PEDs or gambling
November 16th 2011 09:34
On one of the other websites I have recently written a column discussing the comparisons between professional athletes taking performance-enhancing drugs or betting on the sport they play. I don’t know about you but I would much rather watch an entire lineup of juiced up players competing and trying to win as opposed to pro athletes betting on the game they play. I don’t even think the two are close from an integrity standpoint.
Yes, both performance enhancers and gambling have been present in competition and sports since the time the first ball was rolled out onto a field. Yet for over a decade, what garners more attention between the two? The answer is clearly PEDs and the constant battle between the drugs developed and the drugs being tested for. Always trying to get an edge to be bigger, faster, and stronger. Athletes are given the option of taking something that might help them get that one more contract or stay in the game and remain productive a little while longer.
Yet gambling is ubiquitous as much as steroids had been in baseball in the 80s, 90s, and 2000s. Betting is more along the lines of the topic that is best swept under the rug and not brought up until it is appropriate to do so. I liken it to a crowd of people lighting a stick of dynamite, knowing it was lit, and staying near the dynamite watching the wick burn down and explode in front of them. You can’t ignore something that is omnipresent and poses a real threat.
It has been over 20 years since Pete Rose became the poster child for this sort of thing, but he is hardly the only one. Go back in history and go around the world. Cricket and soccer are rife with gambling and match fixing in the 21st century. In October, English soccer star Wayne Rooney’s father and uncle were arrested on suspicion of colluding with Scottish player Steve Jennings on getting kicked out of a game that won bettors a proposition or “spot” bet.
Point shaving and match fixing are defined as things that happened late in the 19th and early part of the 20th century when baseball in this country was truly the national pastime. The 1918 Black Sox goes without saying, but even the game’s biggest names, some of which are in the Baseball Hall Of Fame took part in attempting to fix certain games. Ever heard the names Tryus Cobb, Tristram Speaker, and Smoky Joe Wood? Look up their collusion to fix Detroit Tiger and Cleveland Indian ballgames beginning in 1919. Cobb and Speaker’s gambling was not discovered by President Ban Johnson until 1926. Who knows how many games were influenced by the two.
It’s conceivable to think players are not as apt to take part in gambling today due to the increase in salaries and the amount of money it would take to tempt them to fix a game. But it really isn’t always about the money as it is winning. I believe there is a difference between having a competition problem and having a gambling problem. If Pete Rose as a player-manager alleges he bet on his Cincinnati Reds every night as he did back in 2007, this shows his immense confidence in his team. But Rose was known to be a problem gambler because it wasn’t just betting on baseball that got him in trouble. So if his Cincinnati Reds were on a losing streak and Rose was tired of losing money, would his gambling addiction come into play possibly leading him to bet against his team on certain nights knowing the odds were in his favor to win money?
I believe this to be the case because Rose knew all the intricacies of his team. He knew the lineup he would put out there, the how the starting pitcher felt, and how many fresh arms were really available in the bullpen. So would Pete ruin his chances of winning a bet by blindly betting on his Reds every night? Even if his team flew into a different time zone at 3 a.m. and one of his lesser starting pitchers was throwing that night? Baseball in this country may have the most stories but dig deeper as I have referenced in my Examiner.com article and you will see the threats of integrity can run far and deep.
Yes, both performance enhancers and gambling have been present in competition and sports since the time the first ball was rolled out onto a field. Yet for over a decade, what garners more attention between the two? The answer is clearly PEDs and the constant battle between the drugs developed and the drugs being tested for. Always trying to get an edge to be bigger, faster, and stronger. Athletes are given the option of taking something that might help them get that one more contract or stay in the game and remain productive a little while longer.
Yet gambling is ubiquitous as much as steroids had been in baseball in the 80s, 90s, and 2000s. Betting is more along the lines of the topic that is best swept under the rug and not brought up until it is appropriate to do so. I liken it to a crowd of people lighting a stick of dynamite, knowing it was lit, and staying near the dynamite watching the wick burn down and explode in front of them. You can’t ignore something that is omnipresent and poses a real threat.
It has been over 20 years since Pete Rose became the poster child for this sort of thing, but he is hardly the only one. Go back in history and go around the world. Cricket and soccer are rife with gambling and match fixing in the 21st century. In October, English soccer star Wayne Rooney’s father and uncle were arrested on suspicion of colluding with Scottish player Steve Jennings on getting kicked out of a game that won bettors a proposition or “spot” bet.
Point shaving and match fixing are defined as things that happened late in the 19th and early part of the 20th century when baseball in this country was truly the national pastime. The 1918 Black Sox goes without saying, but even the game’s biggest names, some of which are in the Baseball Hall Of Fame took part in attempting to fix certain games. Ever heard the names Tryus Cobb, Tristram Speaker, and Smoky Joe Wood? Look up their collusion to fix Detroit Tiger and Cleveland Indian ballgames beginning in 1919. Cobb and Speaker’s gambling was not discovered by President Ban Johnson until 1926. Who knows how many games were influenced by the two.
It’s conceivable to think players are not as apt to take part in gambling today due to the increase in salaries and the amount of money it would take to tempt them to fix a game. But it really isn’t always about the money as it is winning. I believe there is a difference between having a competition problem and having a gambling problem. If Pete Rose as a player-manager alleges he bet on his Cincinnati Reds every night as he did back in 2007, this shows his immense confidence in his team. But Rose was known to be a problem gambler because it wasn’t just betting on baseball that got him in trouble. So if his Cincinnati Reds were on a losing streak and Rose was tired of losing money, would his gambling addiction come into play possibly leading him to bet against his team on certain nights knowing the odds were in his favor to win money?
I believe this to be the case because Rose knew all the intricacies of his team. He knew the lineup he would put out there, the how the starting pitcher felt, and how many fresh arms were really available in the bullpen. So would Pete ruin his chances of winning a bet by blindly betting on his Reds every night? Even if his team flew into a different time zone at 3 a.m. and one of his lesser starting pitchers was throwing that night? Baseball in this country may have the most stories but dig deeper as I have referenced in my Examiner.com article and you will see the threats of integrity can run far and deep.
| 30 |
| Vote |
subscribe to this blog
Comment by Joe Soriano
Pro Sports Wrap
Orble Sport Blog