NBA Scandal

Forthcoming posts and analysis on new site

2011-06-06T05:10:00.003-04:00

From this point forward, all new posts and analyses will appear @

www.seanpatrickgriffin.net

The new site allows for all sorts of things which are simply not possible on Blogger, and we have tried to incorporate all pre-existing material (from the NBA Scandal blog and others) into the new domain.

Thanks for your interest and support!

Gaming the Game discussed on KNBR 680/1050 The Sports Leader (San Fran)

2011-06-04T16:02:00.000-04:00

Now that the academic year is over, I am back to entertaining interviews regarding Gaming the Game. One of the latest such appearances was with "The Razor and Mr. T" on KNBR 680/1050 The Sports Leader in San Francisco (air date 6/1/11). The podcast is streamed here.

Former NBA referee Tim Donaghy's comments re: Gaming the Game

2011-05-16T04:35:00.003-04:00

I have been (and, at least for the near future, remain) consumed with my responsibilities as the academic year comes to an end, and thus haven’t been available to humor each and every media request related to Gaming the Game: The Story Behind the NBA Betting Scandal and the Gambler Who Made It Happen (Barricade, 2011). In particular, I haven’t taken the time to explicitly examine or discuss former NBA referee Tim Donaghy’s public comments about the book (he has also contacted me privately a few times, and his statements are essentially the same as those available online). I’ll try to address this briefly here, and will no doubt get into this in more detail later as time becomes more available.

I need to state at the onset that according to Tim Donaghy he has not read - and does not plan to read - Gaming the Game, and thus whatever comments he has offered about the book are, themselves, not based on evidence (serious NBA betting scandal followers will note there is nothing new about this when it comes to Donaghy).

Donaghy wanted me (and others) to know that he has recently corresponded with scandal co-conspirator Tommy Martino - indeed, that they are “Facebook friends” – and especially that Martino supported Donaghy on a matter of primacy, namely about whether or not Donaghy waged successful bets with the third co-conspirator, pro gambler Jimmy Battista, on NBA games that Donaghy did not officiate. This is significant, of course, because Donaghy claims that “inside information” (e.g., access to players, coaches, and other referees) accounted for his betting success, not Donaghy’s on-court behavior. If true, it would make sense therefore if Donaghy’s bets were equally placed and equally successful on games he didn’t officiate. If, instead, evidence exists illustrating that the bets from 2003 – 2006 (i.e., starting before Donaghy ever cut a deal with Battista and Martino) were exclusively on Donaghy’s games and/or what few bets placed by Donaghy in the 2006-07 season (with Martino and Battista) on NBA games he didn’t officiate were losers, Donaghy’s claims of “inside info” as the explanation for his betting success would be severely discredited. In short, such evidence would strongly suggest that Donaghy influenced game outcomes with his on-court performance to advance his bets.

Obviously, as someone who has been spent so much time studying the scandal (the project began in March 2008), this issue gets a lot of attention in Gaming the Game, but I’ll delve into this a little here in light of Donaghy’s recent comments.

Tim Donaghy wants me and others to know that, although (like Donaghy) Martino says that he hasn’t read my book, Martino was recently quoted as follows: “We didn’t bet many games that Tim didn’t officiate…but when we did, Tim was very good at them also. Battista refused to take anymore of the games that weren’t Tim’s” (emphasis added).

There are so many things to write about these circumstances, but I’ll try to be as clear and concise as possible.

1. It is very interesting to see that Donaghy and Martino are apparently renewing their friendship.

For those who are unaware, Donaghy and Martino were very good friends for years (indeed, Donaghy has formerly referred to Martino as a “true friend”). Casual NBA betting scandal observers may be confused right now, and are likely asking, “Wait a second - didn’t Tim Donaghy say that Tommy Martino was a ‘Gambino crime family member’ who extorted Donaghy by threatening to harm Donaghy’s wife and kids if Donaghy didn’t place bets with Martino and his childhood friend Jimmy Battista?!” Uh, yes, Tim Donaghy did…when he was trying to sell a book (Note: Martino and Battista are the "members of the Gambino crime family"/"they"/"them" being referred to by Donaghy in this representative montage of his media appearances):

2. It is also noteworthy that Donaghy now wishes to treat Martino as a credible source of information.

After all, this is the same Tommy Martino who, after admitting he perjured himself before the grand jury, visited with federal authorities on three occasions for proffer sessions in the hopes of backtracking his earlier false statements. Such conferences are designed to offer criminal defendants opportunities to lessen the forthcoming harm facing them, and thus the prospective loss of freedom often results in remarkably candid conversations. It was during these sessions that Martino offered authorities insights into all sorts of illicit activities, dating back to Martino’s early years as a low-level drug dealer. It was also during these sessions that Martino explained his version of the NBA betting scandal, ranging from his involvement to win-loss records to payment amounts and locations, etc.

In the context of Tim Donaghy now asking interested parties to believe Tommy Martino, let’s especially consider what Martino told the FBI during his proffer sessions. You’ll easily note that Martino’s version of events on practically every matter of import contradicts Donaghy’s claims (and I predictably get much deeper into all of these matters in Gaming the Game). Please note that quoted material is from confidential FBI memos summarizing Martino's statements:

"A meeting was set up between Martino, [Battista] and Donaghy at a restaurant at the Marriott Hotel in Philadelphia" on December 12, 2006 (i.e., Donaghy was aware of the Martino/Battista conference to address Donaghy's betting concerns and thus wasn't surprised or shocked - much less chilled or shaken - to meet with Martino and Battista, as Donaghy claims);
During the December 12, 2006 meeting, Donaghy "complained [to Martino] that [Donaghy’s golfing and gambling buddy Jack] Concannon was not giving him any money so he wanted to start giving [his NBA betting] picks to [Battista]" (i.e., the conspiracy didn’t begin as a mob extortion attempt of Donaghy, as Donaghy claims);
Martino paid Donaghy approximately $120,000 from December 2006 through April 2007 (i.e., Donaghy was paid roughly $100,000 more than Donaghy claims he received);
Martino provided Donaghy with prescription pills and the two "smoked pot together...on some occasions," and the longtime pals "used the services of prostitutes" on more than one occasion when they met for betting payments during the scandal. Indeed, Martino detailed for the FBI the dates, cities, and the online service used to procure the women for himself and Donaghy (i.e., Donaghy was not in fear of "mobster" Martino, accounting for Donaghy's betting during the '06-07 season, as Donaghy claims);
When pro gambler Jimmy Battista entered drug rehab on March 18, 2007 to treat an addiction to prescription pills, the Donaghy/Martino scheme continued, but now with pro gambler Pete Ruggieri receiving the picks instead of Battista (i.e., Donaghy’s betting did not end on 3/18/07, as Donaghy claims); and
“After Ruggieri decided to shut the scheme down, Donaghy pushed Martino to take one more game” (i.e., Donaghy was not being forced to bet on his games by Battista and Martino throughout the '06-07 portion of the scandal, nor was Donaghy relieved the betting was over, as Donaghy claims).

3. Lastly, there is the recent Martino quote being circulated by Donaghy:

“We didn’t bet many games that Tim didn’t officiate…but when we did, Tim was very good at them also. Battista refused to take anymore of the games that weren’t Tim’s” (emphasis added).

If you simply look closely what Martino says, you’ll notice that it is counterintuitive even without my following commentary. That is, why would Battista have stopped taking bets on NBA games not officiated by Tim Donaghy if they were winning at anywhere near the same rate as the picks on Donaghy’s games? We are to believe that millions of dollars in sure winners were ignored by a pro gambler? Really? Fortunately, in addition to our common sense and intuition we can revisit what Tommy Martino told federal authorities when his freedom was in jeopardy. An FBI memo summarizing Martino’s take on this matter succinctly states (emphasis added): “Occasionally, in the beginning, Donaghy provided picks for some games he was not refereeing. After a few losses, though, [Battista] did not want any more of those games.”

There is much more information than this offered by Martino (and by others, including fellow cooperating government witnesses) which directly contradicts many Donaghy claims. A thorough assessment of the FBI’s probe allows readers to understand why federal authorities never mentioned organized crime in the months and months of scandal goings-on, why Battista and Martino were never charged with extortion…and why federal officials with direct knowledge of the scandal cases discredit much of what Donaghy claims following his stint in prison. These officials, of course, have already experienced first-hand Donaghy’s repeated efforts to minimize his culpability and to exaggerate his cooperation with the government.

I should note in closing that it is quite possible that neither Tim Donaghy nor Tommy Martino has read Gaming the Game (as each man claims), because their comments to date about its contents are wildly misinformed. Especially off the mark are their assertions that the book relies largely on the words of Jimmy Battista. Nothing could be further from the truth, as noted by several reviewers. For example, it has been said that Gaming the Game is not a sympathetic portrait of Battista (see, e.g., here), and the book has been praised for its “exhaustive"/"impeccable" research (see, e.g., here, here, or here). This critical acclaim is very much appreciated and is the result of two-plus years of study which included dozens of interviews of relevant persons such as local and federal law enforcement officials (investigators and prosecutors), defense attorneys, professional gamblers (and their “employees”), journalists, and scholars. More importantly, especially with regard to the NBA betting scandal, Gaming the Game – like the rest of my published research - relies upon a wealth of confidential law enforcement files, court documents, and news articles (betting line data and electronic betting records were also obtained and analyzed).

[As mentioned above, I'll have likely have more to say about Tim Donaghy's recent comments and activities in the near future as time becomes available.]

Why I never attempted interviewing Tim Donaghy

2011-05-16T04:33:00.013-04:00

“Why didn’t you try to interview Tim Donaghy?”

I have been asked this (perfectly fair) question many times in the past month or so while discussing my new book which features a detailed examination of the 2003-07 NBA betting scandal, and will humor answering it more fully here for others to reference.

As I explain in Gaming the Game, at the onset of the research in March 2008, I planned to attempt interviewing the former NBA referee. In time, however, I discovered how many demonstrably false claims Donaghy has made, and decided against trying to contact him.

Merriam-Webster’s online dictionary offers the following definitions of “lie”:

1a. an assertion of something known or believed by the speaker to be untrue with intent to deceive;

1b. an untrue or inaccurate statement that may or may not be believed true by the speaker;

2. something that misleads or deceives

You’ll easily note that the key distinction between “1a” and the other definitions of “lie” concerns the mindset of the speaker. Using the lesser standards (i.e., “1b” and “2”), Tim Donaghy is without doubt a pathological liar.

The stricter standard (“1a”) requires us to determine whether Donaghy believes all of the falsehoods he has repeatedly stated and whether he intends to deceive. When researching the scandal, I – like the federal authorities who investigated his claims – saw little value in taking the time to assess his state of mind and merely cared if his assertions were valid and supported by the evidence. Some may recall what the lead prosecutor told the court about Donaghy’s myriad claims (that consumed the resources of the FBI at who knows what taxpayer expense, incidentally):

“…we’ve never taken the position that Mr. Donaghy has lied to us. But, there is a difference between telling the truth and believing you’re telling the truth and finding out later that a number of allegations don’t hold any water” (emphasis added).

Of course, there are still many Donaghy whoppers made after his release from prison (when he began straying even further from the facts, most likely to sell books and/or excuse his prior behavior) that Donaghy certainly knows are not true, led perhaps by his repeated statements that his longtime “true friend” Tommy Martino was/is a member of organized crime (see below and elsewhere). As to whether Donaghy believes the numerous other factually-untrue statements uttered and/or penned by him, here is my brief analysis of the matter.

As I explained to an online publication recently about not trying to interview Donaghy for Gaming the Game, “Importantly, by the time Donaghy was released from prison in late 2009 and ostensibly available for an interview, I was deep into the project and knew there were significant flaws in what he had told federal authorities. Of course, I had also interviewed those persons who investigated and prosecuted him, including one federal official who, since the earliest days of dealing with Donaghy, considered the former NBA referee to be ‘deranged’ and someone who ‘believes the world is against him.’ Another federal official called Donaghy ‘a fucking loose cannon.’” These are in addition to other interview subjects who have known Donaghy over the years who expressed similar sentiments. As such, I suppose it is conceivable that Tim Donaghy actually believes some of the things he says which are nevertheless downright silly when measured against the evidence. Regardless of his mindset and motivations, Tim Donaghy is a dubious source to be sure. Here is some more related commentary for interested parties…

Gaming the Game readers will note that for the most part I do not get into the more personal aspects of the NBA betting scandal co-conspirators’ lives. What little material that appears in the book in this regard is offered only to explain the sociology of the conspiracy and to understand how these personal matters impacted the decision-making of various parties during the conspiracy and throughout the criminal justice process. Regarding the former concern, for instance, their backgrounds and relationships mattered in the context of addressing whether this was a mob-orchestrated extortion scheme, as Donaghy claims, or rather if it was simply a matter of longtime and mutual pals getting together to make easy money, as Martino and Battista insist. With respect to the latter concern, personal issues impacted all sorts of things:

(a) during the conspiracy (e.g., What accounted for Battista living temporarily in Martino’s home, which ultimately greased the wheels for the conspiracy with Donaghy? Was Donaghy, as he claims, a mob extortion victim in fear of his life from “Gambino crime family members” Tommy Martino and Jimmy Battista or instead, as fellow cooperating witness Martino expressed to the FBI, was Donaghy partying it up – complete with drug use and prostitutes obtained from an online service - with his longtime buddy Tommy when they met for payments during the scandal - and pleading with Martino to keep the scheme going when Donaghy was informed by Martino that it was being shut down?); and

(b) during the criminal justice proceedings (e.g., Why didn’t federal authorities buy Donaghy’s story about not fixing games and instead fight with him, insisting he admit he may have at the least subconsciously altered games before agreeing to sign off on a plea deal with him? What off-the-court actions almost cost Donaghy his job as an NBA referee in 2005, and how might these and other related behavioral issues have impacted a jury trial with him as the lead witness - and with his testimony as the key evidence - in the scandal cases?)

Casual NBA betting scandal followers, especially those located outside the Philadelphia area, may be unaware of Tim Donaghy’s troubling reputation among those who knew him throughout his life. For example, in July 2008 as Donaghy awaited sentencing (i.e., at a time when most criminal defendants can expect others who know them to say things like, “I can’t believe what he admitted to/has been convicted of doing; that seems so unlike him” or “He’s such a great person” or “I feel so bad for him” and the like), Donaghy’s hometown newspaper wrote:

“every teammate, classmate, or associate contacted…by the [Delco] Daily Times either chose not to comment on Donaghy or didn’t return phone calls…While there are those empathetic to Donaghy and his gambling-related plight, many others consider his a karmic downfall.”1

National writers have heard similar assessments of Donaghy, including Yahoo! Sports NBA columnist Adrian Wojnarowski, who wrote:

“several sources described him as fairly unpopular with his peers, past and present…From his Philly basketball roots to his peers in the NBA, Donaghy isn’t described with much affection.”

Now that my findings have been published (in the book and elsewhere; see, e.g., my blogs here and here), Donaghy has engaged in behavior patterns that have characterized much of his adult life. For example, when a prominent and well-regarded sports journalist recently pointed his readers and viewers to my work and offered his praise for my carefully-documented research, Tim Donaghy publicly smeared the commentator as “a nasty drunk” who “had a major problem with the booze” and who was “fired” from a newspaper career (as is standard Donaghy fare by now, all of these assertions are of course without a hint of supporting evidence).

Similarly, when two of Philadelphia’s most highly-regarded sports journalists appeared with me on a popular area television sports program to discuss Gaming the Game, Donaghy was true to form with his response. Stan Hochman is a legendary, award-winning sportswriter who has, among other things, written for the Philadelphia Daily News since 1959, and who has been inducted into the Philadelphia Sports Hall of Fame. Hochman reviewed Gaming the Game for the Daily News, in part stating that the book is not a sympathetic portrait of Jimmy Battista, that it is “intriguing,” and that it “offers a fascinating look into the Donaghy scandal.”2 Dick Jerardi is also an award-winning sportswriter for the Daily News, who has been described as “one of the leading basketball reporters in the country” (in fact, he formerly served as president of the U.S. Basketball Writers Association). Interestingly, Jerardi penned a lengthy (and I think most would say “positive”) piece on Donaghy’s father, Gerry, an admired and respected former NCAA referee, during the newspaper's comprehensive NBA betting scandal coverage. Like Hochman, Jerardi was very familiar with my two-plus years of research, and thus he appeared on the program to discuss the book. Despite the seriousness with which the material was treated by each panelist, Donaghy – as is his nature – publicly said, without ever seeing or hearing the program – and still without having read the book and without reviewing its considerable documentation, “They are all full of shit.”

I am also aware of Donaghy phoning others with whom he disagrees and harassing them, especially if they have publicly discussed (or have otherwise been involved with) my research.

Tim Donaghy’s recent statements and actions perfectly confirm what informed persons described to me during the project, and they validate my decision not to attempt interviewing him. He is a source lacking credibility…and a lot more.

1. Anthony J. SanFilippo, “Donaghy’s downfall leaves many scars,” Delco Times, July 6, 2008 (not available online).

2. Other published reviews have similarly stated that Gaming the Game is not particularly kind to former pro gambler Jimmy Battista, and have praised the book for its “exhaustive"/"impeccable" research. For reviews of Gaming the Game, please see here.

Las Vegas Review-Journal review of Gaming the Game

2011-05-11T14:15:00.000-04:00

The latest review of Gaming the Game: The Story Behind the NBA Betting Scandal and the Gambler Who Made It Happen (Barricade, 2011) was penned by John L. Smith and appears today in the Las Vegas Review-Journal.

For previous reviews of Gaming the Game, please see here.

Gaming the Game on PCN's "PA Books"

2011-04-26T07:32:00.004-04:00

Some may recall that of the dozens of media interviews I entertained for Black Brothers, Inc., by far my favorite was the one conducted by the Pennsylvania Cable Network's Brian Lockman for their popular "PA Books" program. You can thus imagine my delight when I was invited to appear on the program with him to discuss Gaming the Game: The Story Behind the NBA Betting Scandal and the Gambler Who Made It Happen (Barricade, 2011).

The 1-hour interview airs for the first time on Sunday, May 1st at 9pm. The program may also be viewed via live streaming video at www.pcntv.com, and will be posted as a podcast on the website for one week (beginning the Monday after the initial airing). The wide-ranging interview discusses everything from the NBA betting scandal (including the credibility of former referee Tim Donaghy) to the underworld of big-time sports gambling to the ongoing debate about the legalization of sports wagering.

UPDATE: The segment is available online here.

Gaming the Game Q & A at Covers.com

2011-04-15T09:59:00.001-04:00

The latest interview regarding Gaming the Game was published yesterday on Covers.com, a popular and influential web site covering sports and related betting information and analysis. **Please know that when I get the time, I will be posting a commentary about what was edited out of the piece, and how such editorial decisions have adversely affected the public's understanding of the NBA betting scandal until now.

Gaming the Game on Don Best TV

2011-04-14T06:38:00.003-04:00

As I explain in great detail intermittently throughout Gaming the Game (also see my post here), pro gamblers rely heavily upon the Don Best service for real-time betting line movements. Thus, it is fitting that I was interviewed about the book (and about my assessments of former NBA referee Tim Donaghy's claims) on "Don Best TV". Here is Part I (of two):

Here is Part II of the interview:

You can also find the interview posted in two parts here: Part I and Part II.

Gaming the Game on 610 WIP (Philadelphia)

2011-04-01T16:23:00.000-04:00

I taped an interview with Steve Trevelise for broadcast during his show tonight (technically for early Saturday morning [4/2/11], 1:00am - 5:00am) on Philly's 610 WIP. The segment will be re-aired during his show early Sunday (4/3/11) morning, between 2:00am and 6:00am. As I explained to Steve during the interview, a large percentage of the writing for Gaming the Game took place with him or his fellow early morning WIP host Big Daddy Graham on in the background.

Gaming the Game discussed on ESPN 710 (L.A.)

2011-04-01T16:18:00.000-04:00

I appeared briefly (notwithstanding cell phone issues!) with Max Kellerman and Marcellus Wiley today to discuss Gaming the Game. The "Max and Marcellus Show" airs on ESPN 710 (Los Angeles). Podcasts of their shows can be found here.

Gaming the Game on The Lion Roars throughout April 2011

2011-03-30T09:17:00.001-04:00

Each Thursday night in April at 7:00pm, Philadelphia-area Comcast subscribers will be able to watch a 30-minute interview conducted by Dr. Moylan C. Mills, Professor Emeritus of Integrative Arts at Penn State. The segment largely focuses on Gaming the Game, with a few comments about my work more generally, including Black Brothers, Inc. The program, The Lion Roars, airs on Comcast Cable Channel 190.

Next Gaming the Game talks/signings

2011-03-27T06:52:00.007-04:00

There will be several of these engagements in the coming weeks, spread throughout the Greater Philadelphia region. These events have been entertaining thus far, and I very much enjoy the Q & A session and hearing the thoughts of others regarding the big-time sports betting world and, especially, about various aspects of the NBA betting scandal.

Particulars for the next two Gaming the Game events are as follows (books will be available for sale/signing, of course):

Thursday, April 7, 2011 from 7-9p at SmokeEaters Pub, 7681 Frankford Ave., Philadelphia, PA, 19136 (Frankford and Sheffield), (215) 338-4188.

Thursday, April 14, 2011 from 7-9p at Liberties Restaurant and Bar, 705 N 2nd St., Philadelphia, PA 19123 (2nd and Fairmount), (215) 238-0660.

Gaming the Game event on Monday, March 28, 2011

2011-03-27T04:54:00.001-04:00

There are numerous things in the works regarding Gaming the Game (book events, signings, press coverage, etc.). I still need to post some media coverage from the past few weeks when I get the time (I am in the teeth of an academic semester right now). Until then, interested parties may wish to know that I'll be appearing at the Chester County Book & Music Company on Monday, March 28th at 4pm, where I'll sign books and entertain questions. CCBMC has requested that attendees RSVP.

I will also be there earlier taping an interview for broadcast on Brandywine Radio. The segment, which will be hosted by local author (among other endeavors/titles) Bruce Mowday, is set for broadcast at 5pm on Friday, April 22, 2011.

Here is a related story in the Delaware County Daily Times.

Author profile in Philadelphia Magazine

2011-03-25T10:40:00.001-04:00

In the context of the recently-released Gaming the Game, there is a brief profile of me in the April 2011 issue of Philadelphia Magazine. [Note: If you read the piece, please know that the establishment being referenced was formerly a nondescript chain restaurant back when I held court with interview subjects.]

Latest Gaming the Game press

2011-03-23T14:58:00.005-04:00

As I noted earlier, there is much more that I need to post. For now, here is some recent coverage of the new book on pro gambling and the NBA betting scandal:

My appearance with Chad Doing on The Morning Sports Page (95.5 The Game; Portland, OR) on Wednesday, March 23, 2011 is now available online.

Here is a related commentary to the above appearance by Dwight Jaynes on Comcast SportsNet Northwest.

Coverage of the book and interview in (Philadelphia's) Northeast Times.

NBA Betting Scandal on YouTube

2011-03-18T07:55:00.000-04:00

In response to several complaints about the format of this blog vis-a-vis the viewing and sharing of the audio/vid clips I have compiled of Tim Donaghy's media appearances, I have created an "NBA Betting Scandal" YouTube Channel that will house these and similar "videos". Thus, the assessments posted on this blog regarding Donaghy's media appearances (see here, here, and here) now relate to clips that can be shared and viewed more easily. Thanks to those who pointed this issue out to me.

Gaming the Game on Facebook

2011-03-09T08:35:00.002-05:00

I still don't get the allure of social networks, but at the urging of many, Gaming the Game now has its own Facebook page.

Comcast SportsNet appearance tonight at 5:45p

2011-02-23T13:36:00.011-05:00

For those in the Greater Philadelphia area (or who otherwise have access to the network), I will be on Comcast SportsNet's "Daily News Live" program discussing Gaming the Game tonight at 5:45p. The panel, hosted by CSN's Michael Barkann, includes Stan Hochman and Dick Jerardi of the Daily News
UPDATE: HERE IS THE SEGMENT:

NBA Commissioner David Stern's comments re: Gaming the Game

2011-02-20T15:35:00.001-05:00

In case you missed it, NBA Commissioner David Stern was asked to comment on Gaming the Game yesterday during the league's All-Star weekend festivities in L.A., which elicited the following reply:

I have not read the new book or seen it yet, although I'm happy with each All Star Weekend or Finals to present an opportunity for a convicted felon to issue yet another tome on his misdeeds.

So we'll see if there's anything new suggested, Mr. Pedowitz will be asked to continue to review it as we have with each one that has been published, because we want to make sure that we get to the bottom of it all.

But right now, I don't have any more information other than I know you always confirm your sources; so I commend you to confirming the convicted felon's sources.

Of course, we have no idea what question was posed to Commissioner Stern which resulted in the above reply [see below for 2/24/11 update]. As I have taken pains to point out explicitly in Gaming the Game, and others have already been quick to note (see, e.g., here), my new book would have been completed in the Spring of 2008 if the research simply entailed interviewing pro gambler Jimmy Battista (as my wife and kids will attest!). Thus, I am glad Stern at least noted that he had not seen the book, because anyone who reads GTG will easily understand this project absolutely consumed me for almost 3 years such that little of the book rests solely on Battista's words.

Readers may wish to know that although Larry Pedowitz was gracious enough to humor my inquiries, the NBA and the National Basketball Referees Association (NBRA) each refused to entertain my correspondence on several occasions. Given the correspondence and how much I was doing in this area of inquiry, it is difficult for me to believe the Commissioner didn't at least have a rough idea of what I had discovered in the course of interviewing federal law enforcement officials, pro gamblers (beyond Battista) and others, in addition to reviewing confidential FBI files, court documents, betting records and other objective betting data.

2/24/11 UPDATE: Thanks to Silver Screen and Roll (an L.A. Lakers blog hosted by SB Nation), we have the question that was posed to Commissioner Stern about Gaming the Game.

I don't know if you've seen this new book about the Donaghy scandal, but having read it myself, three of the four conspirators have said something on the record to somebody, and they are unanimous - the fourth, by the way, is Donaghy himself - and they are unanimous that he was really good at winning bets on games he officiated, really bad at winning bets on any other games, and he was gambling on games since 2003 until he left the league and the report that he looked at 16 games. How confident can we be that there are not fixed games in the NBA?

This was a pretty good question, and Stern's reply is thus more curious than I had first thought.

Gaming the Game reviews

2011-02-20T10:59:00.042-05:00

The first reviews for Gaming the Game: The Story Behind the NBA Betting Scandal and the Gambler Who Made It Happen (Barricade, 2011) are each available online.

GTG Review by Philadelphia Sports Hall of Fame member Stan Hochman of the Philadelphia Daily News

GTG Review by Henry Abbott of ESPN.com's True Hoop

GTG Review by M. Haubs of ESPN.com's The Painted Area

GTG Review by Jack McCaffery of the Delaware County Daily Times [also for The Daily Local (Chester, PA)]

GTG Review by the gambling web site Bettors World

GTG Review by Carola Von Hoffmannstahl-Solomonoff of the Blogger News Network

GTG Review by John L. Smith of the Las Vegas Review-Journal

GTG Review by Ted Sevransky of Covers.com

GTG Review by Allen Moody of About.com

Gaming the Game in the news

2011-02-20T10:54:00.000-05:00

The Philadelphia Daily News ran two excerpts this past week from Gaming the Game:

GTG excerpt 1

GTG excerpt 2

My brief appearance on Fox 29's Good Day Philadelphia program on Friday:

NBA Betting Scandal's DELCO Roots: MyFoxPHILLY.com

Gaming the Game book events this week

2011-02-19T18:39:00.000-05:00

The first two book events for Gaming the Game are this coming week. The particulars for each event are posted here. I look forward to speaking - and, especially, entertaining questions - about the underworld of big-time sports gambling and, of course, about the 2003-07 NBA betting scandal.

A comment on my forthcoming posting re: Gaming the Game coverage

2011-02-17T08:18:00.000-05:00

As a rule, I post as much newsworthy commentary and analysis of the NBA betting scandal as possible, regardless of my opinion of what is written. That will not change with whatever coverage relates to Gaming the Game, and I welcome suggestions for information to be posted on this blog.

Gaming the Game released on February 17, 2011

2011-02-17T08:16:00.000-05:00

For reasons that are unclear, the information regarding the release of Gaming the Game: The Story Behind the NBA Betting Scandal and the Gambler Who Made It Happen (Barricade) is inaccurate (e.g., Amazon.com says the pub date is April 15, 2011). The book was shipped weeks ago and, though I realize the distribution chain is notoriously slow, books should be widely available shortly. I know that certain Philadelphia-area stores like Robin's Bookstore in Center City got stock of Gaming the Game a while ago, though they were only permitted to begin sales today.

On Donaghy's media appearances (part two)

2011-02-17T07:57:00.000-05:00

As can be sensed by now, a review of his appearances discloses the same phenomenon in re: Donaghy simply repeating canned replies on a fairly small universe of topics (a tidy summary is here [see paragraph two]). You can plainly hear and see that he was an absolute machine in getting his message out - and that he benefited greatly from a mix of hosts who, at a minimum, ignored the public record (which had also been widely reported contemporaneous with key events). I'll have more on this latter point soon, but until then I thought I'd highlight a brilliant public relations strategy Donaghy (and/or his handlers at the time) employed.

You see, it wasn't simply that Donaghy was remarkably robotic and on-message (he'd be any political campaign manager's dream candidate in that regard), it was also the patterning of the questions which allowed him to weave a storyline that commonly ended with hosts and "interviewers" expressing sympathy and well wishes. Often, Donaghy's appearances looked or sounded something like this (paraphrasing his statements in my "quotes" below):

* As evidence he didn't fix games on which he bet, Donaghy would say, "I did not fix games by making incorrect calls to influence outcomes to facilitate my bets. If I was doing that, I'd be throwing up red flags all over the place and I would have been detected even sooner than I was."
* In response to the predictable (if not explicitly scripted) question, "Why should we believe you?", Donaghy would typically reply, "Because the FBI conducted a thorough investigation, as did the NBA, and they concluded I did not make any calls to influence these bets."
* If the above wasn't sufficient enough to establish Donaghy's credibility, he often said something like, "The FBI supports the book" or "The FBI stands behind the book".
* On the (extremely rare) occasion a host pointed to ESPN's TrueHoop host Henry Abbott's research (see, e.g., here, here, here, and here) which quite seriously called into question several of Donaghy's assertions (and which, until now, was the most comprehensive critique of Donaghy's overall situation), Donaghy would attempt to discredit Abbott's work by arguing it was a biased result of research done on behalf of the NBA because the league has a significant business relationship with ESPN. [I must admit I have never understood Donaghy's argument in this regard, since Abbott was among the most substantive and equally damning when it came to the issue of whether Donaghy had ever been cleared by the FBI or the NBA in re: fixing games, and indeed had posted interviews (see, e.g., here and here) with pro gambler Haralabob Voulgaris, who openly stated he firmly believed Donaghy fixed games. Thus, to me Donaghy makes little sense when he says ESPN is out to get him on behalf of the NBA. After all, the NBA almost certainly has no interest in someone - much less the influential sports network - promoting the idea that Donaghy may very well have fixed games - especially after the league conducted its own "study", the one Donaghy loves to cite so much as clearing him of fixing games!]

With Donaghy's confessed and alleged criminal activity out of the way (often in brusque fashion), typically complete with his credibility intact, the "interviews" moved onto topics or themes that painted Donaghy as both victim and hero.

* Donaghy commonly got into his rant about the NBA's alleged culture (of biases and corruption) of which he was, in his view, a bit part. In short order, the Donaghy appearance would thus move from his actions to those of others (referees, league officials, etc). Importantly, it was often at this point of Donaghy's appearances that he shrewdly employed two time-tested public relations strategies within a sentence or two:
1) Donaghy would ingratiate himself with his audience by saying how "smart" or "knowledgeable" they were (ala politicians who so often say, "The American people are smart..."), including taking the time and effort to make it personal by naming the market/town/city in which he was appearing (i.e., "The NBA fans, especially in a city like Dallas, are very, very knowledgeable..."); and
2) Donaghy would use a speaking tactic that exploits a cognitive phenomenon known as "confirmation bias" by saying something like, "Ask the fans if I was a lone, rogue referee because they know they have seen a lot of unusual things over the past ten or fifteen years" (alluding to pre-existing and well-known conspiracy theories which argue the league conspires, by various means, to feature certain players and/or teams and certain playoff/championship matchups, all with the league's financial coffers in mind). [Note: Confirmation bias is defined as "a tendency to search for or interpret information in a way that confirms one's preconceptions" - often at the expense of evidence, however valid and substantial, that does not support one's preconceptions.]

The takeaway is therefore that rather than being treated as a common criminal who simply and shrewdly defrauded his former employer for his own personal gain, Donaghy is to be heralded as a whistle-blower exposing corrupt practices within - and institutionalized by - his former organization.

Donaghy's appearances almost always ended with a combination of discussions that had the collective effect of painting Donaghy as a sympathetic figure who was fighting multiple battles. For example, the following themes were commonly explored as his "interviews" concluded.

* Donaghy claimed he was beaten in prison by "someone claiming he was associated with the New York mob," which was likely because he was a "cooperator for the government". Related to this...
* Donaghy claimed he is now frequently "in contact with the FBI, who say they have people within these organizations and if they hear anything they'll let me know..." (implying that Donaghy has something to fear from organized criminals). Please revisit my comments in part one of this review and elsewhere about Donaghy's "mob" claims.
* Donaghy claimed he bet on NBA games not because of greed or a want for money but rather because of the addictive rush of gambling. Indeed, so great was his addiction that not only cost him his job and his freedom, it cost him his marriage. For the purposes of this analysis, readers must take Donaghy at his word that it was his gambling addiction and not his other alleged behaviors (including those discussed in Gaming the Game and elsewhere [also see, especially, here]) that caused his wife to seek a divorce.
* Donaghy commonly said, as with numerous Donaghy assertions without a shred of supporting evidence, the NBA was trying to suppress him from telling his story - including intimidating his first publisher and attempting to influence CBS in re: Donaghy's appearance on the network's 60 Minutes program.

In sum, Donaghy says he was a guy who was: fighting the mob, fighting the NBA, fighting ESPN, and fighting his addiction. Far from a more simple tale of manipulation, deceit, avarice and malevolence, this was instead an inspiring story of victimhood, addiction, recovery, and redemption. As such, Donaghy says he wrote his book - and will continue to do related appearances - because "friends, family, and even law enforcement officials" have told him he has an "important message" to spread.

With this unbelievably predictable template in mind, combined with the requisite unprepared hosts, you can see how Donaghy's appearances so frequently ended like this (and why I stopped treating them as newsworthy long ago):

On Tim Donaghy's media appearances (part one)

2011-02-17T07:52:00.005-05:00

Anyone who has remotely followed this blog will recall that I stopped some time ago posting information regarding former referee Tim Donaghy's media appearances. As I explained in less detail previously, I wrongly assumed two key and related things when Donaghy began his book tour in late 2009: 1) that Donaghy would be interviewed, complete with original, informed questions and references to the existing public record (i.e., court filings, plea agreements, public utterances of relevant authorities), and with follow-up questions; and 2) that Donaghy's appearances would be newsworthy.

What I soon discovered after listening to dozens of his "interviews" was that these were essentially scripted appearances. That is, the questions asked of Donaghy were almost always the same, and were commonly asked in the same pattern/order. If this wasn't problematic enough for anyone (naively!) assuming this weighty subject matter would be treated seriously, Donaghy's answers were arguably more rehearsed. Thus, instead of bona fide interviews, these were more akin to canned political stump speeches. [As an aside, his ability to remain, as they say in politics, "on message" is remarkable. Perhaps it isn't entirely coincidental that his publisher was political consultant Shawna Vercher.]

To provide a sense of what I am describing, and thus to to help explain why I ceased covering his appearances, I have put together some montages of Donaghy's replies during the "interviews". Please note that at some point this process got way too tedious and I thus stopped compiling the clips (you'll see why, I am sure). As such, the fact that some montages may have more uses of a phrase than others does not represent the relative use of the phrases (i.e., if I offer a clip using 5 instances of a phrase, this should not be interpreted to mean the phrase was used less frequently than a phrase I illustrate being used, say, 15 times in another montage). Just know that I could have done this in even more detail with still more examples if I wanted to take the time, and that this goes for the number of phrases chosen and for the number of instances certain phrases are used by Donaghy. Most of the audio files from which these were taken remain online, and many of the links can be found elsewhere on this blog (see, especially, posts from December 2009).

Please be sure to see below the clips for a summary of these and a brief analysis of Donaghy's appearances.

As I have posted elsewhere, Donaghy has often said he did not make "incorrect" or "unjustifiable" calls to facilitate his bets. In the course of answering questions about the possible fixing of games, Donaghy has also routinely used some variation of the following paraphrased statement (Donaghy mainstays in BOLDED CAPS):

"If I was making incorrect calls in a game to facilitate a bet, I would have been throwing up RED FLAGS and I would have been DETECTED BY THE NBA AND BY THE FBI/LAW ENFORCEMENT even SOONER than I was."

If (for some reason I can't fathom!) you'd like to see some of Donaghy's "red flag" quotes, for starters you can find them within his published interviews here, here, and here.

Here is a smaller sampling (9 references, versus the 17 instances contained immediately above in "Red Flags") of Donaghy routinely using some variation of the following paraphrased statement (Donaghy mainstays in BOLDED CAPS):

"The FBI conducted a THOROUGH INVESTIGATION, as did the NBA, and they each CONCLUDED I wasn't making calls in games to facilitate/influence bets." [Please note that for the sake of this review, viewers/listeners will have to ignore that, in fact, neither the FBI nor the NBA ever "concluded" that Donaghy didn't influence game outcomes. I delve into this area in great detail in Gaming the Game.]

If you're so inclined, almost identical "FBI/NBA/thorough investigation" quotes can be found published here, here, here, and here, for starters.

You can easily perform the task of finding published examples of the phrases from each of the remaining audio clips as I have done, even though I have opted to cease taking the time to post them.

Here is a very brief sampling of Donaghy routinely using some variation of the following paraphrased statement (Donaghy mainstays in BOLDED CAPS):

"The FBI STANDS BEHIND EVERYTHING IN/ STANDS BEHIND EVERY STORY IN/FULLY SUPPORTS THE BOOK." [Please note that for the sake of this review, viewers/listeners will have to ignore that, in fact, "The FBI" doesn't review books penned by ex-cons, much less offer the Bureau's official endorsement or support for them! Indeed, federal officials with direct knowledge of the investigation and prosecution disagree considerably with much of what Donaghy claims. Perhaps most importantly, in light of Donaghy's comments, also note that although retired FBI Supervisory Special Agent (SSA) Phil Scala wrote the foreword of Donaghy's book, SSA Scala takes exception to certain key Donaghy assertions.]

Here is another very brief sampling, this time of Donaghy routinely using some variation of the following paraphrased statement (Donaghy mainstays in BOLDED CAPS):

"ESPN HAS AN AGENDA to DISCREDIT ME because of ESPN's RELATIONSHIP WITH THE NBA."

Here is a slightly more lengthy sampling of Donaghy routinely using some variation of the following paraphrased statement (Donaghy mainstays in BOLDED CAPS):

"Was I a rogue referee? NBA FANS [especially in (insert audience market here)] ARE VERY KNOWLEDGEABLE and THEY HAVE SEEN A LOT OF UNUSUAL THINGS OVER THE PAST 10/15 YEARS."

Here is a lengthy sampling of Donaghy routinely using some variation of the following paraphrased statement (Donaghy mainstays in BOLDED CAPS):

"I was HIT/WHACKED IN THE KNEE WITH A paint-rolling STICK BY SOMEONE WHO CLAIMED HE HAD TIES TO/WAS ASSOCIATED WITH THE NEW YORK MOB because IT WAS WELL KNOWN/WIDELY PUBLICIZED THAT I COOPERATED WITH THE GOVERNMENT and THERE ARE A LOT OF PEOPLE IN PRISON BECAUSE SOMEONE/OTHERS COOPERATED AGAINST THEM." [Please note that for the sake of this review, viewers/listeners will have to ignore that, in fact, that there is no evidence whatsoever Donaghy was assaulted in prison by an associate or member of organized crime.]

Here is a fairly lengthy sampling of routinely using some variation of the following paraphrased statement (Donaghy mainstays in BOLDED CAPS):

"I am/stay IN CONTACT WITH THE FBI and THEY ASSURE ME THAT THEY HAVE PEOPLE WITHIN THESE (crime) ORGANIZATIONS and that IF THEY HEAR ANYTHING (of concern) THEY'LL GET TO ME/LET ME KNOW RIGHT AWAY."

Here is very brief sampling of Donaghy routinely using some variation of the following paraphrased statement (Donaghy mainstays in BOLDED CAPS):

"I was ENCOURAGED TO WRITE THE BOOK by FAMILY, FRIENDS, and even LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIALS, because the story has an important message."

NOTE: Please see the conclusion to my assessment here.

My assessment of Donaghy's book and related (post-11/09) claims

2011-02-17T07:49:00.001-05:00

Though I suppose I could have placed my assessments of Donaghy's book and claims here, I view this more or less as a distraction and thus opted to place them on a related blog that is preoccupied with addressing the conventional wisdom and/or correcting the existing historical record.

On "the mob" and the NBA Betting Scandal

2011-02-17T07:44:00.008-05:00

For those of us charged with researching the sociology and the history of the underworld, deconstructing myths is standard fare. As students of my organized crime classes over the years will tell anyone willing to listen, I spend the first few weeks of each semester addressing the intellectual baggage most bring with them when it comes to organized crime. My experience researching the NBA betting scandal, complete with its attendant media coverage and considerable amount of public reaction, is but the latest example of how tiny strands of facts so quickly grow into wholly unfounded (but fascinating and gripping!) legends about the underworld. Before continuing with this assuredly annoying and dispiriting post, I should point out that my primary blog is subtitled (emphasis added) "The Social Construction of Organized Crime" precisely because this sort of thing is unfortunately all too necessary. Perhaps just as importantly, the main reason I took on the NBA betting scandal project was to gain an understanding of the role - if any - organized crime plays in the upper echelon of the sports betting underworld. Needless to say, this particular issue gets considerable attention in Gaming the Game, far beyond what little appears below and elsewhere on my blogs.

Here, then, is a fairly concise summary of "the mob" and the NBA betting scandal, based almost exclusively on official records and law enforcement sources. [In advance, please know that I offered a tidy primer of the traditional and expected relationship between organized crime associates and bookmakers here.]

* On July 20, 2007, the New York Post broke the NBA betting scandal story with a piece written by Murray Weiss - "NBA in a 'Fix'". Among other things, Weiss wrote "The FBI is investigating an NBA referee who allegedly was betting on basketball games - including ones he was officiating during the past two seasons - as part of an organized-crime probe in the Big Apple, The Post has learned...An FBI organized-crime squad in the bureau's flagship New York office is handling the case...The FBI got wind of the scheme while conducting a separate mob investigation."

Within a week's time, Tim Donaghy had been identified as the NBA referee and pro gambler Jimmy Battista was pegged as the "alleged bookie".

Because a specialized FBI unit focused on organized crime cases made the discovery, initial media reports predictably considered the mob angle. Reporters, especially those who worked crime beats and who had quality law enforcement and "street" sources, soon discounted the supposed involvement of the mob in the scandal, however. See, e.g., here, here, here, and here.

* On August 14, 2007, FBI Special Agent Paul Harris, the (lead) case agent who operated out of the Bureau's "Gambino Squad", wrote in his affidavit in support of application for arrest warrants: "In early 2007, the FBI received information that Battista was engaged in betting large amounts of money on NBA basketball games and was receiving assistance from an NBA referee in determining his bets."

* On August 15, 2007, Donaghy pleaded guilty in federal court and his co-conspirators, Battista and Martino, were arraigned. As is standard fare, the feds issued a press release for this rather consequential series of events. The press release, despite the fact that the case was being handled by experienced mob investigators and prosecutors, makes absolutely no mention of organized crime.

It is difficult to convey to persons who pay scant attention to organized crime and the federal government's treatment of mob cases how odd the 8/15/07 release is if there was even a hint of mob involvement. For examples of how the U.S. Attorney's Offices for the Eastern and Southern Districts of New York, respectively, announce actual organized crime prosecutions involving "mob associates", see, e.g., here, here, here, here, here, here, and here. There are literally dozens of readily-available examples, and you can also search the site of the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, where Philadelphia mob cases are handled. You'll soon notice that, if anything, the government amplifies mob cases with the knowledge such hype garners media coverage. Headlines for the real "O.C." cases linked above are predictably - and distinctly - different than any releases or public pronouncements by federal authorities in the NBA betting scandal cases against co-conspirators Donaghy, Battista, and Martino. For instance, those releases linked above respectively announce (emphasis added), "Three Gambino Organized Crime Family Associates Indicted...," "Genovese Family Associate Sentenced...," "Sixty-Two Defendants Indicted, Including Gambino Organized Crime Family Acting Boss, Acting Underboss, Consigliere, and Members and Associates...," "Colombo Organized Crime Family Captain and Five Associates Indicted...," "Colombo Organized Crime Family Acting Boss, Underboss, and Ten Other Members and Associates Indicted...," "Acting Boss and Longtime Associate of Gambino Crime Family Charged...," and "Additional Charges Files Against Acting Boss and Longtime Associate of Gambino Crime Family."

* Generally speaking, the alleged involvement of organized crime remained dormant as a subject for months and months following the initial summer 2007 developments, particularly since the FBI and U.S. Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of New York (USAO EDNY) never referenced the matter as an organized crime case, much less a mob conspiracy.

* The "mob" issue re-surfaced briefly after the Donaghy defense team asked the court, in May 2008, to remove the seal on the government's "5K" filing in support of a reduced sentence for cooperating witness Donaghy. The letter, which was released on June 2, 2008 following the government's consent and Judge Amon's related order, included a comment on Donaghy's supposed state of mind upon entering the betting conspiracy: "Battista told Donaghy that 'you don't want anyone from New York visiting your wife and kids.' Over the preceding years, Donaghy had come to believe that Battista had organized crime connections, and so he interpreted 'New York' to be the Mafia."

This single, unsupported Donaghy allegation in the government's 5K filing represents the lone reference to organized crime in the months and months of filings and public utterances by the feds concerning the NBA betting scandal cases.

* Though Donaghy's assertion had little influence on federal authorities, his attorney nevertheless mentioned the unsupported mob claim no less than five times in a May 19, 2008 filing as Donaghy was positioning himself for sentencing.

* The federal government, however, never revisited the organized crime issue during the sentencing filings, appearances, or public utterances. Thus, in the entire history of the scandal, each and every discussion of organized crime and the NBA betting scandal from that point (May 2008) forward stems from a single, unsupported Tim Donaghy claim.

Having commented above regarding the official government record in consideration of Donaghy’s claim, I thought I’d offer readers a sense of how it was soon exaggerated and amplified by Donaghy beginning with the December 2009 publication of Donaghy’s book.

From Personal Foul (emphasis added):

“My road to ruin was punctuated by a shameful relationship with underworld figures” (p. xiv); “I associated with sleazy bookies and reputed mob figures” (p. xiv); “I passed information to wiseguys who were making millions of dollars on my picks and lining the pockets of Mafia heavyweights” (p. xiv); “By 2006, Battista had become a high-level bookmaker with connections to the Gambino crime family” (p. 2); “[Battista] was not an actual member of the Gambino crime family, but Tommy did talk about how he was ‘connected’” (p. 3); “I had suddenly become the central figure in a Mafia-controlled gambling ring” (p. 11); “From respected NBA referee to mafioso. What the hell happened to me?” (p. 11; and, yes, Donaghy really says that); “[Battista] had obligations, the serious kind that required constant attention and a firm hand. If I was the golden goose for [Battista], he was the rainmaker for his bosses, and rainmakers have a certain sway in the organization” (p. 127); “Tommy was really nothing more than a mid- to low-level goombah” (p. 127); “Maybe [Battista] was getting pressure from his bosses to milk the cow with both hands and two feet. Let’s face it, they used [Battista] like [Battista] used me and Tommy” (p. 128); “I suppose Tommy recognized the need to keep his boss in the loop. After all, [Battista’s] friends don’t look kindly upon rats. It Tommy pissed off the wrong people, he could find himself hanging on a meat hook in a refrigerated truck” (p. 137); “[Battista] had an image to protect, not to mention a few unhappy bosses who were watching him closely” (p. 185); and “Watching ESPN on evening, two former mobsters were interviewed about the scandal. Mike Franzese was a former captain in the Colombo crime family, and Henry Hill was a reformed wiseguy, once portrayed by the actor Ray Liotta in the movie Goodfellas. Both were commenting on the mob’s connection to the case and the ramifications of my cooperation with the FBI. Franzese and Hill told ESPN that I would be looking over my shoulder for the rest of my life” (p. 193). [The mention of “hanging on a meat hook in a refrigerated truck” is an apparent reference to a scene in the film Goodfellas, which is based on Nicholas Pileggi’s classic Wiseguy.]

During the media appearances in support of his book, Donaghy routinely hyped the supposed role of organized crime in the scandal. For example, here is a montage of Donaghy describing "the mob" visiting him in December 2006 at the PHL Airport Marriott and the chilling effect it had on him:

Needless to say, as someone preoccupied with researching organized crime in general and in particular with the mob's supposed role in the scandal, I asked federal officials with direct knowledge of the government's investigation about this situation. One official, especially, took pains to address the particular (and contentious) issue of Donaghy’s incessant claim that Battista was somehow a “mob associate”, to which there is literally a single unsupported reference (which, itself, is based exclusively on Donaghy’s allegation) in the hundreds (thousands?) of pages in the government’s court filings spanning many months: “At best it is accurate not based on what Battista is, but based on what Donaghy perceived. You have to always remember that Tommy Martino is a talker. He’s the kind of guy who, if he was hitting on girls, would say stupid shit and brag. So, it’s not inconceivable for Martino to be in Tim Donaghy’s ear saying, ‘Oh, yeah, I take Baba up there [to New York City] and I see him meeting with these people and I think he’s connected!’”

This is why law enforcement officials mock Donaghy when so often he describes his supposed omnipresent fear of "the mob". As one person with direct knowledge of the investigation sarcastically notes regarding Donaghy's claim that he was called in for a "mob sit-down" following a lost bet during the scandal: "In one interview I saw, Donaghy says he kicked out [San Antonio Spurs coach] Gregg Popovich from a game and that there was a 'sit-down' - the Gambino crime family didn't like that very much [because it could have harmed that evening's bet] and there was a 'sit-down'. Little does the public know that it's Tommy Martino that calls him up. That's the 'sit-down'! The 'sit-down with the Gambino crime family' was his buddy Tommy Martino calling him up and saying, 'Dude, that wasn't good for our bet'!"

[Note: It is unclear precisely which media appearance is being referenced by the official above, but see here for a possible source.]

* On Donaghy's repeated claims throughout his book tour that he was beaten in prison by "someone who claimed he was associated with the New York mob" because Donaghy "cooperated with the government".

Donaghy writes (on pages 223-24) of the prison climate to which he was subjected: "As I walked around the institution, it became painfully evident that gambling was everywhere," after which Donaghy, the self-described gambling addict, wrote to the warden pointing "to the widespread illegal gambling that was occurring in the institution and the temptation I was experiencing as a result." Soon, according to Donaghy, word spread that he had complained about the gambling that killed numerous hours for many inmates, and "the warden instituted a crackdown on gambling, sending guards to conduct unexpected raids on card games and to search the lockers of suspected ringleaders. It was pure pandemonium and all eyes were once again on me." According to Donaghy (p. 225), it was soon thereafter that an inmate called out to him, "Rat, rat, rat," and hit him with a paint roller in the knee.

I have listened to dozens of Donaghy's "interviews" dating to December 2009, and I have never heard a word of this context during his media appearances. Instead, Donaghy has encouraged an alternative - and far more sensational (read: book-selling) and sympathy-inducing explanation, namely that the inmate said, "I'm from New York, and I have friends in the mob!" Donaghy routinely elaborates on the mob angle by saying such persons would have an interest in harming him since many of these inmates wound up in prison as the result of government cooperators like Donaghy. Here is a montage I compiled of Donaghy's media appearances in which he discusses this:

When I contacted various people within the Federal Bureau of Prisons and the FBI while researching the scandal, Donaghy's claim of a mob assault was routinely met with officials chuckling at the suggestion of organized crime's role, and (unsurprisingly) not a single interview subject was aware of evidence supporting this alleged motivation for the prison incident.

Perhaps to put a final point on this I should quote FBI Supervisory Special Agent Phil Scala (ret.), whom Donaghy can't mention enough as a supporter of all-things-Donaghy. SSA Scala, who in his capacity as head of the Gambino Squad (the unit which housed the NBA betting scandal investigation) was privy to much of the probe despite not being familiar with numerous details of it. When I interviewed former SSA Scala, he had this to say (not unlike several of his former colleagues) regarding Donaghy's supposed prison assault in the much-hyped context of organized crime: "If organized crime wanted to hurt Donaghy, he wouldn't be around today."

Donaghy on not making "incorrect calls" to advance his betting propositions

2011-02-14T18:31:00.000-05:00

To briefly recap the existing public record re: NBA referee Tim Donaghy and the possible fixing of games:

*Donaghy claims he didn't consciously fix games to advance his betting propositions.

*Federal authorities said very little publicly on the matter throughout the court proceedings involving Donaghy and his co-conspirators, other than to note that "there is no evidence that Donaghy ever intentionally made a particular ruling during a game in order to increase the likelihood that his gambling pick would be correct." Although...

*Donaghy admitted to authorities that he "compromised his objectivity as a referee because of his personal financial interest in the outcome of NBA games, and that this personal interest might have subconsciously affected his on-court performance.''

Unfortunately, very little has been written regarding Donaghy's more nuanced statements about his on-court behavior when his bets were at stake. Donaghy has repeatedly said, in slightly different ways, that he did not make “incorrect calls” to advance his betting propositions, leaving wide open the possibility that he simply made strategic “correct” calls (perhaps on typically oft-ignored violations) to produce successful outcomes with regard to his bets.^

Consider this incisive give-and-take with ESPN’s Mark Schwarz, who interviewed Donaghy for the network’s acclaimed “Outside the Lines” program (beginning at 6:23 of the interview, following Donaghy saying that game “manipulation” occurred among NBA referees because of personal biases [emphasis added]):

MS: But, if you had a bias against a player - and you said you did against Rasheed Wallace - didn’t you make calls to affect the point spread?

TD: Sure.

MS: So, how is that not fixing a game?

TD: I think, um, those calls are justified. That’s where the subjectivity comes in.

MS: Why is it justified to make calls at an unusual rate against a particular player? How’s that not fixing the outcome?

TD: If the calls are warranted, it’s not fixing the outcome.

MS: But “warranted” by what, personal bias?

TD: Personal bias, um, obviously comes into effect, but the calls have to be justified to be made.

MS: Personal bias compounded by also betting against Rasheed Wallace could lead to manipulation of a game, correct?

TD: Sure it could.

MS: So, how is that not fixing it?

TD: It’s not fixing it because I don’t think that I’m making calls up against him.

Importantly, Donaghy has made numerous similar statements. Here are a few, just so the above isn't dismissed as unrepresentative (emphasis added; sources immediately follow the italicized quotes):

Obviously I didn’t want to be detected. Going out and making calls that were wrong to help a bet win is something that I tried to stay away from because the goal was not to be detected. Certainly if I was making incorrect calls on purpose to help my bets win I would have been detected by the NBA which scrutinizes most of the calls.

From the Dennis & Callahan Show 12/8/09 on WEEI [Boston] at 3:35 of the interview (the interview transcript is here). [Donaghy goes on to say that "Allen Iverson palms the ball every night, but it's not called" and that if someone wanted to start calling palming violations on him "they could be justified." Thus, all a ref would need is the motivation to call them.]

Obviously, when you’re doing something wrong like I was, you don’t want to get caught and, uh, going out onto the floor and making calls in games that are wrong to influence a point spread would have certainly thrown up some red flags very quickly that would probably, uh, enable me to get caught a lot quicker than what I did.

From the Boomer & Carton Show 12/8/09 on 660 WFAN [New York] (at 5:08 of the interview)

I didn't want to throw up any red flags and be detected to make calls that were incorrect to help a bet win.

From CNN's Headline News Network12/8/09 (Donaghy's interview begins at 28:30, and the above quote is at 39:54 of the "transcript").

I certainly didn’t want to throw up red flags and be discovered with what I was doing by making calls that weren’t justifiable in the games.

From Neil Cavuto's program 12/7/09 on the Fox Business Network (at 1:55 of the interview).

If I was making calls in games, uh, that were flat-out wrong to, uh, facilitate a bet winning, uh, I certainly would, uh, be throwing up red flags to be detected.

From the Scott Van Pelt Show (NBA Today segment) 12/7/09 on ESPN Radio (at 3:17 of the interview).

I certainly didn’t want to make calls in games, especially calls that were wrong, that would send up red flags and get me in the kind of trouble that I ended up in later down the road.

From Slam Online interview with Dave Zirin on 12/14/09 (interview is posted here).

I’m going to be detected if I’m making incorrect calls on a continuous basis to affect these games so that the bets would cover. I mean, red flags would be thrown up all over the place and the NBA or the FBI certainly would have detected this well before it was detected.

From the Ball Don't Lie blog 12/15/09 on Yahoo Sports (interview [by Dan Devine] is posted here).

In closing, and in special consideration of all Donaghy has been quoted as saying above (and elsewhere), I'd like to return to something I noted a while ago. In Personal Foul, Donaghy argues that the subjectivity of calls is a significant problem with the league's officiating. He then states (p.238) that an additional issue concerns "the friendships and hatreds between the referees and the players, coaches, and owners." In this regard, Donaghy adds:

Because (NBA) referees are able to make calls or ignore violations with impunity, they can hide a whole lot of love or hate for players or a team with their calls.

Couldn't this logic be used to illustrate why it would have been possible, indeed easy (assuming he is correct), for Tim Donaghy to fix games? That is, let's take Donaghy at his word, and simply apply Donaghy's arguments to his particular situation vis-a-vis the possible altering of game outcomes in advance of his betting propositions:

Because Tim Donaghy was able to make calls or ignore violations with impunity, he could - depending on which side he bet that evening - hide a whole lot of 'love' or 'hate' for players or a team with his calls.

^ If Donaghy was, in fact, making such strategic "correct" calls, these actions would have been rather difficult to detect considering Donaghy's reputation as an official who made a lot of calls. NBA Commissioner David Stern has said that Donaghy "probably was near or at [the] top of calls made," and that according to the league's assessments of his officiating, Donaghy was "in the top tier of accuracy."

[Obviously, I get into the context for all of this in much greater detail in Gaming the Game. I am nevertheless attempting to offer as comprehensive an understanding of the scandal as possible, and amalgamating this sort of publicly-accessible information in a tidy fashion hopefully assists others in conducting their own follow-up assessments.]

Offshore Sports Betting and the Law

2011-02-14T18:05:00.001-05:00

The topic of offshore sports betting may be of interest as more become familiar with the NBA betting scandal in the coming weeks and months. As such, I have posted a very brief summary of the legal status of such activity on my primary blog.

Sports Betting Arbitrage (and more)

2011-01-17T16:12:00.000-05:00

Though indirectly related to the NBA betting scandal (because these methods apply more to Jimmy Battista's former clients and partners than to himself or the scandal), I decided to post my brief commentary on the important and fascinating topic of sports betting arbitrage here.

Joseph "Joe Vito" Mastronardo

2010-12-15T15:37:00.000-05:00

Serious NBA betting scandal followers may recall that it was Joe Vito’s phone records that were first subpoenaed in the FBI probe which led to the successful prosecution of the scandal’s three conspirators (pro gambler Jimmy Battista, referee Tim Donaghy, and mutual friend Tommy Martino). Until now, there has been no explanation offered for this curiosity. In this regard, some may find this post on my primary blog of interest.

Some tidbits on what readers can expect to see in Gaming the Game

2010-12-12T09:17:00.000-05:00

As publication nears for the new book on the career of Jimmy Battista, architect of the 2006-07 NBA betting scandal involving referee Tim Donaghy, here are some bullet items from the publisher discussing some of the things readers can expect…

GAMING THE GAME deals explicitly with numerous previously unknown aspects of the NBA betting scandal, including:

· Pro gambler Battista’s discovery of referee Donaghy’s bets on games he was officiating, and an examination of what pro gamblers, led by Battista, were doing with this information for years before Battista and Donaghy ever agreed to their own illicit deal.

· Details of Battista’s relationships with co-conspirators Donaghy and Martino dating back many years, including the extent of their involvement together in the betting world.

· The unraveling of the NBA betting conspiracy, including the behind-the-scenes details of Battista’s indictment, arrest, and negotiations with federal authorities.

· An explanation of why federal law enforcement officials never alleged referee Donaghy fixed games, and why they came far short of concluding he didn’t.

· The first ever discussion of why pro gamblers wagered millions on games Donaghy officiated and bet, and the compelling evidence which supports their contentions that Donaghy influenced game outcomes when his bets were at stake.

Among other non-NBA betting scandal matters also discussed in GAMING THE GAME are:

· The trying – but ultimately and ironically fortuitous – mix of Philly mob extortion and local law enforcement heat that forced Battista’s move from Philadelphia’s suburbs to Las Vegas, without which his meteoric rise to the top of the betting world could never have occurred.

· Inside accounts detailing the highest levels of the Las Vegas-based international betting scene.

· A mind-boggling look into the big-time offshore sports betting infrastructure and its operations within the U.S., including the daily, secretive movement of millions of dollars.

· A fascinating discussion of the world’s tight-knit fraternity of heavy-hitting sports gamblers.

· The mechanics of wagering millions of dollars on a particular bet, which few people have ever understood – and even fewer could pull off (for a host of reasons beyond acquiring the funds).

Gaming the Game press and tv/film rights inquiries

2010-10-31T15:10:00.002-04:00

A quick note for interest parties (press and tv/film entities) in advance of the release of Gaming the Game: The Story Behind the NBA Betting Scandal and the Gambler Who Made It Happen (Barricade, 2011):

I would very much appreciate members of the press contacting me through Chuck Marsh of Penn State's University Relations Office.

Parties interested in the tv/film rights to Gaming the Game should contact Judith Karfiol at (323) 463-4800.

Thanks as always for your understanding.

Latest accusation re: Donaghy making threats/harassing adversaries

2010-05-14T18:18:00.000-04:00

I suppose I am more tuned into this alleged pattern of Tim Donaghy's behavior than others because of my research, but I wonder if anyone else is even noticing this. The former NBA referee is mentioned in the news today as having made threatening calls against an adversary - again. This time, the supposed victim was none other than his publisher, VTi-Media, with whom he is at odds over royalty payments. According to the sports betting website Covers.com, "the Tampa-based VTi-group [is] saying [Donaghy] has issued threats against members of the firm...Beyond the money dispute are allegations by VTi that associates of Donaghy have threatened VTi employees with harm if the payments are not made. 'The phone calls we received were not implied threats,' says [VTi CEO Shawna] Vercher, who did not say how many threats were made. 'They were direct threats.'" The Philadelphia Daily News added, "Vercher said that Donaghy has been contacting company employees and book vendors with 'increasingly irate and threatening calls,' demanding money for his book. 'One thing he said in particular is that, "You know I have associates in the Gambino crime family and they are active in this part of the state,"' Vercher said...Vercher says she has audio recordings of some of the alleged threats. She said VTi is gathering other evidence to support its request for a restraining order next week."

For casual followers, a refresher on similar accusations against Tim Donaghy may be useful. In August 2008, the National Basketball Referees Association alleged Donaghy made threatening calls. As detailed in USA Today: "The National Basketball Referees Association said a man identifying himself as Tim Donaghy has been making threatening phone calls since the former NBA referee last week was sentenced to 15 months in prison...Lamell McMorris, the NBRA's lead negotiator and spokesman, said a man identifying himself as Donaghy made calls to McMorris' Perennial Strategy Group, a consulting firm in Washington, D.C., on July 30 threatening bodily harm. McMorris said the person threatened to 'have someone hurt' if the referees association did not stop 'spreading lies to the media.' McMorris said a follow-up phone call by the person identifying himself as Donaghy was made to the NBRA offices, also in Washington. The person emphasized his anger toward McMorris for calling him a 'scoundrel' in a statement after Donaghy's sentencing. 'He reiterated that he was tired of "taking it" and was upset, and had info that he had not released,' McMorris said." [A related USA Today op-ed penned by the NBRA is here.]

The August 2008 NBRA situation followed the March 2008 allegations by his wife (who had filed for divorce in September 2007). As recounted in the New York Daily News, "Kim Donaghy sought an order of protection after a March 14 blowup with her husband, claiming in court papers that he threatened to 'knock my...head off my body.' 'He was enraged, out of control, cursing at me in front of our four children and making threats,' Kim Donaghy claimed, adding that he beat their children." The matter was later dropped when she failed to show for a court appearance.

All of the above is in addition to the widely-publicized 2005 imbroglio with his neighbors, Pete and Lisa Mansueto. According to the Associated Press, the Mansuetos "sued Donaghy for harassment and invasion of privacy, and accused him of vandalizing their property and stalking Lisa Mansueto. In their lawsuit, the Mansuetos also alleged that Donaghy set fire to a tractor they owned and crashed their golf cart from Radley Run Country Club into a ravine." According to the Philadelphia Inquirer's coverage of the suit, "in the summer of 2003...Donaghy initiated 'a pattern of public harassment' that included yelling obscenities at the Mansuetos.' The paper added, 'The suit also states that Donaghy was charged by West Goshen Township Police with disorderly conduct and harassment in June 2000. Court records show that Donaghy had a verbal altercation with his mail carrier; however, the charges were dismissed when the carrier did not show up for a hearing.'1 According to a summary of the latter case from the New York Daily News, "Mail carrier Charles Brogan, 48, said he was making a delivery at Donaghy's home when his car knocked over a container containing bottles and cans in 2002. 'He just freaked out,' Brogan said. 'He came out screaming and hollering. . . . He tried to belittle me like I'm just a public servant and he's the big NBA ref. I guess he wanted me to fight him, but I would have lost my job.' Police arrested Donaghy and charged him with disorderly conduct, harassment and stalking."

I should note in closing that I am also aware of Donaghy (or someone in his camp) allegedly phoning threats to a business agent who assists Donaghy's former co-conspirator Jimmy Battista. Soon after Battista appeared on HBO's Real Sports with Bryant Gumbel in November 2009, someone claiming to be CBS producer Bob Anderson made a threatening call to Battista's agent. That call was followed a short time later by another threatening call to the agent by someone claiming to be ESPN writer/producer Mike Fish. The calls were made immediately before Donaghy appearances on CBS (60 Minutes) and ESPN, respectively, before the public knew of Donaghy's forthcoming interviews (suggesting the caller was Donaghy or someone close to him).

1.Kathleen Brady Shea, "Referee out of bounds, suit says," Philadelphia Inquirer, January 21, 2005. (Not available online)

Insightful Donaghy interview on 95.5 The Game

2010-05-11T06:07:00.000-04:00

Another newsworthy appearance for former NBA referee Tim Donaghy. He appeared on 95.5 The Game (Portland) on 5/10/10, where the hosts of the Morning Sports Page had the audacity to reference analysis and official records in their insightful interview.

Dozens of other sports radio hosts around the country are apparently not aware they are allowed to do a modicum of research and to ask follow-up questions. Among other things, the MSP hosts properly pointed out that the FBI never "concluded" Donaghy didn't fix games, and that there is no supporting evidence for his claim that he won 70% to 80% of his bets. Donaghy, himself, says he can't reproduce his betting propositions (sides, lines, outcomes), so how could the FBI "confirm" anything re: Donaghy's betting success rate? The FBI doesn't even pretend to know how many games he bet much less what the propositions and their results were.

Latest Donaghy allegation: FBI was "adamant" other NBA referees passed along inside info that could "help others place winning bets"

2010-05-11T05:34:00.000-04:00

Appearing on ESPN Radio affiliate 1080AM (The Fan, Portland) on 5/10/10, former NBA referee Tim Donaghy said the following in response to a question regarding whether other referees were betting on NBA games:

"I know that the FBI agents were adamant that with the information I gave them, and through their investigation, I certainly wasn't the only one that was passing along inside information to others that could help others place winning bets."1

Reprising an earlier post with a similar theme, if it is true "FBI agents" (i.e., not just Donaghy and not merely a current or former FBI agent) believed other NBA referees were "passing along inside information to others that could help others place winning bets," that would certainly be news. It would also suggest that cooperating witness Donaghy was somehow privy to confidential aspects of a federal investigation, possibly even as it was unfolding. Of course, given Donaghy's problematic record of, to be polite, "misstatements" to date, all of this being true is a big "if". Thus, it would be helpful if hosts would ask for evidence backing up Donaghy's myriad claims, and why/how he supposedly knows so much about the FBI's investigation when it is standard policy for law enforcement officials not to share criminal intelligence with cooperating witnesses. As is often said in criminal justice circles, information dissemination with informants and cooperating witnesses is a one-way street - they provide information to authorities (not the other way around).

1 From 11:41 of the interview from the "Primetime with Isaac & Big Suke" program.

Cover and brief promo text for Gaming the Game

2010-05-06T14:12:00.001-04:00

Here is the cover, followed below with the accompanying promo text, for my forthcoming book, Gaming the Game: The Story Behind the NBA Betting Scandal and the Gambler Who Made It Happen (Barricade, 2011):

In June 2007, the FBI informed the NBA that one of its referees, Tim Donaghy, was the subject of a probe into illegal gambling. Within months, the public knew the broad outlines of a scheme involving Donaghy betting on games he officiated with a co-conspirator, longtime Donaghy acquaintance and professional gambler Jimmy “Baba” Battista. They were joined in the scandal by a mutual childhood friend, Tommy Martino. By November 2008, each man had pleaded guilty to charges relating to the conspiracy, and was in federal prison. The story was over. Or so it seemed to be.

Researched with dozens of interviews, court documents, betting records, referee statistics, and unique access to witness statements and confidential law enforcement files, GAMING THE GAME looks inside the FBI’s investigation and beyond to provide the definitive account of the scandal. Jimmy Battista’s remarkable decades-long bookmaking and betting career is examined, including and especially his role as architect of the widely publicized scandal. Battista, who - unlike his co-conspirators - never spoke with federal authorities, reveals for the first time the intricate details of the scheme, most of which only he knows.

Gaming the Game

2010-03-31T06:38:00.000-04:00

I am pleased to announce my forthcoming book will be published by Barricade Books. I've been a fan of many Barricade non-fiction true crime offerings, and this should be a great home for the new book. I'll post the publication date when it is firmed up, along with other relevant information as warranted. Until then, the only thing of note is the change in the book's title, which has been finalized as Gaming the Game: The Story Behind the NBA Betting Scandal and the Gambler Who Made It Happen. More soon...

Latest Donaghy allegation: FBI believed US Attorney's Office did "favors for the NBA"

2010-01-05T10:15:00.001-05:00

Finally, something (ostensibly) newsworthy from former NBA referee Tim Donaghy's book tour. Following a discussion of his allegations against other referees throughout his book, Donaghy (p.206) turns to why he believes these officials were never prosecuted:

"As a former federal prosecutor, (NBA-hired investigator) Larry Pedowitz had sway, the kind of juice that provides unique access to people who make decisions about things like whether or not to pursue a prosecution. The FBI...wouldn't play the game. Nevertheless, the U.S. Attorney had the final say. Further prosecutions would be a 'no-go.'"

Donaghy later adds, "Maybe political strings were being pulled to make sure I was cemented in the public's mind as the 'lone assassin.'" We can infer what Donaghy is saying above, namely that the FBI was apparently interested in pursuing cases against other NBA referees but lost the battle with the U.S. Attorney's Office, which declined to prosecute these individuals because they had been dissuaded from doing do by a former federal prosecutor hired by the NBA.

In a recent interview on The Chris Vernon Show (Memphis, 730 Fox Sports) posted online on January 4, 2010, Donaghy went considerably further than offering his personal opinion by explicitly stating,

"There was a lot of conflict with this whole investigation between the prosecutor and the FBI because (the FBI) felt that the prosecution was doing favors for the NBA."1

If it is true "the FBI" (i.e., not just Donaghy and not merely a current or former FBI agent) believed the U.S. Attorney's Office "was doing favors for the NBA" (against the wishes of the Bureau, no less), that would certainly be news. It would also suggest that cooperating witness Donaghy was somehow privy to confidential aspects of a federal investigation, even as it was unfolding. Of course, given Donaghy's problematic record of, to be polite, "misstatements" to date, all of this being true is a big "if".2

1. At 7:25 of part 2 of the interview.

2. In advance of much more from me on numerous Donaghy assertions, see, for example, my earlier comments here, here, here, and here.

Some suggested research for the NBA

2010-01-03T12:00:00.000-05:00

As a quick follow-up to my earlier post re: the Pedowitz Report, here are three things the NBA could entertain if they wanted substantive evidence of whether former referee Tim Donaghy altered game outcomes to advance his betting propositions.

1. My first suggestion, ironically, was inspired by the NBA's own inquiry into the betting scandal. In the Pedowitz Report (pp.113-14, under "VII. Recommendations; 4. Gambling Enforcement, Detection and Deterrence; c) Gambling Monitors; and d) Statistical Screening for Gambling and Bias"), the following is respectively discussed (emphasis added):

The League has now arranged to obtain information on a regular basis from individuals and entities involved in the gambling business who can provide the League with information about unusual movements in the betting lines, rumors about things such as injury reports or referee schedules or where the “smart money” is being wagered. By flagging games or individuals for the League to investigate, these monitors may help the League detect gambling or misuse of confidential information....

Since the 2003-2004 season, the League has been collecting data on calls and non-calls for each referee. The collection system was designed by Sibson as part of the overall effort to redesign the officiating performance program. The system itself was built by the League. Although this system was developed for training and instructional purposes, we have worked with the League and Sibson to develop a prototype, proprietary system for screening games in an effort to help detect data patterns that may suggest misconduct by referees and others. Data ― including this foul call information and the movements of betting lines ― can be analyzed using various algorithms to flag patterns consistent with questionable behavior. While this system is in development, the League has already started to actively monitor several high level data-points (such as line movements) for every game for signs of potential misconduct, and certain game and betting information is distributed to League management on a daily basis. For those games that are flagged, the League has undertaken further review. In addition, the League hired Steven Angel, a former consultant with Sibson, as Senior Vice President for League Operations and Officiating to, among other things, help coordinate wagering intelligence and game screening...

This collection of gambling and referee behavior data seems prudent, as do the related assessments. Why, though, restrict such analysis to current and future activity? If the referee/call data has been collected since the 2003-04 season (which, interestingly, is when former referee Tim Donaghy claims he first bet on NBA games), why not perform these analyses on Donaghy's games (and others) beginning with the '03-'04 season?

An interesting footnote related to this suggestion: According to Ken White, CEO and lead oddsmaker for Las Vegas Sports Consultants, the world's largest oddsmaking company, he researched betting trends involving Tim Donaghy and submitted his report to the NBA in the fall of 2007. Of this situation, White told the Las Vegas Review-Journal, "They never called back to discuss it or anything."

2. I have written previously about Indiana University Business Professor Wayne L. Winston's commentary on whether Tim Donaghy fixed games. Additionally, in his book, Mathletics, he suggests (p.247) we should:

compare the percentage of fouls Tim Donaghy called in games where the Total Line increased by at least two points to the percentage of fouls he called in all other games.*

I would add this analysis should be conducted dating back at least to the 2003-04 season. Serious NBA scandal observers are likely noting to themselves that Donaghy claims to have never bet on totals ("over" or "under" total points in a game), and thus may be discounting Dr. Winston's suggestion. I think Winston's proposed analysis would, in fact, be telling, for reasons I will explain in due time.

*A move of two points or more in the Total Line is generally considered a big, or unusual, move.

3. The third thing the league could do is either the most simple or the most difficult: identify and locate big-time, heavy-hitting professional gamblers, and then interview them about the NBA betting scandal. Some of these individuals have done their own - remarkably sophisticated - assessments, and there may be considerable wisdom to gain from speaking with them.

Interesting quote (among others) from Donaghy's book

2010-01-03T11:57:00.000-05:00

In Personal Foul, former NBA referee Tim Donaghy argues that the subjectivity of calls is a significant problem with the league's officiating. He then states (p.238) that an additional issue concerns "the friendships and hatreds between the referees and the players, coaches, and owners." In this regard, Donaghy adds:

Because (NBA) referees are able to make calls or ignore violations with impunity, they can hide a whole lot of love or hate for players or a team with their calls.

Because Tim Donaghy was able to make calls or ignore violations with impunity, he could - depending on which side he bet that evening - hide a whole lot of 'love' or 'hate' for players or a team with his calls.

Reasonable, no?

A quick general comment on Donaghy's book

2010-01-03T11:54:00.000-05:00

I could write at length about former referee Tim Donaghy's myriad claims (those made explicitly in his book and those offered during his related media appearances) on a host of topics, and may return to this possibility later. However, let me say this generally about his book, having read it too many times. It is remarkable (perhaps "troubling" is more apt) how often he pretends to know the opinions, beliefs, or motives of other parties, ranging from prison officials to NBA officials to federal law enforcement officials to co-conspirators and their respective defense attorneys and so on. He has no basis beyond supposition for so much of what he writes, and there are common threads to most of his assumptions: he inflates his importance or significance; and he ascribes ill motives and/or conspiracy theories to the parties being discussed. Concerning the latter theme, it is almost never the case that the more simplistic, less sinister possible explanation is accepted much less promoted.

A prelude to my formal analysis of the NBA's Pedowitz Report

2009-12-29T16:31:00.000-05:00

I have spent considerable time assessing the NBA's inquiry into the NBA betting scandal ever since the league's so-called "Pedowitz Report" was released, and will produce a more formal essay at some point. Since the subject comes up so frequently with media entities, however, here is a snapshot of my take on the report.

Lawrence B. Pedowitz, a partner at the law firm of Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz, is the former chief of the criminal division in the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York. In August 2007, Pedowitz was selected by the NBA to head the review of the league’s officiating program. With the assistance of a research team from his law firm, he conducted more than 200 interviews with referees and team and NBA personnel over 14 months. The 116-page assessment, which also included reviews of several game tapes, was submitted to the NBA on October 1, 2008, and released to the press the following day. The so-called “The Pedowitz Report” examines numerous aspects of officiating and (often arcane) NBA policy. Its key findings regarding the referee betting scandal focus on two preeminent issues: whether other referees were involved and whether the outcomes of games were influenced by Donaghy and/or other officials. On these matters of primacy, the report respectively (pp.39, 7) states:

We have discovered no information suggesting that any NBA referee other than Tim Donaghy has bet on NBA games or leaked confidential NBA information to gamblers…Donaghy has denied intentionally making calls designed to manipulate games, and the government has said that it found “no evidence that Donaghy ever intentionally made a particular ruling during a game in order to increase the likelihood that his gambling pick would be correct.” Based on our review, and with the information we have available, we are unable to contradict the government’s conclusion.

Observers almost universally and uncritically accepted the report’s conclusions, as can be inferred from the following sample of headlines covering the report’s release: “Donaghy Report Clears Other Refs”(Washington Post), “Probe: No evidence of other referees’ misconduct” (USA Today) , “Report confirms Donaghy was the only corrupt referee, clears NBA” (Philadelphia Daily News), “Review of NBA officials finds Donaghy only culprit”( ESPN.com), “NBA referees are cleared; Report: Only Donaghy guilty” (Boston Globe), and “Report: Donaghy fixed games alone” (Newsday). In short, by November 2008 - with Donaghy in prison and the NBA’s review completed - what has infamously become known as the NBA betting scandal was over. Or so it seems.

Tim Donaghy’s co-conspirators in the scheme were 42 year-old James “Jimmy” Battista, a professional gambler, and 41 year-old Thomas “Tommy” Martino, a mutual friend who served as the intermediary between Donaghy and Battista. Battista, who pleaded guilty to conspiracy to transmit wagering information, received a sentence of 15 months in federal prison. Martino pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit wire fraud and received a sentence of 12 months. Just a week before Donaghy reported to prison camp in September 2008, gambler Battista began serving his sentence at the federal detention center in Brooklyn, New York. Unlike the media blitz that announced Donaghy’s first day of incarceration, Battista’s introduction to prison life was virtually ignored.

Only two people know the intricate details of how the NBA betting scheme was conceived, how it worked, its duration, and so on – referee Donaghy and gambler Battista. On the most consequential matter, Donaghy insists he did not influence games, and this is difficult for third parties to assess merely by reviewing game tapes. Furthermore, the referee had no knowledge of how much money was being wagered based on information he provided to Battista, how it was being placed, by whom, where and why. Thus, even though it seems as though the NBA scandal was examined by the league and numerous media observers, there is quite a lot that is not publicly known. In fact, the Pedowitz Report (p.19) notes, “Despite our repeated requests, Donaghy has declined to speak with us. The government also has declined to share any non-public information from its investigation with us.” Combined with Battista’s refusal to speak with its researchers, the Pedowitz group was confined to reviewing the public record, namely court filings. This critical weakness doomed the Pedowitz Report from being anything other than a rather superficial synopsis of court activity and kept it far from being an incisive look into the scandal. For this, they would have needed access to the scandal’s architect, pro gambler Battista.

Jimmy Battista is the lone individual who can answer numerous vital questions, including whether or not there is evidence Donaghy influenced games and whether he was the lone referee involved in the scandal. Battista can also explain how and why he (and others) were able to bet on Donaghy’s games for a significant period of time without being detected by sports books, various authorities, or the NBA. Though he pleaded guilty, Battista refused to cooperate with authorities. He has yet to share his insights into the scandal, including - and especially - how he came to orchestrate the scheme in the first place.

Bookin', bettin', and organized crime: A primer

2009-12-25T05:54:00.000-05:00

It has occurred to me that the audience following the NBA betting scandal featuring referee Tim Donaghy and pro gambler Jimmy Battista, while cognizant of the general concept of illicit sports gambling, may not be as familiar with the traditional roles played by underworld figures in this arena. This has permitted any number of misstatements and conspiracy myths to flourish vis-a-vis the Donaghy-Battista scheme. (I very briefly summarized the common relationships between organized criminals and illicit gambling here.)

As it turns out, there is an ongoing bookmaking and betting "mob" case that can serve as a concise but great tutorial for interested parties. Comically, and ironically, the case is based in Delaware County, PA, the same suburban Philadelphia county that is home to Battista (though there is no suggestion the current case has anything to do with him or with the NBA scandal). The case has been widely covered in the print media, most especially by the Philadelphia Inquirer and the Delco Times.

The so-called "Delco Nostra" case is relevant to the public's understanding of the NBA betting scandal only to the extent that it exhibits the expected relationship between bookies, bettors, and organized crime (none of which have been alleged by federal authorities vis-a-vis the NBA scandal) and the expected use of the term "mob associate" (so loosely attributed to Battista first by Donaghy and then promoted uncritically by most in the media, though never stated in the official record or by law enforcement authorities throughout the case).

Here is how the Delco Times summed up the alleged relationship between these symbiotic "Delco Nostra" partners:

"A state grand jury linked (alleged bookmaking ringleader Nicholas "Nicky The Hat") Cimino with the Philadelphia mob, citing his close association with Louis "Bent Finger Louie" Monacello. Cimino allegedly paid Monacello, an alleged associate and enforcer for the Philadelphia organized crime family, a regular sum of money every month as a "tax" on his illegal casino in Ridley, according to the grand jury presentment. Monacello was also allegedly used by Cimino to collect gambling debts and payments on high-interest loans."

The Pennsylvania Office of Attorney General offered a corresponding synopsis of the case. George Anastasia, the Inquirer's well-regarded "mob" reporter, is featured in a short yet insightful vid clip (see below) summing up the "Delco Nostra" bookin' and bettin' case.

Thus, there are at least three key components present in the textbook illicit gambling "Delco Nostra" case that are not evident in the NBA betting scandal vis-a-vis organized crime: 1) a relationship between a bookmaker/bettor and an organized crime figure (a "mob associate" in the common/assumed usage of the term); 2) a payment/tax from the bookie/bettor to "the mob" for services such as collecting gambling debts; and 3) law enforcement authorities and the official record as the primary sources of the public's information.

On the dubious and salacious "13 other referees are involved" claim

2009-12-25T05:27:00.000-05:00

Because I am in a unique position - and, in fact have motivations - to address this, it requires its own post (whereas other dubious claims are amalgamated elsewhere on this blog).

During his current press tour promoting his book, former NBA referee Tim Donaghy has repeatedly stated (in various iterations) that his co-conspirator, pro gambler Jimmy Battista, is claiming 13 other referees were involved.1 This claim stems a single, unbelievably speculative media story based exclusively on an anonymous source put out by a local NBC affiliate (WHDH, Boston) on 11/25/09, which I immediately publicly discredited as "ridiculous and irresponsible" hours after it aired.

Battista has made no such claims, nor does he make such claims. The same can be said of me, as someone who has interviewed Battista and others with intimate knowledge of the scheme extensively. I can quite easily imagine some of Donaghy's incentives to promote this, but like many other matters in the scandal coverage often emanating from Donaghy himself, it has no basis in fact.

1. For example, Donaghy said the following on 12/8/09 during an interview with "Boomer and Carton" on WFAN, New York (at 23:27 of the interview): "Battista is also saying that he had 13 other referees on his payroll that he worked with."

The NBA betting scandal: Follow the (smart) money

2009-12-25T04:59:00.000-05:00

There has been very little discussed of betting line movement on NBA games Tim Donaghy officiated. Though this is a challenging assignment for a variety of reasons (e.g., multiple sportsbooks each with its own line, the passage of time), such an assessment would likely yield compelling results.

On a related note, those who are commenting on games it is suspected Donaghy bet should proceed with caution without knowing precisely what betting propositions were in play. That is, even if there was agreement upon which games were part of Donaghy's betting record (which there clearly is not, of course), simply knowing the opening or closing betting line of a particular sportsbook may not allow for conclusive evidence of a winning or losing proposition. This sort of analysis would require knowing what line(s) Donaghy's co-conspirator, pro gambler Jimmy Battista, was able to obtain and exploit.

A couple of Donaghy curiosities for consideration

2009-12-25T04:55:00.000-05:00

This is the first of what will likely be several critiques of former NBA referee Tim Donaghy's book and related tour (to be posted here and elsewhere). Any further clarifications to his media appearances - and/or to my assessments of them - are heartily welcomed.

When Donaghy was interviewed on the "Boomer and Carton" program (WFAN The Fan, New York) on December 8, 2009, he stated, "Between December 12th and March 18th, the time that I was associated with (pro gambler and co-conspirator Jimmy Battista)...I was only scheduled and only worked 33 games."1 He repeated the claim two days later on Mike Missanelli's program (97.5 The Fanatic, Philadelphia).2 According to ESPN.com and elsewhere, Donaghy actually worked 39 games within that crucial time period. This is a trivial point to casual followers, I suppose, but is not to those investigating the scandal, as will be explained in time.

Donaghy's original claims re: "the mob" were restricted to having heard a rumor from his "true friend" (and co-conspirator) Tommy Martino that Martino's longtime best friend Jimmy Battista was somehow "connected" to organized crime. This quickly morphed into Battista matter-of-factly being referred to by Donaghy as a "mob associate". The escalation and sensationalism has continued throughout the book tour, unfortunately, where Donaghy has routinely referred to Battista and Martino as "mob associates". Most troubling, at least for those trying to get the story right, on at least one occasion he referred to them as "members of the Gambino crime family"3 and on another permitted Battista to be labeled as "a member of the Gambino crime family."4 As my students and academic colleagues will attest, I am hyper-sensitive to the mythology that dominates my niche research area. Tragically, though not surprisingly, this book tour - complete with loaded terms being tossed around with abandon by Donaghy and by numerous hosts and analysts - is but the latest exhibition in the social construction of organized crime. Necessarily, this set of circumstances perpetuates conspiracy myths that are commonly rooted in nothing more than street legends. In the immediate case, I am guessing part of the problem stems from the forums being exploited, namely sports-centered outlets with little expertise (or care, for that matter) regarding the substance and validity of the "mob" claims.

1. At approx. 22:20 of the interview.
2. At 13:10 of the interview.
3. Dan Le Batard Show, 790am "The Ticket" (Miami), 12/9/09, at :48 of the interview.
4. Mayhem in the AM Show, 790am "The Zone" (Atlanta), 12/8/09, at 7:23 of the interview.

Latest from True Hoop on Donaghy

2009-12-24T10:34:00.005-05:00

Tim Donaghy and the lie detector (story and vid clip) posted 12/17/09

"Has the FBI exonerated Tim Donaghy?" posted 12/16/09

Some new Donaghy analysis

2009-12-24T10:28:00.000-05:00

Finally, some new tidbits and takes on the Donaghy situation.

The latest assessment of former referee Tim Donaghy's allegations comes from Drew Sharp of the Detroit Free Press, who (12/23/09) writes in part:

"The NBA isn't fixed. Anyone who believes to the contrary must then assume the natural next step of believing in the existence of a multilayered fraud meant to deliberately deceive the general public. If you're certain that the NBA is nothing more than a conspiracy-cloaked, gambling-shadowed scam, there is no alternative but to walk away from the product and never watch another second - or else you're a willing accomplice to a criminal act...(Former referee Tim) Donaghy has become a hero to those who have long suspected that some referees hold grudges against some players while granting special privileges to others. But that's hardly a news flash. Donaghy isn't saying anything that anyone with an ounce of common sense couldn't already figure out..."

Sharp's column is syndicated, and can be found on the web sites of numerous other media outlets if the Free Press link above is problematic.

The Painted Area, part of the True Hoop Network of blogs (affiliated with ESPN), posted an assessment of Donaghy's claims on 12/22/09.

ESPN.com's Bill Simmons discusses Donaghy's book and claims with noted author and commentator Malcolm Gladwell 12/18/09.
The exchange includes this from Simmons: "I love how (Donaghy's) arguing that he made 80 percent (of his bets on NBA games) on the biases of other referees, but Donaghy, the guy who was gambling on professional basketball and calling other referees pretending to be friends but secretly pumping them for information, somehow managed to remain unbiased that whole time. Pull this leg and it plays "Jingle Bells." On the other hand, he tapped into four things that had been haunting the league for a while: certain fishy moments in playoff games from 1999-2002 (things I was writing about even at the time); some blatant, if-you-saw-it-happening-in-person-you-could-feel-it examples of officials barely being able to conceal their disgust for certain players or coaches (a recurring theme of the past two decades); conflicts of interest with stars doing favors off the court for referees (for instance, sending a signed jersey or sneakers to an official who runs a charity); and a fear in general that officials hold too much sway over every basketball game. All he did was regurgitate the same tales/whispers/rumors/concerns that everyone within NBA circles had already heard and digested, but for the general public, it was eye-opening."

Re: Donaghy's claims he won between 70-80% of his bets without fixing games, Simmons writes, "if Donaghy was smart, he'd scrap the book and open a 1-900 gambling hotline," something I noted here weeks ago.

"On the DL" discusses Tim Donaghy's book with TalkHoops

"On the DL" discusses Tim Donaghy's book with TalkHoops.net 12/15/09

Audio discussion between "On the DL" host Dan Levy and Zach Harper of Talkhoops.net
(Donaghy-specific discussion is from 18:05 - 38:50)

Starting at 19:55, Harper offers this assessment re: Donaghy's supposed betting success rate and the related means to attain it: "Any advanced NBA blogger, any NBA writer (knows) a lot of the things that (Donaghy) is claiming as inside information...This is all stuff that above-average NBA fans will know, and yet we're not going to go out and bet and win at a 70 percent clip...I just believe he's either lying in the book, in this 'tell-all' book where he doesn't tell all, or he is withholding information which, in this situation, could be considered the same thing."

On the diminishing posting of Donaghy media coverage

2009-12-15T06:09:00.001-05:00

As I stated below, I am not editorializing in my posting of Tim Donaghy/Personal Foul media coverage. Whatever media I find and can link to, I post, despite the fact that I disagree with a rather large percentage of the linked content. I haven't posted links to appearances over the past few days, however, simply because they are essentially all the same, and each is heavily reliant upon whatever materials have been supplied to the press (I am guessing, just like with other books, by the publisher). Thus, the first wave of interviews (posted here throughout December) can be referenced as a representative sample of what the former referee is saying about the scandal. Now that it is clear what will be asked and said during these media appearances ("interviews" is too strong a word), I will only link to pieces that are newsworthy, such as the sabermetric analysis of Donaghy's claims posted a few days ago. In the event a host strays from the template and/or Donaghy veers off-message, and there is thus something noteworthy to consider, I'll certainly post it here.

Regarding the Donaghy book tour, I have been amazed at the manner in which the subject matter is being treated. After all, it isn't as though these various radio and tv hosts (along with a smattering of journalists) are interviewing a movie star about a film release, and thus can afford to simply follow along with the suggested interview questions and bullet-point highlights supplied beforehand. Rather, this is a complex, controversial, potentially consequential story involving real people and real entities, for which there is an historical record to reference. That this distinction regarding the material is not being made throughout most of the media is disappointing, problematic, or worse.

Gaming the Game: The Story Behind the NBA Betting Scandal and the Gambler Who Made It Happen

2009-12-14T06:16:00.001-05:00

For a host of reasons (especially the dribs and drabs mentioned in the press, and spread throughout the blogosphere), here (again) is a synopsis of my current project, Gaming the Game: The Story Behind the NBA Betting Scandal and the Gambler Who Made It Happen (Barricade/2011).

Though not expressly my research area, illicit gambling has never been far from my organized crime work. Certainly, the two-degrees of separation that often mark the underworld commonly involve the extortion of bookies by local syndicates. Further still, organized crime groups usually have complex relationships with bookies (and with bettors, for that matter). These complicated areas include: financial assistance (usually in the form of loan sharking by the syndicate, though there may be occasions bookies and bettors in fact assist the crime organization) to “mediation” between various parties to money laundering and so on. For these reasons - and more, I wholeheartedly welcomed the opportunity to research the recent NBA betting scandal when granted access to the scandal’s progenitor, professional gambler James Battista, back in March of 2008.

Researching the NBA betting scandal has consumed my time and energy since I first interviewed the man known in big-time betting circles as “the Sheep” - Jimmy “Baba” Battista - in the spring of 2008. The new book, like practically all else I have penned, relies upon a mix of numerous interviews, court and law enforcement documents, and related media coverage. Battista did not cooperate with authorities, and has not spoken publicly about the extent, duration and mechanics of the outrageous scheme. Though the book details the activities which placed him in federal prison, it also discusses his remarkable bookmaking and betting career, and examines the fascinating, close-knit fraternity of the world’s most consequential sports bettors.

Now that the research and writing of Gaming the Game is all but complete, more will be posted about the current project as events warrant. Please know this would have been done ages ago if the project was simply a primary interview subject (pro gambler Jimmy "Baba" Battista) speaking into a tape recorder. Documenting as much of the story as possible required considerable legwork, and I hope the readership appreciates the final product. (Related note: It didn't help humoring interest from Hollywood throughout the process).

A note to my students and colleagues: Whereas Black Brothers, Inc.: The Violent Rise and Fall of Philadelphia’s Black Mafia (Milo, 2005/07) was a conventional read that followed considerable academic writing on similar and related subject matter, Gaming the Game will be mainstream reading followed by academic journal articles (and perhaps an academic text on the general sociology and history of big-time betting).

A note to the media: I will post as much info as possible when time and circumstances permit. As a courtesy, I would very much appreciate interested parties contact me through Chuck Marsh of Penn State's University Relations Office. Thanks as always for your understanding.

Sabermetric Research on Donaghy betting claims

2009-12-14T05:58:00.000-05:00

In the course of researching Gaming the Game, I have had the occasion to review statistical analyses of various basketball and betting trends. Predictably, this involved interviewing and/or relying upon a few Sabermetric experts and devotees. Phil Birnbaum, host of the Sabermetric Research blog, posted his most recent analysis of Donaghy claims yesterday: "Did Tim Donaghy really win 70% of his bets against the spread?"

Professor Wayne L. Winston is Professor of Operations & Decision Technologies at Indiana University in their Kelly School of Business. I linked earlier to Dr. Winston's current book, Mathletics: How Gamblers, Managers, and Sports Enthusiasts Use Mathematics in Baseball, Basketball, and Football, but I'll do so again here for convenience. In Chapter 36 (pp. 244-47) of Mathletics, "Did Tim Donaghy Fix NBA Games," Winston briefly analyzes a sampling of 15 games officiated by Donaghy, based on what little evidence has been in the public domain about games on which he bet and officiated. Professor Winston concludes there are statistical curiosities that need to be explored, and offers suggestions for further study in this regard should the appropriate data ever become available.

Biggest Donaghy question remains: Which games?

2009-12-11T11:32:00.000-05:00

I intended to provide the broader context for this column's thesis in this post, but don't have the time at the moment. Until then, here is a Philadelphia Daily News column by hoops and betting expert Dick Jerardi for which I was interviewed:

Biggest Donaghy question remains: Which games?

Next round of Donaghy coverage

2009-12-11T09:00:00.000-05:00

Please see immediate post below for previous media coverage and my brief comment on these posts.

Philadelphia Daily News 12/11/09 Donaghy reiterates he never threw games

Associated Press 12/11/09 Ref spokesman says Donaghy threatened him

Latest ESPN comprehensive True Hoop analysis 12/10/09

More video footage released 12/10/09 of ESPN True Hoop (Henry Abbott) Donaghy interview

Fox News Channel's "On the Record with Greta Van Susteren" interview 12/10/09 part 1 and part 2

FNC's "On the Record with Greta Van Susteren" 12/10/09 interview transcript

97.5 The Fanatic/ESPN 950 (Philadelphia) Mike Missanelli 12/10/09 interview audio

WTSP 10 Connects (Tampa Bay television) interview video

Donaghy media blitz continues

2009-12-09T16:36:00.001-05:00

I'll be posting a rather large critique of the Donaghy ongoings in the very near future, but until then I'll try to post links to as much coverage as possible (print, tv, radio, and internet). Please know I am not editorializing in my choice of posted links. That is, I am not taking the time to assess the coverage within each item, and I am sure I would take exception to much of the content I am listing below (most recent first):

Philadelphia Daily News 12/10/09

Philadelphia Inquirer 12/10/09

Philadelphia Inquirer 12/10/09 (second article)

True Hoop brief video clip of Donaghy interview re: book proceeds

ESPN J.A. Adande commentary (video)

ESPN 1050 (NY) "The Brandon Tierney Show" 12/9/09 interview audio

NY Daily News columnist commentary on Tierney interview and Knicks broadcaster Mike Breen call to show following interview

Sportsnet.ca column 12/9/09

ESPN.com column 12/9/09 (Jemele Hill)

Boomer and Carton on WFAN (New York) 12/8/09 interview audio

ESPN Radio (L.A.) Mason and Ireland 12/8/09 interview audio

Mayhem in the AM 790 The Zone (Atlanta) 12/8/09 interview audio

"The Herd" on ESPN Radio audio (Colin Cowherd interviews Tim Legler on 12/8/09; Donaghy discussion is 2:30-6:10)

Sports Illustrated (SI.com) podcast Donaghy interview 12/8/09

Mike and Mike discussion (i.e., not an interview) on ESPN Radio 12/8/09

SportsTalk790 (Houston - "Matt and Adam" show) interview audio 12/8/09

Dennis and Callahan (WEEI in Boston) 12/8/09 interview audio

D and C WEEI transcript 12/8/09

Associated Press column 12/8/09

CNNSI column 12/8/09

Fox Business Network interview video 12/7/09
FBN transcript available here.

Fox Sports.com column 12/7/09

ESPN feeds into ESPN-NBA conspiracy theory

2009-12-09T07:19:00.000-05:00

I have no knowledge regarding whether or not ESPN's relationship with the NBA has influenced the network's reporting of the NBA betting scandal involving former referee Tim Donaghy, namely to irresponsibly undermine his credibility on behalf of the league, as many firmly believe and ESPN firmly denies. However, ESPN isn't helping its case by posting a sidebar of otherwise substantive Donaghy coverage with his picture next to a large headline screaming "Debunked!"

More ESPN True Hoop assessments of Donaghy claims

2009-12-08T06:40:00.000-05:00

More analyses of Donaghy's claims by ESPN's True Hoop staff here and here.

ESPN's True Hoop assessment of Donaghy's claims

2009-12-07T20:27:00.000-05:00

'Talk about impressive work. Best assessment to date and a must read.

Donaghy's ESPN appearances on 12/7/09

2009-12-07T20:04:00.003-05:00

I will get around to critiquing the various media treatments, but until then here are the posted links regarding former referee Tim Donaghy's appearances on ESPN:

OTL "Is Donaghy's Story Believable?"

Podcast of Donaghy's interview on ESPN Radio

60 Minutes on Donaghy's betting success

2009-12-05T16:44:00.000-05:00

(Offscreen) Anchor: Yet, based on investigations by 60 Minutes and the FBI, was [Donaghy] actually influenced in the way he was refereeing?
CBS Correspondent Bob Simon: He says he didn't let his betting influence his games. Now, this is rather hard to believe, but the FBI and the NBA thoroughly investigated him and they agree that he did not let his betting influence his games.

Anchor: However, he had an accuracy of about 70-80%, so how does he explain this?
Simon: He explains his accuracy by knowing the relationships that different refs had with different players, different general managers, and different owners. He said that refs had biases; they liked certain players, disliked others, the same with managers and owners, and by knowing which refs were ref'ing which particular games, which teams, he then knew which team to bet on.

Whew. Where to begin?! The easiest issue to address is Donaghy's assertion that he won "70-80%" of his bets. For starters, is this according to him, exclusively (i.e., not supported by the FBI, independent reporting, etc.)? Next, is he saying he won "70-80%" of the 122-153 games he bet between 2003 and 2007? Lastly, though most importantly, is he claiming he had this (outrageous!) betting success rate for games he officiated and for NBA games he did not? Let's hope that CBS at least asked him this last question. Incidentally, I am giving 60 Minutes the benefit of the doubt by assuming the interview was taped before Donaghy's co-conspirator, pro gambler Jimmy Battista, finally spoke publicly last week. As Battista explained to Bryant Gumbel on his HBO "Real Sports" program, the referee's "unheard of" betting win rate (37-10, or 78.7%) applied only to games Donaghy, himself, officiated. According to Battista, Donaghy's bets on NBA games he didn't referee were so bad that the gambler ultimately stopped taking them.

Battista's claims are relevant especially when you consider Simon's assertion that "the FBI and the NBA thoroughly investigated him and they agree that he did not let his betting influence his games" (emphasis added). Again, there is a written, official record we can reference for clarity on this issue of primacy.

According to the federal government, as quoted on p.27 of the NBA's Pedowitz Report, Donaghy admitted that he “compromised his objectivity as a referee because of his personal financial interest in the outcome of NBA games, and that this personal interest might have subconsciously affected his on-court performance." Furthermore, regarding whether the FBI and/or the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of New York supposedly concluded Donaghy didn't alter the outcomes of games, let's look at what little has actually been said on this controversial topic (and please pay close attention to the government's choice of words - what is said and what isn't).

The government's brief statement on this issue is readily available on pp.15-16 of the Pedowitz Report: "There is no evidence that Donaghy ever intentionally made a particular ruling during a game in order to increase the likelihood that his gambling pick would be correct." That's it. It is carefully worded, stopping far short from concluding anything, and for good reason. Short of: incriminating wiretaps, cooperating witnesses and/or government informants (who could, for instance, claim a referee was explaining how the scheme worked or bragging about it, etc.), what other options remain to conclude whether or not a referee was fixing games? Betting success rate? According to whom, and are there valid records to support the claims? Even if there was a credible witness who maintained such records, against whose betting success would the referee be compared to demonstrate he was altering the outcomes of games, and how would one determine what winning percentage was proof of game-fixing? Some suggest reviewing Donaghy's game tapes. Sure, worth a try, I suppose, but considering how subjective calls are in many sports including basketball, I think experts agree you'd be hard pressed to actually show that Donaghy "intentionally made a particular ruling during a game in order to increase the likelihood that his gambling pick would be correct."

There are two key remaining factors to consider vis-a-vis the government's assessment (to date) of Donaghy's possible game-fixing. First, recall that his co-conspirator, pro gambler Jimmy Battista, has never been interviewed by the FBI. Second, also recall that looking into the possibility an NBA referee was altering the outcomes of games was far removed from the original intent of the FBI investigation, and it is quite possible determining the fixing of games was never a major FBI concern. To my knowledge, no one has asked the FBI precisely how interested they were in possible game-fixing, and precisely what efforts were made to assess this. Given these two concerns, let's turn to Simon's assertions that "the NBA thoroughly investigated" Donaghy and that "they agree [with the FBI] that he did not let his betting influence his games". Pay attention to the soft and vague language - and the repeated assumptions - in the NBA's Pedowitz Report:

"We have no reason to doubt the thoroughness of the government’s investigation on which it based its conclusion. We believe that the government would have been naturally skeptical of Donaghy’s assertion that he did not go beyond exploiting “inside” information and did not intentionally make calls to influence the outcome of games. Before concluding that there was no evidence that Donaghy intentionally made incorrect calls, the government investigators doubtless questioned Donaghy carefully about the specific non-public information on which he based his picks, and his conduct while officiating those sixteen games. Because the NBA provided video of games that Donaghy officiated, the government also would have had the opportunity to review these games and to cross-examine Donaghy ― and assess the logic of his explanations and his demeanor. While we do not know what Donaghy told the government, he clearly convinced them that he had not manipulated these games" (p. 28, emphasis added).

In addition to the apparent lack of access to the FBI, the NBA/Pedowitz group did not have access to gambler Jimmy Battista or to referee Tim Donaghy. Without the two key conspirators, the NBA was left to assume the federal government had treated possible game-fixing with the same degree of seriousness the league ostensibly would have (if only in-house) - and to find other avenues of investigation. According the the Pedowitz group, they reviewed several of Donaghy's game tapes, and interviewed scores of NBA referees, NBA experts, and sports betting experts, resulting in the following conclusion (p.33):

"Given the information currently in our possession, we and the League’s experts are unable to contradict the government’s conclusion that '[t]here is no evidence that Donaghy ever intentionally made a particular ruling during a game in order to increase the likelihood that his gambling pick would be correct'” (emphasis added). This tepid statement is a far cry from the one suggested by Bob Simon in the CBS piece and cited above, namely that the NBA has matter-of-factly concluded that "Tim Donaghy did not let his betting influence his games."

All of the above has been in the public domain (as evidenced by my incessant linking), and was thus readily available to CBS/60 Minutes and to any other news organizations which cared to look. Needless to say, my 20+ months of research into this subject matter - complete with my exclusive access to former pro gambler Battista - have afforded me a MUCH more detailed and nuanced understanding of the above that the public has not seen or considered. Gaming the Game: The Story Behind the NBA Betting Scandal and the Gambler Who Made It Happen will be the most comprehensive treatment of this story available.

CBS 60 Minutes Donaghy preview part I (overview of the segment)

2009-12-05T08:35:00.006-05:00

CBS correspondent Bob Simon's preview of tomorrow's Tim Donaghy piece is posted online, as is another of Donaghy's interview. (A transcript of each is posted on this blog.)

After viewing the posted previews, I quite seriously question whether anyone at 60 Minutes bothered to look at the substantive court filings in the case. For instance, in Simon's preview, he is asked how many games Donaghy bet on during his officiating career, to which Simon oddly replies:

Well, he says be bet on about a hundred games He won't say how many of those games he officiated, but he says, 'A lot,' and it went on for four years.

A court filing in re: Donaghy's sentencing (which you can quite easily find online quoted on p.23 of the NBA's Pedowitz Report) states:

"Beginning in or about 2003, and continuing into 2007, Donaghy provided betting recommendations or “picks” on NBA games ― including games he officiated ― to Jack Concannon, who was one of Donaghy’s friends. Donaghy and Concannon bet on approximately 40 games per season...Donaghy temporarily stopped betting with Concannon in December 2006, when . . . Donaghy began dealing with James Battista and Thomas Martino, both of whom Donaghy knew from high school. He resumed dealing with Concannon, however, in approximately February 2007."

Another court filing (which can also found online quoted on p.26 of the Pedowitz Report) states:

"In the Spring of 2003, Donaghy provided picks for games he refereed on only 2-3 occasions. Over the next three full seasons (2003-2004, 2004-2005, and 2005-2006), however, Donaghy bet on numerous games that he worked. The government’s investigation revealed that Donaghy provided picks for anywhere from 30 to 40 such games for each of those three seasons. During the 2006-2007 season (the time period charged in the information), Donaghy bet on approximately 30 games..." The government later noted that although Donaghy bet on 30 NBA games during the '06-07 season, only 16 of those were games he officiated.

So, according to the federal government, the low estimate for Donaghy's bets on games he officiated = 2 + (30 x 3) + 16 = 108, while the high estimate = 3 + (40 x 3) + 16 = 139. Why CBS correspondent Bob Simon states flippantly that Donaghy "says he bet on about a hundred games" and that Donaghy "won't say how many of those games he officiated" is anyone's guess.

Transcript of 60 Minutes Donaghy preview re: betting

2009-12-04T15:46:00.000-05:00

In addition to my curiosities re: organized crime's supposed role in the NBA betting scandal, I have also been keen to assess the many issues involving Donaghy's alleged betting success rate. Here is a transcript of the preview released by CBS yesterday:

(Off-screen) Anchor: Bob, you interviewed Tim Donaghy, the infamous NBA referee who bet on games he officiated in. How large was the scope of this problem, how long did it go on for, and about how many games did he bet on?

CBS Correspondent Bob Simon: Well, he says be bet on about a hundred games. He won't say how many of those games he officiated, but he says, 'A lot,' and it went on for four years. The first three years, he was doing just fine. He was placing his bets through a friend. He was afraid of being caught, so that's why he did it that way. But then in the fourth year, The Mob found out and they got involved with Donaghy and that led to his downfall.

Anchor: Yet, based on investigations by 60 Minutes and the FBI, was he actually influenced in the way he was refereeing?

Simon: He says he didn't let his betting influence his games. Now, this is rather hard to believe, but the FBI and the NBA thoroughly investigated him and they agree that he did not let his betting influence his games.

Anchor: However, he had an accuracy of about 70-80%, so how does he explain this?

Simon: He explains his accuracy by knowing the relationships that different refs had with different players, different general managers, and different owners. He said that refs had biases; they liked certain players, disliked others, the same with managers and owners, and by knowing which refs were ref'ing which particular games, which teams, he then knew which team to bet on.

CBS 60 Minutes Donaghy preview part II (mob allegations)

2009-12-04T15:03:00.001-05:00

Wow. 'Just watched the online preview of the upcoming (Sunday, 12/6/09) 60 Minutes piece on former referee Tim Donaghy. In particular, I was waiting with interest for the "Mob" comments dominating today's NBA scandal-specific news cycle (resulting in part from the brief AP story linked below, but mostly from the CBS story headlined "Ex-NBA Ref Tim Donaghy: Mob Threatened Me"). Talk about misleading - or worse!

I don't know what was more surreal, watching the video preview or reading the "news" story. Each is obsessed with the salacious - though incredibly dubious - organized crime angle, and neither mentions the names of the two individuals who visited Donaghy at the PHL airport Marriott in December 2006.

When I saw today's headline re: "The Mob" threatening Donaghy, I assumed the reference was to his stint in prison during which, according to a Donaghy spokesperson, an "inmate claiming ties to the New York mob beat Donaghy with a heavy object." Thus, imagine my surprise when I learned Donaghy was referring, instead, to the fateful December 2006 meeting with his longtime, close friend Tommy Martino and mutual pal, pro gambler Jimmy Battista! These are the two unnamed men "associated with the Gambino crime family" referred to in the video segment?! The "news" story may be worse (emphasis added):

When the Mafia learned of his [betting] success, they wanted him to work for them, he says. "They basically told me that I needed to give them the picks and if I didn't, that it's a possibility that somebody would go down and visit my wife and kids in Florida," says Donaghy...He spent 11 months in prison and provided evidence against his mob cohorts.

Thus, Jimmy Battista and Tommy Martino are the mobsters referenced in the hyper headline and throughout the organized crime-obsessed article? Has anyone at CBS even searched Google for these characters?

On a more serious note, Donaghy told a much watered-down story to the FBI, where he apparently made no mention of Martino. As the NBA's Pedowitz Report, quoting a court filing, states (p.24):

"Battista also threatened harm to Donaghy’s family. Battista told Donaghy that 'you don’t want anyone from New York visiting your wife and kids.' Over the preceding years, Donaghy had come to believe that Battista had organized crime connections, and so he interpreted 'New York' to be the Mafia."

As reported in the Philadelphia Inquirer, covering the former gambler's recent interview with Bryant Gumbel, "Battista denied blackmailing Donaghy as Donaghy had claimed. 'I never threatened him - I didn't have to. He was a degenerate gambler,' said Battista, pointing out that he wasn't charged with extortion."

Here's hoping the full 60 Minutes interview provides some new information, preferably based in part on documents, and that what has been released is not a representative sample of things to come. Wow.

ESPN 12/3/09 on Donaghy's Personal Foul

Related AP Story 12/4/09

Transcript of 60 Minutes Donaghy preview re: "The Mob"

2009-12-04T11:10:00.003-05:00

For my purposes, at least, one of the key areas of interest in the upcoming 60 Minutes interview of former referee Tim Donaghy involves the assertion he was threatened in December 2006 by organized crime figures to provide them with his NBA picks (which he had been placing, according to him, since 2003). Here is a transcript of the preview released by CBS yesterday:

CBS Correspondent Bob Simon: "'The Mob' found out about it [his successful betting on his NBA games], and wanted in on the action. That's when Donaghy discovered what it means to be really scared. It started outside this hotel in Philadelphia. The FBI says two men associated with the Gambino crime 'family' requested a meeting with Donaghy. They took him for a ride.
Former NBA referee Tim Donaghy: They came down and picked me up.

Simon: They picked you up?
Donaghy: Mm hmm.

Simon: And what happened then?
Donaghy: They basically told me that I needed to give them the picks and if I didn't, that, um, it's a possibility that somebody would go down and visit my wife and kids in Florida.

Simon: Wow. And you believed them?
Donaghy: Yes.

Simon. [Were] you scared?
Donaghy: Sure.

See 1:25 of the vid clip:

More on Donaghy's book and claims

2009-12-03T04:04:00.000-05:00

As more of former referee Tim Donaghy's claims are published, I'll try to post them here. Today's news cycle is pre-occupied with a matter of primacy, namely Donaghy's repeated claim that he did not influence the outcomes of games to advance his betting propositions. According to the New York Times, Donaghy states in his book:

“The big question on everyone’s mind is, ‘Did Tim Donaghy fix games?’ The answer is no. I didn’t need to fix them. I usually knew which team was going to win based on which referees had been assigned to the game, their personalities, and the relationships they had with the players and coaches of the teams involved.”

If this is true, Donaghy should immediately open up one of those "1-900" tout lines which charge a fee for betting insights and "sure winners!". After all, if his intimate knowledge of referee behavior - ALONE - accounted for his outrageous betting success (winning approx. 79% of his wagers), this insight would still be invaluable and the former referee could earn quite a living.

It is unlikely we'll ever see a Donaghy tout service, however. As Donaghy's co-conspirator, former pro gambler Jimmy Battista, explained to Bryant Gumbel recently, the referee's "unheard of" betting win rate applied only to games Donaghy, himself, officiated. According to Battista, Donaghy's bets on NBA games he didn't referee were so bad that the gambler ultimately stopped taking them.

ESPN

Philadelphia Daily News story 12/3/09

Philadelphia Daily News column 12/3/09

Donaghy book fiasco update

2009-12-01T05:23:00.000-05:00

According to Deadspin, Tim Donaghy has found a new publisher for his manuscript. The newly-titled Personal Foul: A First-Person Account of the Scandal that Rocked the NBA will be discussed on December 6th, when the former referee appears on 60 Minutes. It is unclear when the interview was taped and thus we don't know if Donaghy was offered an opportunity to respond to claims made by his co-conspirator, former pro gambler Jimmy Battista, in a recent appearance on HBO's Real Sports program. Considering Donaghy's guilty plea and other filings with the government, it will be interesting to see how he offers anything new or noteworthy that would not result in criminal charges. I will also be keen to assess what evidence exists to back up whatever claims are made in the book and during the related media blitz.

Related coverage:

Philadelphia Daily News

New York Daily News

Latest revelations in the news re: the NBA scandal

2009-11-25T08:34:00.000-05:00

Some media coverage of HBO's "Real Sports" segment of the NBA betting scandal, featuring Bryant Gumbel's interview with Jimmy Battista, follows below. I have only linked to what I considered the three most comprehensive pieces, though dozens of sites offered their own takes on the revelations. Obviously, as a result of this past year's research, I am in a position to knock down or confirm many of the (often ridiculous and irresponsible) rumors surrounding the scandal that appear in the the current news cycle. Whatever speculation remains following the publication of Gaming the Game: The Inside Story of the NBA Betting Scandal and the Gambler Who Made It All Happen will be addressed at that time.

Philadelphia Inquirer

New York Times

ESPN

HBO's Real Sports on the NBA Scandal

2009-11-24T14:18:00.000-05:00

This month's episode (#152, technically) of HBO's impressive "Real Sports with Bryant Gumbel" program briefly examines the NBA betting scandal by interviewing the architect of the scheme, James "Baba" Battista. Battista, the primary subject of my forthcoming book, Gaming the Game: The Inside Story of the NBA Betting Scandal and the Gambler Who Made It All Happen, speaks publicly about his role in the conspiracy for the first time. The initial air date was 11/24 at 10p, though the show airs numerous times throughout the next few weeks.

My forthcoming book on the NBA betting scandal

2009-11-18T15:25:00.000-05:00

Much more information will soon be available regarding my forthcoming Gaming the Game: The Story Behind the NBA Betting Scandal and the Gambler Who Made It Happen. Nineteen months and counting(!), I realize, but please know this would have been done ages ago if the project was simply a primary interview subject (pro gambler Jimmy "Baba" Battista) speaking into a tape recorder.

Documenting as much of the story as possible required considerable legwork, and I hope the readership appreciates the final product. (Related note: It didn't help humoring interest from Hollywood throughout the process).

I will post as much info as possible when time and circumstances permit. As a courtesy, I would very much appreciate interested parties contact me through Chuck Marsh of Penn State's University Relations Office. Thanks as always for your understanding.

Donaghy book fiasco

2009-11-18T14:37:00.000-05:00

Yes! I am aware of NBA referee Tim Donaghy’s proposed book, Blowing the Whistle: Exposing the Culture of Fraud in the NBA, and of much hullaballoo surrounding it. I have no comment on the book’s contents, however, simply because I have only seen the leaked excerpts first posted at deadspin.com. Importantly, however, I do have a few words for the conspiracy-minded out there who find it inconceivable a publisher would: sign a contract for a book, presumably pay an advance, design a cover, offer pre-release sales online, ONLY THEN to conduct “a close legal review of the final manuscript” and an “independent evaluation of some of the author's sources and statements” ultimately dumping the project because of "concerns over potential liability.". I am sorry to say I can quite easily believe this is what occurred (i.e., without interference or pressure from an outside party such as the NBA). Speak with authors, editors, and publishers and you’ll be shocked at how frequently dubious material gets through the process without ever being properly vetted. Perhaps the NBA threatened legal action (as Donaghy's spokesperson Pat Berdan insists, despite the protestations of the league), but there is no evidence whatsoever to support such a conclusion and, if anything, there is a history of other “non-fiction” works suffering similar fates because of better-late-than-never vetting. Here is a some coverage re: Blowing the Whistle:

Philadelphia Inquirer 10/30/09

Fox Sports 10/29/09

USA Today 10/29/09

ESPN 10/29/09

Repository for NBA betting scandal information

2009-10-09T17:29:00.000-04:00

Hopefully, this space will evolve to include numerous links to commentary and analysis of the recent NBA betting scandal involving referee Tim Donaghy, pro gambler James Battista, and intermediary Tommy Martino. For now, my host blog will have to do.