Match-fixing opportuniteiten in toernooi

TOURNAMENT DESIGN

Vulnerabilities to match-fixing in tournament design

Match fixing is a phenomenon that occurs in all countries, sports and competition levels. The way in which a competition is planned can play an important role in the prevention of match fixing. However, competition planning can also create match-fixing opportunities. When sports matches are played, there are many interests involved that can lead to match fixing. Want to know more? Read more!

Players or teams have an interest in winning a match if the outcome of the match affects the chance of winning a prize. Winning the competition is a prize, but promotion, relegation and qualifying for an international tournament are also possible prizes. These prizes usually depend on the final ranking. A match between two opponents is symmetrical if the result of the match influences the winning of a prize for both teams. If this is the case for only one of the two teams, we speak of asymmetrical interest. In other words, one of the two teams no longer has a sporting interest in participating in the matches.

What is the link with match fixing?

Asymmetric matches have a higher risk of match fixing. The prize that can be won or avoided has major (financial) consequences. The match-fixing risk lies in the fact that an athlete or team can convince the opponent to lose on purpose. This, for example, in exchange for money. The opponent has no sporting interest in winning the match. This will make them more inclined to accept the proposal (e.g. accept the money).

ProOFS Recommendations

In terms of competition planning, dynamic planning can help: instead of planning the entire competition at the beginning of the season, it can be planned up to a certain point. For the second half, historical information is then taken into account to minimize asymmetric matches.

TOOL ALERT

Within the PrOFS project, a tool for better tournament design was developed. Click here for more info!

Common interests can arise in a match when there is an outcome that is in line with the goal of both teams. For example, teams must score a certain number of points to advance to the next round.

What is the link with match fixing?

In competitions with common interests, both sides may agree to have the match end in a certain outcome. This is also called conspiracy. Collusion is usually at the expense of other teams and is a form of competitive distortion. An example is Gijón's disgrace at the 1982 Football World Cup. The win during the group stage was worth 2 points. The first two of the four teams advanced to the next round, based on points (Ptn) and goal difference (DV). Austria and West Germany had 1 match left (#) and agreed to play 0-1. This was a conspiracy so that both teams advanced at the expense of Algeria.

ProOFS Recommendations

To avoid collusion in the group stage, the following things can be done:

limit the number of teams that advance to the next phase to 1.
play matches in the same group simultaneously, to ensure maximum uncertainty about each other's results.
avoid odd groups so that there is no ‘passive’ team is on the last day of play.

TOOL ALERT

Within the PrOFS project, a tool for better tournament design was developed. Click here for more info!

In youth competitions it happens that several teams from the same club are present in a competition. Also in international competitions, the same competition often includes athletes from the same country. In this case we speak of a community of players. We can group the players based on a common characteristic.

What is the link with match-fixing?

Players can agree to work together in such a way that a losing match increases the chance of winning for another team or player from the community. An example is the badminton semi-final at the 2004 Olympic Games. Chinese player Zhou Ming deliberately lost to Zhang Ning, her Chinese opponent. The reason for this was that it was believed that Zhang had a greater chance of winning the final

ProOFS Recommendations

There are two solutions:

limiting the number of participants of the same community
limiting the number of matches between members of the same community.

TOOL ALERT

Within the PrOFS project, a tool for better tournament design was developed. Click here for more info!

If a tournament consists of multiple rounds and the next round's matches are determined by the results of the previous round, a player may be motivated to lose on purpose. The reason for this is to play against the desired opponent in the next round. This is the case, for example, in the Football World Cup, where on the first day of the knockout phase, group winners play against teams that finished second in their group.

What is the link with match-fixing?

A team can deliberately drop to second place. This is to play in the next round against a group winner who according to them is ‘weaker’ is. At the 2012 Beijing Olympics, 8 badminton players were disqualified. They deliberately tried to lose in the group stage to get a ‘strong’ team in the knockout phase.

ProOFS Recommendations

Possible solutions are:

limit the number of teams that advance to the next phase to 1.
ensure that the top half of the best ranked players, in order, get to pick their bottom half opponent.

TOOL ALERT

Within the PrOFS project, a tool for better tournament design was developed. Click here for more info!

When a tournament consists of several phases and teams only carry over a portion of the points earned to the next phase.

What is the link with match fixing?

A player or team may have an interest in losing on purpose. This is so that another team ends up higher in the rankings. This can be beneficial. For example, when only the points obtained against the top 4 are transferred. By losing on purpose, a team can influence which teams finish in the top four or not and thus also the transfers

affect points.

ProOFS Recommendations

Possible solutions are:

Treat all results equally
Only transfer half of the points, as this reduces the attractiveness of deliberately losing.

TOOL ALERT

Within the PrOFS project, a tool for better tournament design was developed. Click here for more info!

What? When a team deliberately loses in order not to be promoted to a competition in which it sees its travel distances increase.

What is the link with match fixing?

Teams that play against intentionally losing teams enjoy an unfair advantage over teams that do play against fully-paced opponents.

ProOFS Recommendations

The solution in this case is operational in nature, namely designing a schedule in such a way that travel distances are minimized. The format of a tournament influences the extent to which travel distances can be minimized. Research shows that an incomplete round robin tournament offers much more flexibility to minimize travel distances compared to a format where teams are divided into separate round robin tournaments. As a result, the incomplete round robin format can indirectly reduce match-fixing opportunities.

TOOL ALERT

Within the PrOFS project, a tool for better tournament design was developed. Click here for more info!