IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolet/v105y2009i1p90-92.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Point shaving: Corruption in NCAA college football?

Author

Listed:
  • Schmidt, Martin B.
  • Stuck, Lee M.

Abstract

Several recent studies suggest the presence of point shaving in NCAA college basketball. While similar asymmetric incentives between athletes and gamblers exist, evidence for point shaving in college football does not appear to exist.

Suggested Citation

  • Schmidt, Martin B. & Stuck, Lee M., 2009. "Point shaving: Corruption in NCAA college football?," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 105(1), pages 90-92, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolet:v:105:y:2009:i:1:p:90-92
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165-1765(09)00195-5
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Erik Snowberg & Justin Wolfers, 2010. "Explaining the Favorite-Long Shot Bias: Is it Risk-Love or Misperceptions?," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 118(4), pages 723-746, August.
    2. Justin Wolfers, 2006. "Point Shaving: Corruption in NCAA Basketball," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(2), pages 279-283, May.
    3. Steven D. Levitt, 2004. "Why are gambling markets organised so differently from financial markets?," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 114(495), pages 223-246, April.
    4. Thaler, Richard H & Ziemba, William T, 1988. "Parimutuel Betting Markets: Racetracks and Lotteries," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 2(2), pages 161-174, Spring.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Bergemann, Dirk & Ottaviani, Marco, 2021. "Information Markets and Nonmarkets," CEPR Discussion Papers 16459, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    2. Erik Snowberg & Justin Wolfers, 2010. "Explaining the Favorite-Long Shot Bias: Is it Risk-Love or Misperceptions?," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 118(4), pages 723-746, August.
    3. Angelini, Giovanni & De Angelis, Luca & Singleton, Carl, 2022. "Informational efficiency and behaviour within in-play prediction markets," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 282-299.
    4. Philip W. S. Newall & Dominic Cortis, 2021. "Are Sports Bettors Biased toward Longshots, Favorites, or Both? A Literature Review," Risks, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-9, January.
    5. Igan, Deniz & Pinheiro, Marcelo & Smith, John, 2011. ""White men can't jump," but would you bet on it?," MPRA Paper 31469, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Alexis Direr, 2013. "Are betting markets efficient? Evidence from European Football Championships," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(3), pages 343-356, January.
    7. Marco Ottaviani & Peter Norman Sorensen, 2010. "Noise, Information, and the Favorite-Longshot Bias in Parimutuel Predictions," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 2(1), pages 58-85, February.
    8. Goto, Shingo & Yamada, Toru, 2023. "What drives biased odds in sports betting markets: Bettors’ irrationality and the role of bookmakers," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 252-270.
    9. Raphael Flepp & Stephan Nüesch & Egon Franck, 2013. "Liquidity, Market Efficiency and the Influence of Noise Traders: Quasi-Experimental Evidence from the Betting Industry," Working Papers 341, University of Zurich, Department of Business Administration (IBW).
    10. Carl Singleton & Alex Bryson & Peter Dolton & James Reade & Dominik Schreyer, 2022. "Economics lessons from sports during the COVID-19 pandemic," Chapters, in: Paul M. Pedersen (ed.), Research Handbook on Sport and COVID-19, chapter 2, pages 9-18, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    11. Igan, Deniz & Pinheiro, Marcelo & Smith, John, 2015. "A study of a market anomaly: “White Men Can’t Jump”, but would you bet on it?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 13-25.
    12. Igan, Deniz & Pinheiro, Marcelo & Smith, John, 2012. "Racial biases and market outcomes: "White men can't jump," but would you bet on it?," MPRA Paper 36069, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Marius Ötting & Christian Deutscher & Carl Singleton & Luca De Angelis, 2023. "Gambling on Momentum in Contests," Economics Discussion Papers em-dp2023-08, Department of Economics, University of Reading.
    14. Barge-Gil, Andrés & García-Hiernaux, Alfredo, 2019. "Staking plans in sports betting under unknown true probabilities of the event," MPRA Paper 92196, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    15. Siemroth, Christoph, 2014. "Why prediction markets work : The role of information acquisition and endogenous weighting," Working Papers 14-02, University of Mannheim, Department of Economics.
    16. Martin Kukuk & Stefan Winter, 2008. "An Alternative Explanation of the Favorite-Longshot Bias," Journal of Gambling Business and Economics, University of Buckingham Press, vol. 2(2), pages 79-96, September.
    17. Kai Fischer & Justus Haucap, 2022. "Home advantage in professional soccer and betting market efficiency: The role of spectator crowds," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 75(2), pages 294-316, May.
    18. Legge, Stefan & Schmid, Lukas, 2016. "Media attention and betting markets," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 304-333.
    19. Andrew Grant & David Johnstone & Oh Kang Kwon, 2008. "Optimal Betting Strategies for Simultaneous Games," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 5(1), pages 10-18, March.
    20. S Lessmann & M-C Sung & J E V Johnson, 2011. "Towards a methodology for measuring the true degree of efficiency in a speculative market," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 62(12), pages 2120-2132, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecolet:v:105:y:2009:i:1:p:90-92. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolet .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.