Originally Posted by SunDeck
Maybe, but the line in the baseball book is largely determined by pitching. Bookies wouldn't need to look to Pete's money to figure out what the line is.
Yes, but Pete had the inside knowledge that bookies crave. For example, he might have decided to sit Barry Larkin for a game. He'd tell the bookies, "Look, I'm sitting Larkin today so make your bets accordingly." Now, of course, that's no guarantee that the Reds would have lost that game but I think you have to agree that they had a better chance of winning if Larkin was playing than if he were not.
Also, if Pete owed bookies money, it's possible they may have asked him to do his darndest to throw a game in exchange for wiping or reducing his debt. I'm not saying this actually happened but it's an example of what could have happened.