How to Judge a Tipster's Record Without Being Fooled

The betting tips industry has a structural problem: the person showing you the record is the person who chose what goes in it. Apply these checks to any source — including this one.

1. Is the record complete, or curated? The single most common deception is quiet deletion. A tipster posts fifty selections, removes the twelve worst, and shows you a record of thirty-eight.

Ask: can you see every pick ever published, including the bad ones? Is there any mechanism preventing removal, or just a promise?

On this site, published picks cannot be deleted or hidden. Edits are recorded with a timestamp and a stated reason, and the previous version stays visible. The complete history is downloadable as a CSV file so you can analyse it yourself rather than trusting our summary.

2. Was the price recorded at publication? A tip is worthless without the odds available when it was issued. "Backed Liverpool, won" tells you nothing — at 1.30 that could be a poor bet, at 2.60 an excellent one.

Ask: is the publication timestamp verifiable, and was the price captured at that moment rather than afterwards?

3. Does the sample size justify the claim? A 60% win rate over 30 picks is statistically indistinguishable from luck. You need hundreds of selections before a win rate means much, and the shorter the odds, the larger the sample required.

Be especially wary of records that begin at a convenient date. "Since January" often means "since the losing period ended".

4. Is there any market-verified metric? Win rate and profit are outcome metrics, and outcomes are noisy. Closing line value measures whether the pick beat the market's final price — much harder to achieve by luck and much harder to fake.

A source publishing CLV is making a falsifiable claim. A source publishing only win rate is not.

5. What is the business model? This matters more than anything on the page. If a tipster earns from subscriptions, their incentive is volume and confidence, not accuracy. If they earn from affiliate commissions, their incentive is getting you to open accounts.

This site earns from affiliate links to bookmakers. That is disclosed on every relevant page and explained in our affiliate disclosure. You should factor it into how you read everything here — including this guide.

6. How is uncertainty expressed? Genuine analysis contains hedged language, stated assumptions and acknowledged unknowns, because the future is uncertain. Marketing contains confidence.

Any source promising guaranteed returns, "sure things", or risk-free profit is either misinformed or lying. There is no exception to this. Sport is uncertain by definition — that uncertainty is the entire product.

7. Do the losses get the same treatment as the wins? Look at how a loss is discussed. Is it analysed, or explained away? A source that treats every loss as bad luck and every win as skill is not analysing anything.

Applying this to us We publish our analysis desks' full records, including losing runs, on the pick records page, and compare desk performance against both the crowd and the market. Our odds calibration page tests whether market prices come true at the claimed rate — a test we could fail publicly.

We built it this way because it is the only version of this business that survives scrutiny. Judge it accordingly, and remember that no record, however good, predicts the next result.