We don't do reviews. We do ratings.

Why it exists

The tipster market is full of selection bias. Screenshots of winning weeks, losing weeks quietly deleted, services that charge £49 a month to paste odds scraped from soft books. Even the better-intentioned tipster rating sites get flooded with fake 5-star reviews from friends and alt accounts the moment they become useful.

SharpCheck treats tipster quality as a measurable thing. Can you actually get on at the quoted price? Is the P/L publicly tracked and verifiable? Is there a genuine long-term edge or just a hot month? The five criteria below are designed to answer those questions, and the ranking formula is designed to resist manipulation.

The five criteria

Price Achievability

Can you actually get on at the quoted price?

1 = Prices gone instantly or only available on soft books. 5 = Available on Pinnacle/exchanges with plenty of time to get on.

P/L Transparency

Do they track and publish verified results?

1 = No public record. 5 = Live spreadsheet or bettin.gs page with full history — every bet logged.

Market Accessibility

Are bets available across multiple bookmakers?

1 = Only on one obscure book. 5 = Available on all major books and exchanges.

Ease to Follow

Volume, timing, clear instructions, staking plan?

1 = Chaotic, unclear, impossible schedule. 5 = Clear stakes, good timing, manageable volume.

Long-term Edge

Does the record suggest genuine CLV, not variance?

1 = Looks like luck or a tiny sample. 5 = Consistent profit over 1000+ bets with positive closing-line value.

How anti-gaming works

Reviews are weighted by account credibility and timing patterns to prevent manipulation. New accounts, accounts that only ever give one score value, and reviews that arrive in tight bursts all count for less in the final composite. Users must link an X/Twitter account to reach the higher reviewer tiers — identity creates accountability. The exact weights aren't published because publishing them would make them easier to game around, but the logic is deterministic and the same for every tipster on the platform.

What we don't do

• No affiliate links. We never earn a commission from a bookmaker or a tipster service.
• No paid placements. Tipsters cannot pay to be listed, featured, or ranked higher.
• No free-text reviews at launch. Structured numeric ratings only — this is a deliberate anti-gaming decision.
• No sponsorship. The site is self-funded.

Who's behind it

SharpCheck is built and maintained by YLose, a football analytics and betting research project. We use the platform because we want a tipster leaderboard that actually tells us who's worth following — and nothing like it existed, so we made one.