Online Sports Betting Statistics Updated November 2026

Human Written & Fact Checked · Updated

100 Tennis Betting Statistics for 2026

You can measure tennis betting in money, wagers or integrity alerts, but those units answer different questions. This page keeps them separate and identifies the regulated market behind every monetary observation.

France supplies a national online-market study, Illinois separates channels and wager counts, Maryland reports monthly sport accounts, and the ITIA publishes international betting alerts. None of these sources alone measures a global tennis-betting market. Table tennis is excluded.

Headline figures

How large is France's regulated online tennis-betting market?

A national market becomes easier to understand when stakes and operator revenue are kept apart. France's regulator reports both, allowing demand and retained betting income to be discussed without confusing them.

How do stakes and gross revenue differ?

The latest stakes headline appears above. The comparison below retains the previous year and the gross-revenue figures, which measure a different part of the same market. Gross gaming revenue is not net profit: it does not deduct all the costs of running a sportsbook. These values cover licensed French online wagering, not betting placed worldwide on French tournaments. An event's location and the jurisdiction recording a bet are different concepts. The data therefore cannot be used as a global tennis market estimate.

How much does tennis contribute to the wider market?

The growth headline appears above. The remaining indicators distinguish a revenue share, a stakes share and a contribution measured in percentage points. Those measures answer different questions. A sport can attract more wagering while its share of bookmaker revenue behaves differently because payouts and sporting results affect revenue. The regulator's comparison uses the same licensed online market across the stated years. It does not establish whether growth came from new bettors, more bets per customer or larger average stakes.

Which major tournament groups attract stakes?

The Grand Slam and Masters figures describe tournament categories within French online betting. Main draws are explicitly identified; the source does not label every qualifying match as part of that category. Growth measures compare the named period with the preceding year. Category shares should not be added to their corresponding euro amounts, and tournament totals are not a second independent market. The same stakes are being described through different attributes. These categories also do not identify the nationality or residence of the players who attracted the bets.

Which tennis formats and calendar moments attract betting?

Tennis betting follows tournament structure and the sporting calendar. France's original study reveals those differences without assuming that the same patterns hold in every regulated market.

How do tournament concentration and women's events compare?

The approximate women's share is showed above. Concentration and growth figures below describe different cuts of the French market. A circuit-wide change is not a statement about every tournament within that circuit. Likewise, growth in finals stakes should not be read as growth across all rounds. The regulator reports the concentration across named tournament categories, instead of across individual operators. These figures identify where wagering was recorded, not why a bettor selected a particular match or whether an advertising campaign caused the change.

How important are live betting and singles?

The live-betting headline appears above. The remaining figures describe format and seasonality. The competition-level deviation is a measure of dispersion around a reported average, not an additional share of stakes. A sport's monthly share of all sports betting can change because activity in other sports changes too. It does not necessarily track a change in the number of tennis bettors. Singles is the source's match-format category; it should not be confused with a single-leg wager or contrasted with parlays.

Which named matches and payout measures stand out?

The named finals are individual matches, unlike series totals sometimes published for other sports. All amounts refer to betting recorded by French licensed online operators. They are not ticket sales, prize money or worldwide betting totals. The implied payout rate is an aggregate accounting measure from the regulator's study; it is not a guaranteed return on a particular bet. The seasonal share describes tennis within all sports stakes in that month and should not be treated as the proportion of annual tennis wagers.

How much tennis handle was recorded in Illinois?

Channel counts when measuring a regulated market. Illinois publishes separate online and in-person tennis handle, making the distinction observable instead of relying on a national mobile-share assumption.

What handle was recorded early in the year?

The January online headline appears above. Handle is the amount wagered, not operator income or new customer deposits. These values come from the tennis column of the regulator's all-activity report. Parlays are separately classified in that report, so this tennis series should not be described as including every combination bet involving a tennis selection. Reusing the report for another comparison requires keeping both the channel and the category definition unchanged.

What handle was recorded in spring and early summer?

The monthly channel totals retain the regulator's calendar periods. They are not adjusted for the number of matches, tournament quality or days in the month. Such adjustments would require additional evidence and are not calculated here. The figures also do not identify whether a customer used multiple sportsbook accounts. Their purpose is to document the amount of licensed activity recorded in each channel, not to count people.

What handle was recorded later in summer?

The latest online headline appears above; the remaining summer values retain separate channels. The report version was generated in November, but each observation belongs to its named activity month. That distinction counts when refreshing a page: generating a new copy does not make the underlying activity new. These figures cover the Illinois regulated market only. They cannot establish total United States tennis betting, offshore activity or betting on a particular tour. A larger channel total also need not imply more unique players, because frequency and stake size can vary.

How many tennis wagers were recorded in Illinois?

Wager counts provide a different view from handle. They count reported betting activity, so they must not be relabeled as customers, accounts or tennis fans.

What wager counts were recorded early in the year?

The January online count appears above. These counts come from the wager-details page instead of the dollar-denominated handle page. A single bettor can place many wagers, and an account can remain active across several months. Consequently, summing these observations would not produce a count of unique bettors. The regulator's separate parlay classification also limits the scope of the tennis column. It is a reporting category, not a complete record of every tennis selection inside a combination.

What wager counts were recorded in spring and early summer?

The source reports each channel for each month. Counts help describe recorded activity but do not establish the money at risk or the eventual outcome of those wagers. A comparison with handle must use the same channel, month and reporting category. No average stake is calculated here, because the article's purpose is to preserve original observations instead of create additional derived statistics. The report does not disclose unique-user counts for this sport.

What wager counts were recorded later in summer?

The August online count is showed above. The remaining observations complete the summer channel comparison without merging retail and online records into a supposed customer total. A wager-count increase can occur without an equivalent increase in handle, and neither series alone explains bettor motivation. The downloadable report is reproduced from the official generator using the named month and sport-detail option. Its version date is stated separately from the activity period. These distinctions allow a later refresh to replace the right observation instead of comparing different measures under the same heading.

What do Maryland's tennis accounts show?

Maryland's sport table combines retail and mobile activity. Its stakes, payouts and dollar hold provide a useful accounting comparison while preserving a different jurisdiction and reporting design.

What were the early-year stakes and payouts?

The January stakes headline appears above. Values below retain the source's monthly scope. February's accessible report rounds to whole dollars; the other workbooks provide cents. We preserve that difference instead of manufacture extra precision.

What did the spring and early-summer accounts record?

The June stakes headline appears above. Dollar hold is the source's retained amount before operating expenses and tax. It is different from the neighboring hold-percentage column and is not described here as net profit.

What did the latest summer and September accounts record?

The September stakes headline appears above. These are monthly rows, not the second fiscal-year-to-date table in each workbook. Combining both would double-count the same activity. Maryland's combined channels also differ from the Illinois breakdown.

What did tennis's integrity agency report about betting alerts?

An alert is a reason to investigate, not proof that a match was fixed. The ITIA's original quarterly tables show where reported alerts were classified without turning those counts into accusations against individual players.

Which tiers recorded alerts in the second quarter?

The selected nonzero rows below come from the original quarterly table. An alert may reflect an unusual betting pattern, and the agency explains that several explanations other than corruption can produce one. These counts do not include a denominator of all matches monitored at each tier. They therefore cannot establish which tour had the highest rate of suspicious activity. Anti-doping samples are a separate programme and are excluded from this betting-focused inventory. Counts across tournament tiers describe the agency's reported classifications, not the identities or guilt of players.

Which higher tiers and men's categories appeared in the third quarter?

The overall quarterly alert count is showed above. The rows below preserve the agency's tournament labels. They do not identify which individual match generated an alert or whether an investigation resulted in a sanction. Reporting systems, market coverage and the sporting calendar can all affect the number of alerts received. A comparison with the preceding quarter therefore needs more care than simply treating a change in count as a change in corruption. The data are international integrity reports, unlike the jurisdiction-specific monetary accounts elsewhere on this page.

Which additional third-quarter tiers recorded alerts?

The remaining nonzero categories include men's and women's World Tennis Tour tiers. These are alert counts, not counts of banned athletes, proven offences or distinct criminal cases. The original figure also shows zero rows for context; those zeros are not used to pad the article's observation count. A zero reported for a category would not prove the absence of wrongdoing, just as a positive count does not prove it occurred. The agency's own explanation of alerts is the appropriate interpretive framework when quoting these figures in a news story or comparing future reporting periods.

Glossary

Methodology and sources

Every figure on this page comes from the organisation that produced it: regulators, statistics offices, public bodies, research institutes, and companies reporting their own data or surveys. Each one links to the original report or dataset and carries its release date. Survey results keep their population and fieldwork period, and financial figures keep the measure the producer used. Figures from different producers are not added together or ranked against each other. The page is reviewed monthly and updated when a producer releases newer data.