Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 9Sports Analytics and PerformanceDoping in SportsBenford’s Law and Fraud Detection

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 16 of the 16 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Failing to Cover: Point Shaving or Statistical Abnormality?

Diemer, George, Leeds, Michael A.·2013·International Journal of Sport Finance
DOI 10.1177/155862351300800301
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The possibility that coaches, players, or referees might be involved in point shaving has been a subject of debate since Wolfers's (2006) controversial finding that favorites in NCAA college basketball games fail to cover point spreads with disturbing frequency. We reconcile Wolfers's finding with evidence provided by Borghesi (2008) , Borghesi and Dare (2009) , and others that heavy favorites are not, on average, less likely to cover the point spread. We find that the distribution of game outcomes is bimodal, with one peak on one side of the “no corruption” outcome and one peak on the other side. This finding is consistent with point shaving by favorites, who lose by too little, and underdogs who lose by too much. On average, however, the outcome is consistent with the no-point shaving hypothesis. We compare regular-season and post-season results and find that this effect disappears in the more closely observed NCAA tournament games.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/155862351300800301

Cites

16 of 16 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Citations

Cites

Show all 16 references

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. LeedsM. A. & von AllmenP. (2010). The economics of sports. Boston, MA: Pearson.
  2. SeymourH. (1960). Baseball: The early years. London: Oxford University Press.

Cited by

See all 9

Related

Metadata

Authors
Diemer, G., & Leeds, M. A.
Affiliations
  • Chestnut Hill College (US)
  • Temple University (US)
ORCID
Leeds, Michael A.
Venue
International Journal of Sport Finance
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
2013-08
Volume
8
Issue
3
Pages
175-191
ISSN
  • 1558-6235 (ISSN-L)
  • 1930-076X
DOI
10.1177/155862351300800301
OpenAlex
W280374461
Semantic Scholar
1aa091444c8fce39731d11ca2a06cd59cd0ea734
Cited by
9
References
16
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 1
FWCI
1.32
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)
Locations
  • International Journal of Sport Finance (publishedVersion)
  • International Journal of Sport Finance (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Sports Analytics and Performance
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Doping in Sports
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Benford’s Law and Fraud Detection
Keywords
college basketball, NCAA tournament, sports corruption, betting markets

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

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.