Fiaz vs Baker pulled due to irregular betting activity

First time I've seen a fight pulled due to this. Any other examples? Now with the Gambling Commission and the BBBoC. Last time I remember the GC getting involved was with the Allen vs Darch fight, and never heard anything come of that.

 

Surely they should just suspend the betting until its been investigated, rather than stopping the fight.

 

Yeah they can void all bets as well

 

I am assuming a lot of money was being lumped on Kane Baker to get stopped or get stopped early by Fiaz. Of course this is very suspicious as Fiaz only has 1 KO win in 12 wins, and the number and amount of bets would have been unusual.

Slightly bizarre to pull the fight. The bookies could just refuse to pay out. They refuse to pay out all the time to winning punters and freeze cash of winning punters under KYC grounds.

If they had let it go ahead it would have improved their investigation. The outcome would have likely matched the bets.

 

Baker seems a good lad and Fiaz couldn’t take the skin off a rice pudding so it’s a strange one.

 

Just wish there was similar investigations into the plethora of sensational card scoring over the years, many of which cannot be explained by simple incompetence.

 

Can't do that.

Imagine either fighter is involved - they'd get their purse, and presumably a W. Or, if news came out of the betting suspension, the fight would take place under a cloud. Both boxers would have question marks against them for the rest of their career.

All involved did the right thing here imho. Pulled the fight, turned it over to the authorities, made it public, and quashed any conspiracy theories on the spot.

For the sake of the sport, I hope this is sorted quickly. Need to deter any boxers or their advisors from thinking of something like this in future.

 

No way this could or should happen , just because the bookies can refuse to pay out doesn’t mean the fight should go ahead , the result would still be bent , so no one gains at all.

The fight wasn’t pulled to save the bookies money , the bookies will have flagged it to save themselves money but the fight would have be pulled to protect the integrity of the fight/sport (the little it has left).

It really wouldn’t take a lot of money on a fight of this nature to trigger a closer look , a lot of people think it takes thousands of pounds to raise suspicion , it really doesn’t , a small event with a quite specific outcome could take bets totally just 3 figures to be looked at.

 

I hear what your saying but the fight is a separate entity to the betting. Not not like the bets are placed with the bbboc.
The betting companies are doing their own thing.
What if it turns out that no one is charged with this offence then 2 fighters plus their full teams have lost time & money.
Imo suspending all bets and letting the fight go ahead with an investigation to follow was the most sensible course.
That would of not damaged the sport anymore than what your suggesting.

 

So someone could sabotage a massive fight by placing a 3 figure sum to purposefully make it look like there's irregular betting occurring when in actual fact their real interest isn't to win a load of cash from the bookie but to shaft someone's career.
The right course of action is to inform everyone before the fight that all bets are off cos the bookies have noticed irregular betting patterns bit the fight cos ahead with no one been able to capitalise in any funny buisness.

 

A few years ago, I remember a Don King event I worked at and there was a female judge who judged completely wrong. She had Don King's boxer to win (surprise surprise !) and approx. 14 days later, 100,000 US Dollars were deposited into her account and she explained later in court that she didn´t know where the money came from

 

Can't agree mate.

Hypothesis: imagine there were a spate of bets from accounts in the Birmingham / Oldham areas for their local fighter to lose by KO / stoppage in a certain round. The fight was allowed to happen, and the outcome came to pass. It comes out in the wash that suspicious betting patterns had been noticed, but the fight was allowed to happen. That's unacceptable reputational risk for Matchroom, the BBBofC, and the Gambling Commission. Bear in mind that the Benn Eubank fight was pulled by the board due "for the good of the sport".

Also worth noting: in this kind of event, it isn't guaranteed that the boxer is a willing participant in any scheme. Say either they, or one of their family or friends have been issued threats if the boxer doesn't co-operate with the plan. For a fight of this scale it's unlikely to be big players - but could easily be a local gang, or loan shark, whose gambling proceeds won't exactly be going to good causes.

I agree that I sympathise with any innocent parties in this situation, and hope it's wrapped up quickly. But the situation is duly serious - with potential consequences way beyond a dodgy knockout - that a cancellation is the best step.

 

Allegedly a large amount of money was placed on Baker being stopped in a particular round.

 

Or into the Matchroom gym ran by ‘man of honour’ and ex gangster Tony Sims.

 

This content is protected

Jamie Moore involved in dodgy stuff again?