Is David Haye guilty of match-fixing?

[gp.]

I am reminded of Krusty the Clown betting against the Harlem Globetrotters because he "thought the Generals were due".

[adamwillan]

As long as he isn't betting on it surely he can do what he wants in a fight. Even if he wanted to lose a fight why should the fact people bet on it be a factor of what he is allowed to do.

[JxhDel.]

I thought he could have ended it in one and it looked so. I don't think he fixed it for a decision win but that bothered me a lot.

[Syntax Error]

Haye has a history of this.

He did it in the Audley Harrison fight, whereby he bet on himself to win in three rounds.

Notice how he did nothing for the first two rounds, then jumped on Harrison in round three and finished him?

Harrison was so utterly pathetic and passive that you have to wonder if he was actually in on it.

[ShadrachSimmo]

Haye has a history of this.

He did it in the Audley Harrison fight, whereby he bet on himself to win in three rounds.

Notice how he did nothing for the first two rounds, then jumped on Harrison in round three and finished him?

Harrison was so utterly pathetic and passive that you have to wonder if he was actually in on it.

Think that was just a run of the mill performance from big Audley at that time.

[Crease]

Is David Haye guilty of match-fixing?

Not sure about that one, mate. I think the answer would have to be a conclusive NO. If pressed on this, Haye's saving grace is probably the fact that is it only an exhibition. And the rules of exhibitions seem to differ very greatly...

[Crease]

What does he blow all his cash on ??

The wife going for the divorce and taking half of his coin can't have been pretty. Especially with David globetrotting like a playboy and putting it about. I don't even think he contested it when she said he was unfaithful and they just let the paperwork go through as smoothly as possible to avoid additional costs...

Plus, he still has a son to his former wife, so you can bet that she's taking child support off him every month.

[Crease]

I always thought the Harrison fight was extremely suspect so wouldn't put anything past Haye in that regard.

You'd have a stronger case if his opponent was anyone else except Audley Harrison... The man who is afraid to throw a punch when he's nervous...

[Crease]

There was some video at the time which seemed to show Haye saying ‘now’ or something before koing him. And Audley didn’t throw a punch. But it doesn’t make sense really

There was, you are right.

The trouble is that in the Mormeck fight, Haye can be seen calling him "motherf@cker" when he was punching him.... The thing is David talks to himself during his fights. Which is not too uncommon we know that Ali did it and Tyson Fury does it now at the moment...

[Ricky]

Is David Haye guilty of match-fixing?

Not sure about that one, mate. I think the answer would have to be a conclusive NO. If pressed on this, Haye's saving grace is probably the fact that is it only an exhibition. And the rules of exhibitions seem to differ very greatly...

But what difference does it make if there are betting markets available? This would be the same as a footballer deliberately getting booked in a pre-season friendly. If he intended to do it, for betting purposes, then it's the exact definition of match-fixing, no?

[JamesPhilips]

There was some video at the time which seemed to show Haye saying ‘now’ or something before koing him. And Audley didn’t throw a punch. But it doesn’t make sense really

There was, you are right.

The trouble is that in the Mormeck fight, Haye can be seen calling him "motherf@cker" when he was punching him.... The thing is David talks to himself during his fights. Which is not too uncommon we know that Ali did it and Tyson Fury does it now at the moment...

Yeah I find it hard to understand how Audley could be convinced to throw the fight - the payoff would have to be big. Or they would’ve had to offer Audley the fight on condition he threw it….. it just seems hard to pull off at that level. You could argue Harrison would never be able to get a good payday without Haye, but these are heavyweights and you’re just one win away from a good payday.

[Crease]

But what difference does it make if there are betting markets available? This would be the same as a footballer deliberately getting booked in a pre-season friendly. If he intended to do it, for betting purposes, then it's the exact definition of match-fixing, no?

Valid point, mate... I'm just not sure... I can definitely see what you're getting at.

But it does make a difference considering that the result of which will not be going on to Haye's professional boxing record. Also, Joe Louis did loads of exhibition bouts when he was in the army against fellow American soldiers... If people were having a flutter on Joe winning, is it the same thing? What is Joe backed himself to win each time?

[Crease]

Yeah I find it hard to understand how Audley could be convinced to throw the fight - the payoff would have to be big. Or they would’ve had to offer Audley the fight on condition he threw it….. it just seems hard to pull off at that level. You could argue Harrison would never be able to get a good payday without Haye, but these are heavyweights and you’re just one win away from a good payday.

That is definitely the way that things are going these days... And you know what? I don't really mind that as such - as long as we see the big fights getting made and top guys facing each other....

Personally speaking I'd love to see Dillian Whyte go in and have a crack at Deontay Wilder... Even Usyk - I don't think that he will win on the weekend, but I don't think that he's done at the weight. Still plenty of fights out there for him... I'd like to see him at Joseph Parker face off.

[Controversial]

[Crease]

Thanks for the vid, just watched it there...

So Haye told everyone that he would do him in the 3rd and encouraged people to bet on it... Somewhat reminiscent of Ali don't you think? And he never got into any hot water for choosing his rounds...

Getting away from the betting side of things for a moment.... £5 million is serious cash to batter poor old Audley. Fine work if you can get it...

[keirw]

Not a pro fight which makes it interesting. i would of thought when it got changed to an exibition sports books would of voided bets. but you gotta do that befor the fight in my opinion

Betting on exhibitions makes no sense because in an exhibition athletes are allowed to do what they want really i would of though, its not fighting, its not acting, but its somewhere inbetween. If Haye or any of Hays close mates have lumped on haye by points then it will be interesting..

But as for the general public, everyone betting on this knew (or should of known) what they were betting on, not boxing ability and IF haye Could knock him, but instead they were betting on weather or not Haye would choose to KO his mate, or if they were going to dance around and mug the public off.

Indeed, why is that classing something as an exhibition it suddenly becomes ok to fix the result? There must have been people in the know that would have bet Go the Distance in the knowledge these 2 are friends and Haye had no intention of stopping him. The Cricket players that were found to be spot-fixing was huge news in the UK and dominated headlines for days. How's this any different?

For anyone interested I've written to the UK Gambling Commission about David Haye and will keep you posted.

The cricketers in question were proven to be part of a betting syndicate and were set to earn a great deal of money from their actions had they not got caught.
As yet there is no evidence that Haye put any bets on the fight, that might change and something may come to light down the line.
But until then, that is the difference.

[HomicideHenry]

This reminds me of when professional wrestling started listing itself as exhibitions rather than contests so they didn't have to fork out the kind of money to commissions as they did in the past.

Classifying matches as exhibitions also put a halt to gambling, because exhibitions were off the table to be betted on. Many a time someone would get the inside scoop beforehand and lay down an outrageous bet, and basically drain the casinos dry. So labeling matches as exhibitions prevented this from happening for the most part.

Same deal with boxing, although it's sort of the reverse proposition--- where everybody knows for the most part it's just a show not the real thing, unless the two participants forego the rules and turn it into a full-blown contest by going 100% hard at each other.

It seems to me in this case that nothing illegal transpired here because David Haye basically exposed a loophole in the British gambling system allowing exhibitions to be betted on.

The two men are friends so why anyone thought it would actually be a fight is beyond me. And why anyone would lay down a wooden nickel let alone a legitimate dollar on the match is beyond me.

[mchuffy]

Anyone who has any problems with this fight is guilty of perpetuating these nonsensical fights in the first place. It's embarrassing.

[mchuffy]

When wrestling becomes a valid part of the conversation people need to step back and look at themselves.

[Glass Joe]

Forgot that happened Haye really screwed up in the post fight interview and tried his best to bury it in the interview

[Controversial]

Thanks for the vid, just watched it there...

So Haye told everyone that he would do him in the 3rd and encouraged people to bet on it... Somewhat reminiscent of Ali don't you think? And he never got into any hot water for choosing his rounds...

Getting away from the betting side of things for a moment.... £5 million is serious cash to batter poor old Audley. Fine work if you can get it...

It's not that he predicted the round, the issue was he said he bet money on it.

[Controversial]

Forgot that happened Haye really screwed up in the post fight interview and tried his best to bury it in the interview

Ha yes and I'm sure he didn't personally put a bet on but would you be surprised if he gave money to someone else to bet on it on his behalf?

[Crease]

It's not that he predicted the round, the issue was he said he bet money on it.

I know... But wouldn't it be a thousand times worse if he backed against himself and lost the fight on purpose...

Nigel Benn said that he put 100 grand on himself to beat Steve Collins in the rematch...

[Controversial]

It's not that he predicted the round, the issue was he said he bet money on it.

I know... But wouldn't it be a thousand times worse if he backed against himself and lost the fight on purpose...

Nigel Benn said that he put 100 grand on himself to beat Steve Collins in the rematch...

I'm sure it happens.

Slightly different examples between Benn and Haye because Benn wasn't specific, it was just a bet to win, and of course he lost. Haye not only predicted the 3rd round but quite obviously carried Harrison until that round. That smacks more of fight fixing. But I'm sure it goes on a lot in any sport where you can bet on things.

[mickey1975]

Benn would be lucky to have someone take 100k.