Stephen lee betting scadal?

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

In order to fix a game, you only need one player to throw it - the winning player doesn't even have to be aware that anything is afoot.

Heres the entire game if anyone is interested, I've only watched from 1:19:55 on, and a few key things happen.

Lee misses a straighforward pink with the rest, whilst playing the tracking quite strangely as well.
Lee pots that pink a few shots later, but tracks the black almost the worst way possible.
Plays a really weird safety shot on the black to leave it for Higgins.
(In fairness he also plays a really good safety on the pink at one stage).
Loses, shakes hands and starts complaining to Higgins, apparently about the cushions and cloth (for show?)

Theres no smoking gun by any means, but it sure looks weird.

zack01 wrote: »

Lee does'nt do himself any favours with his shot selection and in lieu of recent allegations against him he's going to draw more attention to himself each time a situation like that appears. Personally if i saw that happen down in the club i'd say hang on a minute this guy is trying to throw the frame here.
Surely Lee knows that he's being watched and if he did throw that frame and is found out he could find himself banned. He's currently suspended so he'll miss the third European event in Belgium this weekend.
Unless the WPBSA have concrete info on him gaining financial gain then i really dont think a lot more can be done and he'll be back playing soon enough.

where to start:

Right - he has the perfect angle on the pink to do 2 things: either drop it in with a touch of left hand side or a gentle stun shot to create the same angle. The pink was a total snatch, hit way too hard too.

When Higgins leaves the pink over the left middle, the angle is more than there to drop it in and be plum on the black. Even if he wanted to stun it in off 2 cushions he got nowhere near enough stun on it to do it. Any professional snooker player or top amateur would be embarrassed to finish without a pot on the black from that pink.

On the final safety on the black, surely he's got a few options. he can drop the black on to the black cushion leaving the white anywhere. He can force a cocked hat double with a lot of top, he can even play super thin off the black bringing the white across the table. ANYTHING but what he did.

There may be a few mitigating factors - the shot clock for one. He can argue he snatched on the pink due to time ticking down. He can argue the cloth wasn't gripping or cushions sliding (to explain the tracking on the black).

All in all, he appears guilty as sin based on that frame alone.....my only doubt would be whether all the money was purely on Higgins to win or was it on 4-2. Because making it that obvious is silly. He could have easily played a few bad safeties and been down 4-0 if that's all he wanted to do. If the weight of money was on 4-2 then throw the book at him.

fresh off the press :pac:


http://www1.skysports.com/snooker/news/12243/8191687/Stephen-Lee-to-remain-banned-while-WPBSA-investigates-Premier-League-snooker-defeat

Giruilla wrote: »

Thought there were a few suprisingly wide misses during last fram by Lee but that pink at pace and then the black was laughable!

Winners prize fund - 50,000. Wonder how much Lee would receive, were it the case he threw it.

Yes there was something a bit suss about the pink to black, Not much to do with the white, below centre cue ball and gently tap in and perfect on the black...I still want to believe that he is innocent. If it was anyone else i would say otherwise..

From watching snooker for many many years i have noticed with Lee that his shot selection is a bit diffrent at the best of times...He seems to always leave it til the last minute to go into the pack of reds.
He let's himself run out of options far too early.. he's messes up position on the blue or get's too straight on the black resulting on him having to play a safety shot, With Hendry, Higgins, Ronnie them lads open the pack very early to create a winning chance for themselves.

He seems to time the cue ball sooo sweet and has plenty of cue power. If he could apply the same break building logic as any of the top 4 players he would probably be a world champion by now!

Hopefully this mess will be cleared up soon. VERY hard to prove that he is cheating..All this time he is banned he's not earning. It's hurting himm badly im sure!

cherryghost wrote: »

Ronnie dragging the sport down further claiming he knows others who have done match fixing, Barry Hearn asks to name and shame.... I feel this could be dark days ahead for snooker

This is a really tough situation for Barry Hearn. The perception that the sport is clean is obviously crucial in terms of sponsorship.

In terms of Ronnie and Stephen Lee, it's also tough for Hearn. He knows both of them pretty well and it's never nice when someone you know puts you in a really difficult position. It's sort of like an ex-girlfriend turning up at your mams house at Xmas - we could all do without it!

Is it limited to Steven Lee? I'm certain it was wider than that circa 2007-2011 when even the top pros were playing for small prize money. I'm also certain plenty are getting through the net - even now.

Take a PTC tournament for example. Hundreds of entrants, very little in the way of tv coverage, lots of the early rounds watched by 1 man and a dog under little scrutiny. Then obviously it's best-of-7. £100 to enter a PTC event. And some of the pros ranked around say 96th-128th in the world might not make much more than 5-6 grand a year after expenses. That's if they get lucky and play well - many pros struggle to break even without help. So it's effectively worse than living on the dole.

Whether it's through secretly backing themselves to win (or lose) i feel certain that many pros further down the list are up to some shenanigans to try make it economically viable for them to remain professional and try further their dreams of making it big as a pro.

So, for example, a pro ranked around 110th enters a PTC in Rotterdam. £100 entry, flights, accomodation, food, drink etc etc really he's looking at £500 to enter the tournament. The realistic chances of him getting past the last-64 are slim. But to make the week profitable, he would need to reach the last-16 (and that would still only leave him £400 in profit). Even a huge run and getting to the 1/4 final may only see a player come out with £800 profit.

So, of course there is a temptation to get bets placed on his matches: whether that's to win the ones he thinks he will win or to lose the ones he thinks he will win.

For some, it's the difference between paying the rent or not. If done smartly, nobody will ever notice either. The likes of the WBSA and the betting sites, they all look for suspicious patterns. But it'd still be very easy to get away with it.

Player A 4/11 v Player B 2/1

Ladbrokes, Paddy Power, Boyles, William Hill, Betfair, Betfred etc.......some cities in the UK could have 10-15 different bookmakers in same city and countless betting shops in the city. Send 3 or 4 mates around on a bicycle and they each put £50 quid on Player B at 2/1 in 10-20 shops.

Nobody is going to bat an eyelid. In fact nobody would bat an eyelid at one single bet of 500 on Player B at 2/1.

So you have a situation where as a once-off, maybe to try pay the rent, Player A plays poorly and cashes in, and it's very difficult to crack down on unless it's done in a haphazard way like Steven Lee did. When you try rip bookies off more than £100,000 of course they'll come after you.

It's a sad and cynical view but i know for certain some pros bet on their own matches through other routes.

If World Snooker want to eradicate this problem, there is a simple solution: increase prize money for the earlier rounds in the likes of the PTC's. Right now you could win 4 matches and still not cover your expenses for the week so there's an obvious temptation there for shenanigans.

zack01 wrote: »

I heard a whisper today that Lee will get a five year ban

What do you think personally this will do for his career? Would you think it would be possible for Lee to make a return after five years, I dont think so considering the amount of decent asian players making qtrs/semi's now. I used to really enjoy watching him play, he hits the ball so sweet...

realgolfgeek wrote: »

I'd hate to see him back,
I'd hate to see Lee back,
I'm disgusted Higgins was allowed carry on.

It's becoming a joke of a game now. These people should be banned for life playing professional snooker ...

To be fair, Quinten Hanns ban was outrageously unfair when viewed in recent context.

Lets recap: Hann was the victim of a sting by News International. Most of us would have zero time for the News of the World or The Sun in the light of whats gone on in recent years.

Anyway, his crime was admitting on video that he would lose to Ken (Doherty) in the China Open for cash.

He never actually threw any match, never took any money and it never got beyond the "would you do it for money" stage.

For all that he got 8 years.

Compare that to Higgins - he did the exact same thing (filmed by a sting from News International) agreeing in theory that he could throw or "fix" a match and ended up sitting out snooker for 6 months.

Can't help but feel World Snooker wanted shot of Hann. Two court cases over rape allegations probably not the type of fella they wanted on the circuit. But he was massively unlucky getting 8 years when the likes of Joe Jogia and John Higgins got off scot free in comparison.