Dear Ladies and Gentlemen
In connection with the betting scandal, I would first like to draw your attention to two things: I have been a professional gambler for 20 years. My approach is purely mathematical, supported by a football programme I developed myself. Manipulation is NOT desirable for me under any circumstances and I am not involved in it in any way, but am interested in the elimination of cheating. I was also questioned many times in connection with the Hoyzer scandal four years ago, and likewise in the case of this year’s scandal.
I have also written a longer “commentary” on the matter, which I would be happy to send you if you are interested. This commentary looks at the events more from the point of view of the betting market, but there are also a number of other considerations that are not quite ordinary.
With regard to Sunday and the Oberhausen – Munich 60 match, I would like to make a few specific comments: It is inconceivable to me that the teams (and officials) were informed of “irregularities” before the match. If that were the case, it could only be the intention to prevent manipulation for THIS ONE GAME. For me it is inconceivable that after the clarification there was still an attempt to influence the outcome of the match, whoever might have been involved. For me, the behaviour of the investigators is a kind of tyranny. Comparable to putting a wallet on the pavement but putting a sign on it: “We are watching you. So if you pocket the wallet now, we will arrest you.”
In addition, there is the following inconceivable stupidity, but this also relates to the media coverage: every thinking person simply has to ask himself WHAT was bet and in which direction the manipulation was supposed to go. Was the victory of Munich 60 (very expensive) bet on? If neither the investigators nor the reporters know (which is inconceivable for me; you would only have to ask me for information), then the prank would be even more pernicious. In case you should have known: The investigators are already exposed for stupidity anyway. The reporters would have missed their job. But the readers obviously don’t even have an interest in it, as I found out myself in short (non-representative) surveys. All in all, something is crying out for clarification. For that to happen, however, the whole business of betting would have to be fundamentally discussed. I could provide this clarification.
Sincerely
Dirk Paulsen
