Editorial policy

TipsterCompetition publishes football betting tips, AI match previews, live scores, and bookmaker and casino reviews. Betting is a money topic, so readers are entitled to know exactly how our content is made and who it answers to. This page sets out the rules we work by.

Last reviewed: 5 November 2026.

Our editorial decisions are made by our editorial team and our founder, and by nobody else. No bookmaker, casino, advertiser or affiliate partner has any say over what we publish, how we score a brand, which tips our models produce or where a brand sits in a list.

We earn money when readers use our links and when advertisers pay for space. We explain that in full on How we make money. The short version is that the business model and the editorial process are kept apart, and the commercial side never edits the content.

Commission does not buy scores, rankings or tips

• Scores come from the published criteria on How we review bookmakers. A brand cannot pay to raise a score, and a brand with no affiliate deal is scored by exactly the same method.
• Rankings follow the evidence we collect, not the size of a commission.
• Tips are produced by our prediction models from match data. They do not know which bookmaker pays us, and nobody can request a tip for or against a team.

If a partner asks us to change a review, we update it only where the partner shows us a factual error. We never change an opinion or a score because a partner prefers it.

Automation is a core part of the site, and we say so openly.

• Our tipsters are automated prediction models. Every tipster on TipsterCompetition is a model. None of them is a human being, and we never present them as people.
• Tips are recorded honestly. Each tip is logged at real bookmaker odds at the time it is made, then sealed. No bet is ever deleted, whether it wins or loses, so the record you see is the record as it happened. How our tips work explains the process step by step.
• Previews are built from facts. Our AI match previews start from structured data: fixtures, form, head-to-head records, standings, injuries and suspensions where they are confirmed, and current prices. The writing is generated around those facts, not the other way round.
• People are accountable. Automated copy is reviewed against its source data, and our team is responsible for the system, its settings and what it publishes.

Our modelling approach is described on the methodology page.

Articles, guides and reviews are published under the TipsterCompetition name rather than a personal byline. Our founder stays anonymous, and we publish as a team for two reasons: it protects the privacy of the people involved, and it keeps the focus on the work and its accuracy instead of on individuals.

We never invent writers, qualifications, career histories or personal betting results, and we never present an automated model as a human expert. What we ask readers to judge is the evidence on the page: the sources, the data, the method and the track record.

• Official sources first. For bookmaker and casino facts, the operator's own terms, licence register entries and published pages take priority over third-party summaries.
• Numbers are checked at the source. Odds, margins, bonus terms and payment details are recorded from the live site, with the date we checked.
• Match facts come from data feeds. Fixtures, results, line-ups and statistics come from licensed sports data providers and are re-checked when feeds change.
• If we cannot verify a fact, we leave it out. We would rather publish less than publish a claim we cannot stand behind.
• No guarantees. Nothing on the site promises a result or a profit. Betting carries risk, and every tip and preview is an opinion built on probability.

Reviews, guides and tips pages carry dates, and we revisit them when something material changes, such as a new bonus structure, a change to terms, a licence update or a new rule that affects readers. Time-sensitive articles state their dates explicitly so that you can see how current they are. When we change a page in a way that matters to readers, we say so on the page.

We get things wrong occasionally. When that happens we fix it and, for significant corrections, add a dated note. The process is on Corrections and feedback, and you can reach us at any time through Contact.

We take safer gambling seriously. Nothing we publish is aimed at under-18s, and our responsible gambling page lists free support services and tools. If gambling stops being fun, please read it.