The "Point-Shaving 2.0" Era: A Deep Dive into the U.S. v. Jalen Smith Indictment and the Collapse of Sports Integrity
This blog details the January 16, 2026 announcement by federal prosecutors in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania of a major bribery and point-shaving scheme involving 26 individuals tied to NCAA Division I men’s basketball and the Chinese Basketball Association. The case, built on a 70-page indictment, is described as a modern, repeatable business model of corruption adapted for the legalized sports-betting era, raising profound questions about the integrity of competitive sports. The blog also previews a comprehensive legal analysis of the case and its connection to a related NBA investigation.
On January 15, 2026, federal prosecutors in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania pulled the fire alarm on the modern basketball economy.
At a Philadelphia news conference, the U.S. Attorney’s Office announced charges against 26 individuals in what the government describes as a sprawling bribery-and-point-shaving conspiracy reaching across NCAA Division I men’s basketball and the Chinese Basketball Association (CBA).
U.S. Attorney David Metcalf framed the stakes in language that felt bigger than a single scandal:
“The stakes here are far higher than anything on a bet slip.”
And then he made the key point every fan feels but rarely hears stated so plainly by federal prosecutors:
The integrity of sport rests on “fairness, honesty, and respect for the rules of competition.”
The lead charging document is a 70-page indictment in United States v. Jalen Smith, Shane Hennen, et al., Case No. 2:26-cr-00023-NIQA (E.D. Pa.), supported by additional “other filings” that collectively cover the full defendant list.
This case is not merely a story of “bad actors” or “kids making dumb choices.” As alleged, it is a repeatable business model—a modern corruption system designed for the legalized sports-betting era, tailored to NCAA economics, and optimized for maximum profit with minimal visibility.
This blog provides a comprehensive legal analysis of the indictment, the mechanics of the "fix," and the chilling connection to the parallel NBA probe known as "Operation Nothing by Bet." Welcome to Point-Shaving 2.0.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: THE “PHILADELPHIA 26”
According to the DOJ, the investigation uncovered a conspiracy involving more than 39 players from more than 17 NCAA Division I teams, with fixed and attempted fixes tied to more than 29 NCAA games.
THE ALLEGED ANATOMY OF THE ENTERPRISE
- Scope: CBA (2022–23 season) plus NCAA (2023–24 and 2024–25 seasons)
- Method: Bribe players to “underperform” so their team fails to cover the spread, often focusing on first-half spreads
- Payments: Bribes “usually ranging from $10,000 to $30,000 per game”
- Profit strategy: Place large bets (including parlays) against the bribed players’ teams
THE ALLEGED “FIXERS”
DOJ identifies the scheme as led by “fixers” including Jalen Smith, Marves Fairley, Shane Hennen, Antonio Blakeney, Roderick Winkler, and Alberto Laureano.
And that lineup matters, because it explains how a conspiracy like this becomes scalable:
- gamblers who understand markets and timing
- basketball insiders who have credibility and access
- players who can change outcomes without making it look like a throw
The U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania (EDPA) has charged the defendants under Title 18 of the U.S. Code, specifically leveraging Conspiracy to Commit Wire Fraud (18 U.S.C. § 1349) and Bribery in Sporting Contests (18 U.S.C. § 224).
THE MECHANICS: WHAT “POINT SHAVING” ACTUALLY MEANS IN 2026
The indictment defines the operational core in plain terms:
Players “altered their performance… so that their team would not ‘cover’ the spread.”
This is not the old-school stereotype of losing the whole game on purpose. The case is built around something more surgical:
Why first-half spreads are the perfect crime (allegedly)
First-half manipulation is attractive for three reasons:
- Lower visibility
Most fans do not remember first-half lines. Many casual bettors do not even realize those markets exist. - Plausible deniability
Basketball is high-variance. A few missed rotations, lazy closeouts, early foul trouble, rushed shots—everything can look like “just basketball.” - Damage control for players
Players can “fix” a first half… then go nuclear in the second half and still preserve film, reputation, and draft hopes.
In other words: the fix can win the bet without “looking” like a fix.
However, the brilliance—and ultimate criminality—of this scheme lies in its hierarchical structure and its "proof of concept" phase overseas.
ANATOMY OF THE SCHEME: FROM THE CBA TO THE MID-MAJORS
PHASE ONE: THE CBA “PROOF OF CONCEPT” OR THE CHINESE TEST RUN
The government’s theory begins overseas.
Before infiltrating US colleges, the syndicate tested their methods in the Chinese Basketball Association (CBA). The indictment identifies Shane "Sugar Shane" Hennen and Marves "Vez" Fairley as the architects. They recruited former LSU standout and NBA player Antonio Blakeney, then playing for the Jiangsu Dragons during the 2022–2023 CBA season to participate in point shaving—and then to recruit teammates as well.
The press release includes a detail that reads like a scene from a crime film, except it is in a federal announcement:
A package containing “nearly $200,000 in cash” … was left in Blakeney’s storage unit in Florida.
From a compliance and enforcement perspective, this matters: it is the alleged moment the conspiracy shows it can generate enough cash flow to expand into the NCAA.
And that is exactly what the government says happened next:
“After profiting on the fixed CBA games… [they] turned their attention to fixing NCAA men’s basketball games.”
- The Precedent: Blakeney reportedly accepted $200,000 to underperform.
- The Result: In a March 6, 2023, game against Guangdong, Blakeney scored only 11 points (well below his 32-point average), ensuring a 31-point blowout loss for his team.
- The Quote: Hennen was famously captured in encrypted texts stating, "The only thing certain in life is death, taxes, and Chinese basketball."
PHASE TWO: INFILTRATING THE NCAA “NIL BRIBERY GAP”: WHY MID-MAJORS WERE THE TARGET MARKET
Following their success in China, the group turned to the U.S. collegiate market. However, they did not target the "Power 4" giants where athletes already earn millions in Name, Image, and Likeness (NIL) deals. Instead, they weaponized the "NIL Bribery Gap."
The DOJ makes an unusually direct point about why NCAA players were vulnerable here:
Fixers targeted players for whom bribes would “meaningfully supplement or exceed” legitimate NIL opportunities.
That sentence is the story.
This is not “NIL caused crime.” NIL did not invent gambling corruption. But NIL has created a massive and uneven compensation landscape—and where there’s uneven money, there’s predation.
The post-NIL reality prosecutors are describing
- Some athletes earn real NIL money.
- Many athletes earn little to nothing.
- A bribe in the $10,000–$30,000 range can function like an instant “salary,” especially at programs without robust NIL ecosystems.
This is exactly the type of economic vulnerability corruption rings look for: high access, low pay, high pressure.
The Target Demographic: Fixers targeted programs in conferences like the Southland, MAC, and Atlantic-10. Schools named include DePaul, Tulane, Kennesaw State, LaSalle, and Coppin State. At these institutions, a $20,000 bribe represents life-changing money for athletes with few legitimate NIL prospects.
The "Consultant" Cover: To evade compliance officers, lead defendant Jalen Smith (a prominent Charlotte-based trainer) and Hennen posed as "NIL Consultants." Bribes were wired under the guise of "Marketing Advances" or "Consultation Fees," providing a veneer of legitimacy to the bank transfers.
THE PLAYERS AND THE "FIX"
The indictment names 15 collegiate players as defendants. The strategy was precise: target the first-half spread.
- DePaul vs. Georgetown (Feb 24, 2024): Players agreed to tank the first half. DePaul failed to cover, and fixers cashed out.
- McNeese State vs. Nicholls State (Feb 17, 2024): Bribes of $32,000 were offered to Nicholls players. However, the fix failed when McNeese won by 27, accidentally covering the spread.
Notable Defendants:
- Jalen Terry (DePaul)
- Kevin Cross (Tulane)
- Bradley Ezewiro (Saint Louis)
- Simeon Cottle (Kennesaw State)
Most players have been released on personal recognizance bonds, contingent on the surrender of passports and a total cessation of gambling activities.
SUMMARY OF THE 29 FIXED/ATTEMPTED NCAA & CBA GAMES
The indictment unsealed on January 15, 2026, details a point-shaving operation that targeted specific betting windows—most commonly the "first-half spread." While the full list of 29 games is sealed within the evidentiary exhibits, the following high-profile games were explicitly detailed in the charging documents:
| Date | Matchup | Alleged Activity | Result of "Fix" |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 6, 2023 | Jiangsu Dragons vs. Guangdong (CBA) | Blakeney bribed to underperform. | Success: Blakeney scored 11 (avg 32); Dragons lost by 31. |
| Mar 17, 2023 | Jiangsu Dragons vs. Zhejiang (CBA) | Teammate bribed $20k to ensure loss by 15+. | Success: Dragons lost by 41. |
| Feb 17, 2024 | McNeese State vs. Nicholls State | Bribes of $32,000 offered to Nicholls players. | Fail: McNeese won by 27, covering the spread. |
| Feb 21, 2024 | La Salle vs. St. Bonaventure | Fixers wagered $250k against La Salle. | Fail: Fix failed; bettors lost the full $250k. |
| Feb 24, 2024 | DePaul vs. Georgetown | Players agreed to influence the 1st half spread. | Success: DePaul failed to cover; fixers won. |
| Mar 2, 2024 | DePaul vs. Butler | Fixers targeted the 1st half spread. | Success: Butler led big at half; bets cashed. |
| Mar 5, 2024 | DePaul vs. St. John’s | Attempt to influence 1st half performance. | Mixed: Outcome contested in indictment. |
| Nov 2024 | Buffalo vs. Ohio | Players attempted to tank the 1st half. | Fail: Buffalo accidentally beat the spread. |
| Dec 28, 2024 | UNO vs. McNeese State | Bribes paid to three UNO guards to underperform. | Success: McNeese covered 23-point spread easily. |
Other Schools Named in the Indictment: Abilene Christian, Alabama State, Duquesne, East Carolina, Florida Atlantic, Fordham, Kennesaw State, Kent State, and Saint Louis.
CASE STUDY: THE DEPAUL–GEORGETOWN FIRST-HALF FIX (ALLEGED)
One of the most legally vivid sequences in the indictment involves the alleged DePaul fix.
The indictment describes FaceTime and text communications where players allegedly agreed to influence the first-half spread before a Feb. 24, 2024, game against Georgetown.
A key text—because it captures both intent and coordination—reads:
“Just talked to them it’s a lock…”
The indictment alleges Georgetown was favored by roughly 2.5 points for the first half, and conspirators placed wagers on Georgetown to cover.
And then the first half unfolded in the exact pattern a “clean” point shave is built for:
- Georgetown up 41–28 at halftime
- Spread covered
- Fixers win bets
The indictment then alleges the second half looked “normal,” which is the entire Point-Shaving 2.0 design: DePaul outscored Georgetown 48–36 in the second half. And prosecutors include the kind of message that makes juries lean forward:
“I love Jalen Terry… he perfected his job…”
If proven, that is not “bad defense.” That is alleged performance manipulation with payment attached. Even more critically, the indictment alleges the bribe payout happened in cash shortly after: Smith traveled to Chicago and delivered “$40,000 in cash” as bribe payments.
THE REAL INNOVATION: “HUMAN INFRASTRUCTURE” (NOT JUST BETTING)
One of the most underestimated details in modern sports-corruption cases is that they do not succeed on math alone. They succeed on access. The indictment’s structure makes clear the government sees this scheme as built on trusted intermediaries—people who can get close enough to players to make a bribe sound like an “opportunity.”
That theme also appears in related charging documents describing how fixers could approach athletes because of their “prominence” and reputation in basketball circles. This matters because it connects sports law, recruiting culture, and criminal exposure in a way compliance programs often miss:
The recruiting pipeline can double as a corruption pipeline
When a fixer looks like:
- a trainer,
- an AAU figure,
- a “consultant,”
- a scout-adjacent insider…
…the athlete’s threat detection system shuts off. That is not a moral judgment. That is how human beings work.
THE KENNESAW STATE EXAMPLE: “MONEY GUARANTEED” (ALLEGED)
Another indictment sequence illustrates how fixers allegedly enforced “quality control” over a fix. In one alleged exchange tied to Kennesaw State, the organizer pushes for multiple FaceTime check-ins to prevent any deviation:
“This money guaranteed… ima be at the game…”
That is not the language of casual gambling. It reads like operational discipline: verify, confirm, execute, pay. And prosecutors allege a cash payout followed: approximately “$40,000 in cash” delivered as bribe payments.
THE "SUGAR SHANE" CONNECTION: OPERATION "NOTHING BY BET"
Perhaps the most explosive aspect of this case is its intersection with the NBA through Shane Hennen. Hennen serves as the nexus between the collegiate scandal and the high-profile NBA investigation unsealed in October 2025.
THE SHANE HENNEN (“SUGAR SHANE”) TIMELINE
As mentioned throughout this blog, Shane Hennen acted as the "mastermind" and technological liaison for these schemes. His activities represent a rare crossover where a single individual corrupted the CBA, the NBA, and the NCAA simultaneously. For illustrative purposes, here is a timeline of Hennen’s allegedly actions:
- December 2022 – March 2023 (NBA Inside Info): Hennen allegedly established a network with NBA players (including Terry Rozier) to receive "pre-public" medical and injury data. He used this to hammer "under" prop bets.
- March 2023 (The CBA Proof of Concept): Working with Marves Fairley, Hennen successfully fixed two high-stakes Chinese league games via Antonio Blakeney. Hennen famously texted: "The only thing certain in life is death, taxes, and Chinese basketball."
- December 2023 – April 2024 (NBA/Mafia Poker): Hennen allegedly provided "cheating technology" (altered shuffling machines) to high-stakes poker games in NYC and Miami, lures for which included Chauncey Billups.
- February 2024 – February 2025 (NCAA Expansion): Leveraging his reputation as a "trainer," Hennen utilized Jalen Smith and Antonio Blakeney to recruit cash-strapped NCAA players for the 29-game point-shaving spree.
- October 23, 2025: Arrested as part of "Operation Nothing by Bet" in Brooklyn. Charges included wire fraud and illegal gambling.
- January 15, 2026: Formally indicted in Philadelphia for the NCAA/CBA corruption case. He is currently facing over 60 years in total potential federal prison time.
THE TERRY ROZIER "INSIDE INFO" SCHEME
Hennen is a co-defendant in the case against NBA player Terry Rozier.
- The Allegation: On March 23, 2023, Rozier allegedly tipped off associates that he would fake an injury or exit early against the Pelicans.
- The Wager: Hennen and others placed $200,000 on Rozier's "unders." Rozier exited after just 9 minutes.
- The "Midnight Run": Following the game, associate Deniro Laster allegedly collected cash and drove through the night to Rozier’s home, where surveillance captured them counting the proceeds.
THE CHAUNCEY BILLUPS "FACE CARD" ALLEGATIONS
The investigation also touches on "Operation Royal Flush," implicating Portland Trail Blazers coach Chauncey Billups.
- The Role: Billups allegedly functioned as a "Face Card"—a celebrity lure for high-stakes, rigged poker games run by organized crime families (Bonanno and Genovese).
- The Tech: The games utilized "rigged shuffling machines" and X-ray tables. Billups is accused of knowing the games were fixed and even "losing on purpose" to maintain the con.
- The Leak: Billups is also suspected of being "Co-Conspirator 8," who leaked that Portland starters would sit out a March 2023 game, facilitating a $100,000 wager before the news went public.
To summarize: media reporting and EDNY filings publicly describe separate federal prosecutions in 2025 involving:
- illegal sports betting / insider wagering activity (Department of Justice)
- rigged illegal poker games with “Face Cards,” including Coach Chauncey Billups (Department of Justice)
- and reporting that those investigations were internally nicknamed Operation Nothing by Bet and Operation Royal Flush (Courthouse News)
One reason that matters here: the EDPA press release explicitly thanks EDNY for assistance, signaling multi-district coordination. The significance of this is that if the government proves its theory, the sports integrity threat is not just “players gambling,” it is repeat offender market-makers moving between: pro betting ecosystems, underground gambling operations, and financially vulnerable NCAA environments.
That is the industrialization part, which leads me to a deeper look and the Federal charges.
THE FEDERAL CHARGES: WHY THIS ISN’T “JUST GAMBLING”
This case is built on a very intentional federal charging architecture.
BRIBERY IN SPORTING CONTESTS (18 U.S.C. § 224)
This statute prohibits schemes “to influence… by bribery any sporting contest,” covering both amateur and professional contests. (Legal Information Institute) It is the cleanest “sports integrity” statute in the federal arsenal, and it carries a maximum of five years. (Legal Information Institute)
WIRE FRAUD + CONSPIRACY (18 U.S.C. §§ 1343, 1349)
Wire fraud is the engine that drives penalties here.
- § 1343 targets schemes to defraud using interstate wires (texts, calls, apps, online wagering). DOJ explains the elements in its wire-fraud guidance. (Department of Justice)
- § 1349 makes conspiracy punishable at the same level as the underlying offense. (Legal Information Institute)
And DOJ’s press release spells out the maximum exposure: Wire fraud and conspiracy counts carry a maximum “20 years” per count. From a defense standpoint, this is the headline:
sports bribery is the moral wrong — wire fraud is the sentencing hammer.
FOLLOW THE MONEY: WHY “WINNING THE BET” BECOMES FEDERAL FRAUD
One of the most important conceptual points for non-lawyers is this:
Even if a sportsbook eventually adjusts its odds, even if a player eventually plays well, even if the team wins the game…
…the government’s theory is that the scheme corrupts the integrity of the market the moment the wager is placed on manipulated conditions. That is why these cases can be prosecuted as fraud: sportsbooks (and other bettors) are allegedly induced into taking the other side of a contest that has been secretly rigged.
The indictment reveals a sophisticated money-laundering ecosystem designed to clean nearly $7.1 million in illicit gains.
- Shell Companies: Jalen Smith and Hennen operated shell entities registered as "Sports Marketing" firms. This allowed them to issue bribes labeled as "endorsement advances."
- "Smurfing": To avoid the $10,000 Currency Transaction Report (CTR) threshold, the group used "straw bettors" to place dozens of small wagers at physical sportsbooks in NJ, PA, and NV.
- The Casino Wash: Significant laundering occurred at Rivers Casino Philadelphia. Fixers would buy in with illicit cash, play briefly, and cash out with a "clean" casino check to justify their wealth.
- Crypto Mixers: In the poker scheme, winnings were converted to Bitcoin and run through mixers before being deposited in the Cayman Islands.
WHAT COMES NEXT: LITIGATION, COOPERATION PRESSURE, AND THE NCAA FALLOUT
As mentioned above, the defendants face a litany of federal charges, the most severe being Wire Fraud, which carries a maximum of 20 years in federal prison per count.
UPCOMING COURT DATES:
- January 20, 2026: Initial appearances for Jalen Smith, Shane Hennen, and Marves Fairley.
- January 22, 2026: Extradition/Appearance for Antonio Blakeney.
- January 26–28, 2026: Staggered arraignments for the indicted NCAA players.
Defense Strategy: I anticipate the NCAA players will argue they were manipulated by older, "legitimate" authority figures (Smith and Hennen) who misrepresented the legality of the payments as NIL deals. However, for the "Fixers" like Hennen, who have now been indicted in two separate federal conspiracies (NBA and NCAA), the path to a plea deal will likely require substantial cooperation against higher-level organized crime figures.
LIKELY PROCEDURAL NEXT STEPS
In a case like this, the near-term legal landscape will typically include:
- detention/bond litigation
- discovery fights (phones, financials, betting logs, location data)
- motion practice (severance, suppression, venue challenges)
- cooperation decisions (especially for lower-level participants)
WHY THIS BECOMES A “COOPERATION CASE”
Sports corruption conspiracies often break through:
- text messages,
- payment evidence,
- and the fact that only a few people need to flip to explain the entire enterprise.
And the indictment is structured with detailed “game narratives” that prosecutors use to prove intent, agreement, and overt acts.
THE HARD TRUTH: POINT-SHAVING IS NOW A SYSTEMS PROBLEM
This case should force sports governance to confront an uncomfortable reality:
Integrity cannot be protected with posters and policies alone.
In 2026, integrity protection requires:
- education that matches how modern betting actually works
- real compliance capacity
- monitoring and escalation pathways
- and aggressive enforcement against third-party “access brokers”
Because in the world DOJ is describing, the fix did not begin with athletes; It began with professionals building a business model around them.
CONCLUSION: POINT-SHAVING 2.0 IS NOT A SCANDAL — IT’S A WARNING
The federal government’s filings portray U.S. v. Jalen Smith et al. as something bigger than a sports story. It is an enforcement message, a governance failure, and a preview of what “integrity risk” looks like in the post-NIL, post-legal-betting world. And the warning is as blunt as the FBI’s statement:
“There is nowhere to hide — the short-term gain will never be worth the long-term loss.”
If the allegations are proven, the lasting consequence will not just be prison exposure for defendants . . . the lasting consequence is that everyone—fans, athletes, schools, regulators—must accept a new reality: The market has evolved. Corruption evolved with it. And the law is now sprinting to catch up.
U.S. v. Jalen Smith is a watershed moment for sports law. It exposes the fragility of the post-NIL collegiate landscape and demonstrates how easily the lines between professional gambling syndicates and teenage athletes can be blurred. As the arraignments begin today in Philadelphia, the sports world is bracing for more names to drop.
For continued updates on U.S. v. Smith and Operation Nothing by Bet, subscribe to our legal alerts.
Disclaimer: This article is for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. No attorney-client relationship is formed by reading this post.
