UAB’s lopsided win over Temple on Thursday drew the attention of a gambling integrity company due to unusual betting activity before tipoff.
U.S. Integrity notified casinos about the massive odds shift before UAB’s 100-72 win, according to Sports Illustrated.
The outlet reported that U.S. Integrity, which is employed by the American Athletic Conference, has been monitoring Temple games for some time.
“We are aware they flagged it,” AAC men’s basketball director of communications Tom Fenstermaker told the outlet.
While it’s not unusual for a line to move a point or two during a course of the day, and especially as news trickles out about injuries, Thursday’s AAC matchup saw the line move by up to 6.5 points.
UAB (19-11) opened as a 1.5-point road favorite over Temple (11-19) at one book, per Sports Illustrated, but that line ballooned to eight points before ending at seven to 7.5 points.
Action Network listed the consensus final line as 7.5 points.
The Blazers then opened a 15-point halftime lead before scoring 53 points in the second half to cruise to their 28-point victory, which easily covered the spread.
Thursday’s loss marked the second straight game Temple did not come close to covering the spread, having previously lost by five to Tulsa as a six-point favorite on March 2.
The Owls are 12-16-1 against the spread this season, according to Action Network.
U.S Integrity states on its website that it attempts to discourage fraud, match-fixing, and unethical or illegal betting activity.
The company played a role in the discovery of former Alabama baseball coach Brad Bohannon providing insider information that led to a $100,000 wager on a game.
Betting on College Basketball?
- Check out the best College Basketball betting sites
- Read our guide on how to bet on College Basketball
- Get the latest NCAA Championship Winner odds
“We identify suspicious behavior by analyzing changes in betting data against a benchmark of normal betting activity,” the company’s website states. “We monitor the data to see if discrepancies coincide with notable player or coaching events, reveal officiating abnormalities, or are indicative of the misuse of insider information.”
