Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 18Sports Analytics and PerformanceBenford’s Law and Fraud DetectionDoping in Sports

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 9 of the 9 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A test of the widespread-point-shaving theory

Open access
Borghesi, Richard, Dare, William·2009·Finance Research Letters
DOI 10.1016/j.frl.2009.04.004
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.frl.2009.04.004

Cites

9 of 9 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Citations

Cites

Show all 9 references

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Munson, 1998, The fix was in, Sports Illustrated, 89, 100
  2. Yaeger, 1998, Confessions of a point shaver, Sports Illustrated, 89, 94

Cited by

See all 18

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Borghesi, R., & Dare, W.
Affiliations
  • University of South Florida (US)
  • Oklahoma State University (US)
Corresponding author
Borghesi, Richard
ORCID
Borghesi, Richard
Venue
Finance Research Letters
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2009-09
Volume
6
Issue
3
Pages
115-121
ISSN
  • 1544-6131 (ISSN-L)
  • 1544-6123
DOI
10.1016/j.frl.2009.04.004
OpenAlex
W2089556648
Cited by
18
References
9
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 3 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 2 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 2
FWCI
1.96
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Locations
  • Finance research letters (publishedVersion)
  • SSRN Electronic Journal (submittedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Sports Analytics and Performance
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Benford’s Law and Fraud Detection
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Doping in Sports
Keywords
NCAA basketball, corruption, sports betting, betting markets, favorites, coaching methods, conspiracy

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A test of the widespread-point-shaving theory. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.frl.2009.04.004
The paper
Borghesi, R., & Dare, W. (2009). A test of the widespread-point-shaving theory. Finance Research Letters. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.frl.2009.04.004

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.