About Us
Last updated: 4 June 2026
What HoopParse is
HoopParse is an independent editorial resource focused on a single, narrow topic: virtual basketball betting on the UK regulated market. We were set up because the ecosystem around RNG-driven sports markets sits awkwardly between casino-game coverage and sports-betting coverage, and almost no British publication covers it as its own category. The site at virtualbasketballbet.com exists to fill that gap with analysis grounded in technical documents, regulator publications and operator records, rather than in promotional material from sportsbooks.
HoopParse is not an affiliate site. We do not maintain a rankings page of “the best UK bookmakers”, we do not run welcome-bonus league tables and we do not earn a commission when a reader opens an account. Our income comes from a small number of editorial partners that have no influence over our analysis and from independent privacy-respecting display advertising. The separation is documented in our Legal Notice.
Who we serve
Our readers are adult UK residents aged 18 or over who already understand the basics of sports betting and want a more analytical view of one specific product. They tend to ask narrower questions than a general gambling site addresses — about the maths behind a quarter total, about the difference between a Betradar feed and an Inspired Entertainment feed, about whether the eCOGRA seal at the bottom of an operator’s footer actually means anything for a virtual basketball player. HoopParse is written for that audience and assumes that level of interest.
Our editorial team
HoopParse is produced by a small editorial team rather than by a single named writer. The team includes contributors with backgrounds in compliance, in operator-side trading and in sports-data journalism. Articles are written, peer-reviewed and fact-checked by at least two team members before publication. Where an article carries a byline such as “Virtual Sports Betting Analyst”, the byline describes the lead author’s specialisation rather than the identity of a single person.
We have made the deliberate choice not to publish biographies of individual editors. The reason is twofold. First, the team rotates and grows over time and we did not want to attach individual reputations to a project that is collective in practice. Second, a number of contributors have current or recent client relationships in the regulated gambling sector and prefer to maintain a degree of professional separation. The editorial standards described below apply regardless of who is at the keyboard.
How we research and write
Every published article begins with a research brief that lists the questions the piece must answer, the sources we expect to draw on and the regulatory and product context in which the topic sits. We treat three categories of source as primary.
The first is the UK Gambling Commission: licensing conditions, technical standards documents, public consultation responses, enforcement notices and the speeches given by the Chief Executive at industry conferences. The second is the operator and the provider themselves, accessed through the rules pages on their own websites, their financial reports where they are publicly listed and the technical documentation they make available to the trade press. The third is independent analysis from accredited bodies such as the National Health Service Digital, the Office for National Statistics, the Office of Communications and from peer-reviewed academic publications.
Secondary sources, including trade press, industry analyst notes and well-sourced journalism, are used to triangulate and to provide context. They are never used as the only support for a numeric claim. Where two sources conflict we describe the conflict openly rather than silently choosing one.
How we verify data
Every numeric claim in our published work is tied to a specific document, a specific page or a specific public statement that we can name and date. We check figures back to the original source even when a number is widely repeated, because trade press routinely rounds, simplifies or misattributes. Where a figure is given in a foreign currency we present the original alongside the most recent conversion and we date the conversion. Where a figure has changed since publication we add a dated note rather than rewriting the article silently.
Quotations from public figures, regulators and industry executives are taken from the recording, the published transcript or the official press release. We do not reconstruct quotations from memory and we do not paraphrase inside quotation marks. If a recording is not available we present the statement as a paraphrase with the source.
How we handle product, operator and provider information
Information about specific operators, specific virtual basketball feeds and specific markets is taken from the operator’s own published rules and from regulator filings. We describe what is observable on a licensed site and what is documented in regulator-facing material. We do not test operators by depositing or wagering on their products in pursuit of a review. We do not accept incentives from operators in exchange for coverage. Where we cite an operator’s rules page we identify the page and the version we read.
We do not publish operator rankings or scores. The reasoning is published on the site: a numeric ranking implies that one regulated UK sportsbook is materially better than another at virtual basketball, when in practice the underlying feed is supplied by one of a small handful of providers and the differences readers experience are mostly interface and bonus policy. Both are easily checked on the operator’s own site without an intermediary.
Updating and correcting articles
Every article on virtualbasketballbet.com carries a “last updated” date in the header. We review evergreen articles on a rolling cycle of at least once every six months and more frequently where the underlying regulation has changed. When we make a substantive correction we do so transparently: the corrected version remains live, the change is described in a short note at the foot of the article and the update date is moved forward. We do not edit or remove material to hide an earlier error.
If you believe an article on virtualbasketballbet.com contains a factual error, write to the editorial team using the address in the Legal Notice. We will investigate the claim, respond to you and publish a correction where one is warranted.
Editorial independence and conflicts of interest
The HoopParse editorial team operates at arm’s length from any commercial arrangement the site enters into. Editorial decisions about what to cover, how to cover it, what to leave out and what conclusions to draw are made by the editors alone. Commercial partners do not see articles before publication and do not have the right to require changes after publication.
Where a contributor has a current advisory or consulting relationship with a company named in an article, the contributor either recuses themselves from the piece or the relationship is disclosed in a note at the foot of the article. The default is recusal.
Responsible gambling stance
We treat virtual basketball as a high-pace product carrying the same risk classification as casino games. Our articles include practical guidance on stake sizing, session length and operator-side tools. We link to free, confidential support resources operated by GamCare, GambleAware, the National Health Service and the GamStop self-exclusion scheme. We do not promote products or strategies that imply a guaranteed return.
Contact
The HoopParse editorial address is published in the Legal Notice. We read every message and reply to those that need an answer. Press enquiries are welcome at the same address.