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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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."