BO-DOG ALLEGES CBS EMPLOYEES CHEATED ON SURVIVOR BETTING

[wannamakeabet]

April 5, 2003 -- A pair of CBS employees with inside information on the network's hit reality show "Survivor" used that knowledge to place winning bets on an Internet gambling site, according to the shocking claims of the betting-services owners.
A spokesman for the Costa Rica-based BoDog.com said that at least two CBS workers won $35,000 by picking the winning contestants from two seasons of the show and also placed bets on the most recent contest, "Survivor: The Amazon."

The alleged employees were spotted by site security because they gambled only on "Survivor," instead of placing numerous wagers on sporting events as do most site clients.

They also stood out because of their supernatural clairvoyance, said spokesman Lance Bradley.



"We never expected someone would take advantage of this in this way, he said. It [the "Survivor" betting] was just supposed to be an extra entertainment for our hard-core betters."

Bradley would not reveal the identity of the alleged insider bettors, although he said one was in a "production role."

He also said that BoDog has not contacted CBS officials or instigated any legal action to reclaim the $35,000 allegedly lost.

The network yesterday seemed to downplay the offshore gambling site's claims.

"Only ‘The X-Files' has more conspiracy theories than ‘Survivor,' " said network spokesman Chris Ender.

Ender said the network had not heard directly from BoDog and knew nothing more of the allegations than they learned from the media.

He would not say if CBS is investigating the claims.

Bradley said BoDog concluded the pair were CBS employees by using an Internet search to find documents linking them to the network.

He said that the site also has suspicions about four other bettors, who may either be additional employees or aliases used by the suspects.

Bradley said one of the employees made a successful $1,000 bet at 8-1 odds on the winner of "Survivor: Marquesas."

Show officials said such wagers skewed the odds for the site's "Survivor" betting, driving other gamblers away.

BoDog.com has consequently stopped offering to take bets on the pre-taped show and was forced to refund all bets placed on the most recent show.

 

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>"We never expected someone would take advantage of this in this way".<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I am getting more and more worried about these guys.

I hope they are just doing it as a good "Farmer Brown", trying to get more squares into bet.

Nah, no one would ever even THINK of betting on something they already knew the outcome of.

Now the neighbors, friends, parking lot attendant, hairdresser, 2nd cousins.... nah, they would never even think of it either.

 

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>and was forced to refund all bets placed on the most recent show.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I assume that is code for "stiffed the winners"?

 

Peep,

That is amazing, isn't it. If they're stupid enough to put up odds on something at several people know that outcome of then they should pay off the wagers. I wonder, if I had a shop and put up a line on the 2002 Superbowl, do you think I would get much action?

 

It really is amazing.

I can see Intertops taking $50 bets as a publicity stunt, but you start taking dime bets on an already know result...

And then claim you don't have to pay because the result was already known?

They should pay IMO.

 

Peep,

Exactly. $50 are advertisements. Taking a dime on something with a known outcome is beyond stupid. BTW... that line on the SuperBowl is StL at pick'em.... ID bet 5 dimes on StL.

 

unreal

 

[BEANTOWNJIM]

WELL I LEARNED A VALUABLE LESSON THIS WEEK THE SPORTSBOOKS HAVE ALL THE POWER IF THEY DONT WANT TO PAY TOUGH SH-T YOU LOSE.

ALWAYS GET YOUR BETS IN EARLY YOU NEVER KNOW IF THE SPORTSBOOKS WILL HONOR YOUR PLAYS.

 

[Peep]

McIrish says about Bodog....
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Other than a dispute with a site I don't recall one player dispute with these people. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
And Peep remembers this thread.

Did they ever pay the people who bet on Survivor or did they stiff them?

 

[Journeyman]

Do you think they should have Peepinski?

 

[PatrickMcIrish]

Peep - somehow you left off the very next sentences.

Other than a dispute with a site I don't recall one player dispute with these people. Not one. Not saying there isn't one as all books have them from time to time but I am not aware of one.

In fact I think CBS fired their own employees over this if not mistaken. Anyway I am sure that isn't the point in all this, I have your old job so maybe you are here to punish me now, LOL. If so I understand, fire away Peep. Trust me I will make plenty of mistakes. Just keep in mind I never wanted this job, you resigned and then Ken needed someone. If I recall correctly you said yourself I was one of your biggest supporters. So you leave on your own but somehow you blame me for all this, LOL.

I guess it comes with the territory. Nice seeing you around anyway. Lot of people around here look up to you......

 

[Journeyman]

Like I said Peep hears what he wants.....

 

[3rdlong]

This is a highly suspicious story.

First, I have never known BoDog to take that kind of action on their props. Their limit on NBA props is $300, and the limit on the other TV stuff is $50 to $100.

Second, how likely is it that they took a 35k beating on a TV show prop and then put up lines for the next one? A 35k TV prop loss would have been the end of the TV props at BoDog, I believe.

Third, their is no evidence provided to anyone that this happened. BoDog says it happened, and that is that.

It appears that the first part of the story is to justify the second part of the story-- the part where they didn't pay.

 

[Peep]

Well, now you are aware of it.

They took the bet.

Do you think they should have paid it? Where I come from, you book a bet you pay it.

 

[dogball]

Peep
I am all for setting the facts straight, but if your contention is that these criminals with inside information should have been paid, I say No fuking way sir.
First off, Vegas would not honor that bet either, secondly and more importantly, when people trade on inside information in the stock market, not only are the proceeds ( if any ) not there's, they pay a lofty fine and are subject to jail time and license revocation.

Jmho

 

[soccerbob]

#1- They booked it and they should pay it. Once the bet is put in, it is action.

#2 I doubt the loss is as large as they say it was. I sense that figure was stretched a little bit. They don't take enough on that garbage to lose what they say they lost.

#3- When you book shit like that, there will always be someone that will take advantage of inside information. If they want the publicity that goes along with booking silly shit like that, then they have to be prepared to pay when they get hit.

 

[Peep]

Dogball.

They took a bet on which the result was already known.

Given that fact, they can't very well claim they they won't pay it because "the result was already known".

That is a given.

And if anyone in Vegas was dumb enough to take a bet on an event where the result was already known, you can bet they would pay it too.

So I can put you in the "it is O.K. for a book to welsh" McIrish school of fine bookmaking as well?

Pat had it right the first time around. "A shit book" I believe he called them.

 

[lakerfan]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> First off, Vegas would not honor that bet either <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Vegas wouldn't take the bet to begin with because they don't take action on anything but sports and even just on what happens on the field (example: no heisman betting). If Vegas could take action on Survivor, they would honor the bet even if the person making the bet knew the result.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> secondly and more importantly, when people trade on inside information in the stock market, not only are the proceeds ( if any ) not there's, they pay a lofty fine and are subject to jail time and license revocation.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You will have to explain this line of thinking, because I would think (and hope) that you use not publicly available information to bet on some games. Now granted, in sports one can not truely know the result of a game before it happens, but

1) In the case of the survivor bets they didn't know the result either. They just knew who the final two would be.

2) Betting a game when you know about a key injury is very similar if not as certain as knowing who two of field can win.

What your saying sounds similar to the bookies who say with anger "We won't take his bets, he is a winner". If you win more than lose you are "screwing up" the system.

What I do think is that bets made by the same individual under a different account to get around limits should have been deleted. Which other articles have indicated is the case.

As to whether this reflects badly on Bodog? Not really. I think most of the money was won the first time around and withdrawn, so if anything on the final time they just deleted all the Survivor bets. So unless I am forgetting something, how does this reflect badly on Bodog?

 

[dogball]

Peep-
"
They took a bet on which the result was already known. "


That is a decent point which is worth reviewing on my part. Back later after I process that.


Laker-
More later on your comments but the main difference is btwn an edge if someone places a sports wager on team info , and a fact when someone insider trades with specific material, non public information.

 

[Peep]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>We never expected someone would take advantage of this in this way, he said. It (the "Survivor" betting) was just supposed to be an extra entertainment for our hard-core betters."

Bradley would not reveal the identity of the alleged insider bettors, although he said one was in a "production role."<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Did Bodog end up giving CBS names? Did people lose their jobs because a sportsbook broke confindentiality?

I really can't can't see why they went public with any of this anyway, unless like Soccerbob said, just as an excuse to stiff bettors....