153:
149:
127:
87:
40:WikiProjects
295:—Preceding
281:TimHowardII
30:Start-class
620:Categories
608:jnestorius
545:this one:
524:here too.
336:to gain.
154:photograph
594:Luckerkd
574:example.
517:contribs
509:Luckerkd
479:unsigned
454:contribs
446:Luckerkd
442:unsigned
398:contribs
390:Luckerkd
353:contribs
345:Luckerkd
341:unsigned
318:unsigned
297:unsigned
103:Gambling
94:Gambling
59:Gambling
604:changes
241:banner.
183:history
130:on the
36:scale.
193:purge
188:watch
158:added
150:image
601:many
598:made
560:talk
530:talk
513:talk
487:talk
450:talk
415:talk
394:talk
379:talk
349:talk
326:talk
305:talk
285:talk
178:edit
156:be
152:or
122:Low
622::
562:)
532:)
519:)
515:•
489:)
456:)
452:•
417:)
409:?
400:)
396:•
381:)
355:)
351:•
328:)
307:)
287:)
239:}}
233:{{
558:(
528:(
526:0
511:(
485:(
448:(
413:(
411:0
392:(
377:(
375:0
347:(
324:(
303:(
283:(
228:.
134:.
42::
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
