Book-making is surely the second-oldest profession in the world. Some of its practitioners may even stake a fortune on its being actually older than the one otherwise so-described. All of us speculate about future events, and many, if not most are prepared to wager varying amounts on what they think is likely to happen. In the process they incur risks of possible losses, sometimes unaffordable ones. Why do people engage in such pursuits and why do most societies view speculation, especially that motivated by pecuniary gain, with disapprobation? These concerns, always relevant, gain particular currency in view of the present turmoil in the only religion every Indian follows, cricket.
Almost everyone gambles in India. The saintliest of grandmothers feels no qualms at all depriving a favourite grandchild of a chunk of her meagre pocket-money during Diwali card sessions. No event is too small or taboo to bet on, and given the population, even small individual bets add up to amounts comparable to the entire incomes of some smaller nations. Illegality of actions has never been much of a deterrent in India and it certainly is not in case of gambling petty and large.
The simplest form of gambling arises from an assertion of one's skills and abilities. "I told you so," are the sweetest four words in any language. One is tempted to back them with small wagers. I have myself done so with friends, staking my supposed wisdom on outcomes of elections or, as appropriate at this time of the year, monsoon follies of the meteorological department. These expressions of self-belief could also become drivers of incomes. Successive black-jack teams of students of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology honed their card-counting skills to near-perfection to take on Las Vegas casinos, as documented by Jeff Ma in his book, Bringing Down the House (later made into the successful film, 21).
The high-risk, high-reward nature of modern sport makes it a natural target for speculation. Its extensive media coverage makes almost everyone an expert, willing to put their money where their mouths are. Even intermediate outcomes or margins of final result become matters worthy of speculation. These factors together make sports contests natural targets for gambling. It is a relatively small leap from this point to manipulation or fixing of results at any stage.
There is also an underlying realisation that money and sex can outdo competitive spirit as the motive force in sports. Bookies may have originated in shady dives. But these days, local bookies get networked into empires controlled by off-shore dons of organised crime, becoming parts of gigantic syndicates. That is the reason for legalising sports betting in some countries, because it offers some supervision and protection against extortion. Stuart Wheeler, the national treasurer of the now perfectly legitimate and respectable United Kingdom Independence Party, founded IG Index, a company that pioneered spread betting. He sold his stake in the company in the last decade for an estimated £40 million, which he believes to be only a fraction of what it is worth now.
It is another matter altogether that illegal gambling flourishes even in countries that have legitimised betting. Worldwide, hundreds of millions of dollars are bet everyday on myriad sports events legally or otherwise. Boxers are known to have thrown bouts, including world-title fights. The Chicago Black Sox scandal of 1919 led to a thorough house-cleaning of American baseball with commissioners of unimpeachable integrity now overseeing the so-called national pastime of the United States. But a Pete Rose still surfaced 70 years later as a star player and manager indulging in gambling, including betting on the team he managed. Football action in Europe is constantly under surveillance. Even the award of Olympic Games or the conduct of heads of international sports bodies are not above suspicion.
Fixing alters the basic nature of gambling. Fair speculation based on knowledge is now subject to outcomes that are patently unfair. Yet punters are not deterred. Two possible sets of motivations attract them to unfair gambles.
The first is the enormity of payoff, however remote the odds may be. My colleagues Professors Nitin Patel and M G Subrahmanyam (then of Indian Institute of Management, Ahmedabad) hypothesised that the indivisibility of certain needs - a house, a daughter's wedding - require resources far beyond some individuals' earning potential, driving them to participate in unfair gambles. The continuing popularity of lotteries with astronomical payoffs, with minuscule possibilities of winning them, is thus explained.
The other is the thrill, the rush of adrenalin, a compulsive gambler experiences. The poorer the odds, the higher the sense of excitement of the speculator. Some people dare sharks in the ocean, yet others enjoy the free fall from sky-diving from great heights. Candidates for Gamblers Anonymous dare sharks of another variety who take their bets, or fall from personal grace. Fyodor Dostoyevsky based his novel The Gambler on his own addiction. His gambling obligations led him to write at a furious pace (and marry his secretary), but the Hollywood version of the book had the protagonist (a virtuoso performance by James Caan) lose life and limb.
A major area of speculation is the stock market. How pervasive its manipulation is needs no elaboration, with trials of the likes of Raj Rajaratnam for insider trading in the United States resulting in conviction. This is probably the most pernicious form of illegal fixing. Gurunath Meiyappan, the son-in-law of N Srinivasan, the compromised president of the Board of Control for Cricket in India and director of the company that owns the Chennai Super Kings (CSK) franchise in the Indian Premier League (IPL), is suspected to have bet big on IPL matches, including those involving CSK. This is the worst form of insider trading, since Mr Meiyappan knew what few others did and could possibly control all aspects of the games he bet on. Both he and Mr Rajaratnam were wealthy to begin with. So while greed for still more riches could have been their motive, it is far more likely that their satisfaction was mainly from the exercise of raw power they had on the fortunes of countless unknown others entangled in the web they spun. Power could be the most potent aphrodisiac!
I had occasion to make observations on the role of that tarnished star of Indian origin, Rajat Gupta and his trial as an associate of Rajratnam ("Dr Faustus, Wall Street," India Abroad, March 29, 2013). Pedigree mattered little, since they do not come any more highly placed and reputed than Mr Gupta. The conclusion from that essay, a quote from the poet Johann Wolfgang Goethe who wrote a classic play on Faust's selling his soul to the Devil, applies to these IPL leaders as well: "The deed is everything, its repute nothing."
I would not bet on gambling being controlled, any more than the profession it rivals in longevity.
The writer taught at the Indian Institute of Management, Ahmedabad, and helped set up the Institute of Rural Management, Anand
Disclaimer: These are personal views of the writer. They do not necessarily reflect the opinion of www.business-standard.com or the Business Standard newspaper
