Don’t worry, just go ahead and spread the bet

This is where the concept of side bets, sub-bets and spread bets is more useful.

Once a bookie has a captain on his “rolls”, half the battle is won. With his help, Cronje in this case, a bookie could bet on anything: From the toss right to the batting/bowling order and even composition of the team.

The transcripts released so far, do not have any reference of either side winning or losing a match.

So, what was the “fixing” all about? Simple. According to the transcript released, the South African captain was expected to ensure a certain kind of composition, bring in some irregular bowlers, and take `strange’ decisions, which may look like tactics to an outsider, but are in actuality engineered by other considerations.

Side bets are bets with a rider — like X Team will score less than 150 but win the match, meaning there are two components to the bet. One component being scoring less than 150 and the second being winning.

A sub bet is like betting on specific players. Like an in-form batsman like Herschelle Gibbs scoring less than 20 (as the transcripts revealed and Gibbs was out for 19!). A bookie stands to make money because a punter could put money on Gibbs scoring more than 20 because of his good form, but behind the curtain a `deal’ would have already been fixed.

The, third and more complicated but rather popular form is a spread bet. Here the odds keep changing as the match progresses. If a team suddenly loses three or four wickets in quick succession, the odds on it winning the match become higher; likewise a long partnership in the middle of an innings shorten the odds.

In spread bets, only punters who have the confidence of the bookies — and hence allowed to place bets without putting money upfront — enter the ring.At the end of each match, the difference is calculated — the profits the punter has made at various stages minus the losses he incurs at other stages. On a good day a punter could walk away with a huge packet, or lose a fortune. It is here that an insider bookie succeeds, specially if he has “privileged” information from influential players inside the team. He makes the odds attractive to lure the punter.

Other bets are also placed on composition of teams, or the toss — what a captain will do if he wins it. Bets are also placed on run-outs, and in Test matches, on declarations and follow-ons.

Another popular way of betting, which is largely individual — often there are no big bookies involved in it — is when two punters split players and bet.

For instance, in a match where there are 22 players, Bookie A chooses six players, three from either side. Bookie B does the same. The sum-total of runs scored by either punters’ `team’ is compared and the difference paid out depending on who `wins’. The same can be extended to wickets taken by bowlers. Disputes, if any, on who chooses which batsmen are sorted out before the match starts. Money changes hands at the rate of as high as Rs 10,000, or even a lakh per difference of a run.

If in a series, matches are closely fought, the amount of money per run or wicket (difference) becomes higher.

Here is a selection of close matches, stunning results and some strange happenings. Feel free to arrive at your own conclusion:

India vs South Africa (Baroda in March 2000):

India, chasing South Africa’s total of 282, were 252 for two, with plenty of overs to spare. Suddenly four Indian batsmen got out to full tosses and loose deliveries and slid to a position where they needed six runs off the final over. Not a comforting thought for the Indians but Lance Klusener dropped a sitter off Robin Singh — quite like Gibbs dropping Steve Waugh in World Cup last year. India sneaked through.

RESULT:SA (281) lost to Ind (282 for 6) by four wickets

Pakistan vs Bangladesh (World Cup, at Northampton in May ’99)

The first words Pakistan skipper Wasim Akram said after his team’s stunning defeat were: “I think at least now our brothers from Bangladesh deserve Test status from the ICC.” Rumours said, he probably meant his brother, who is believed to be part of a betting ring.

RESULT:Bangladesh (223) beat Pak (161) by 62 runs

India vs Zimbabwe (World Cup, at Leicester in May ’99)

Sachin Tendulkar’s personal tragedy — his father’s sad demise — left the team shattered in the morning. By evening, more Indian heads hung in shame as a certain Henry Olonga came on to bowl from nowhere and scalped three in an over. The generous Indians also conceded 51 extras besides being penalised four overs for slow over-rate.

RESULT:Zim (252 for nine) beat Ind (249) by three runs

India vs Kenya (at Gwalior in May ’98)

Skipper Mohammad Azharuddin didn’t deem it right to bring back his main bowlers — Venkatesh Prasad, Anil Kumble and Robin Singh — when Maurice Odumbe, was smashing the irregulars all over. The `experienced’ Indian batting never really took off and ended way short of the target set by the cricketing minnows.

RESULT:Ken (265 for five) beat Ind (196) by 69 runs

India vs Sri Lanka (World Cup semifinal, at Calcutta in March ’96)

Despite Azharuddin’s baffling decision to put Sri Lanka in to bat first on a wicket which was expected to crumble in the afternoon, Sri Lanka’s total of 251-8 appeared gettable when India, with Tendulkar in full flow, were 98 for one. What happened after that for 69 further deliveries, stunned everybody. India had collapsed to 120 for eight in 35 overs, and the angry Calcutta crowd did not allow the game to be completed.

RESULT:SL (251 for eight) beat Ind (120 for 8 in 35 overs). Match awarded to SL on default.

West Indies vs Kenya (World Cup, at Pune in March ’96)

West Indian skipper Richie Richardson and Brian Lara were in the midst of a cold war. Richardson’s handling of the team and treatment of seniors like Curtly Ambrose and Courtney Walsh was also in question. Eyebrows were first raised when Kenya, batting first on a green wicket, were 72 for six and Richardson, rather than bringing back his main fast bowlers pressed intoservice a part-timer like Keith Arthurton allowing the last four Kenyans to add 94. The West Indians in turn played horrible shots against club-level bowling the Kenyans seemed to be dishing out.

RESULT: Ken (166) beat WI (93) by 73 runs