Can esports players bet? The ESIC code's betting rules, explained

A professional player can watch a match, follow the scores and talk about the result with anyone. Whether that player may also put money on it is another question, and at the tournaments of the Esports Integrity Commission's members the answer is written down in advance. The commission, known as ESIC, sets it out in its Anti-Corruption Code, the text its members apply at their events.

The question matters to more people than the players. Coaches, analysts, managers and team owners are covered too, and so are teams as organizations. The rules reach beyond a bet placed in cash: the code also deals with bets placed with skins, with information shared in public, with gifts, and with approaches that are reported to the wrong person.

This guide sets out those rules from the code itself and from ESIC's published definitions: what the code counts as a bet, the ban on betting on one's own game, the wider ban for owners and officials, the rules on inside information, the duty to declare gifts, the duty to report approaches, the penalties the code sets and the orders ESIC can send to its members. It covers the code as it stands in April 2026. It describes rules, not cases, and it is not legal advice: where the answer turns on the facts, the code says so, and so does this guide.

ESIC Anti-Corruption Code, Articles 1.4, 2.4.3 and 6.2, and ESIC Definitions.

Whose rules these are

ESIC works through its members, the companies whose games and events its codes cover. Its Anti-Corruption Code took effect on May 1, 2016, and the code says it does not apply retrospectively to matters pending before that date. It binds people through the games and events of those members. A publisher's own competition rules, or a league's, are separate texts with their own wording, and nothing in this guide carries the ESIC rules over to them.

The code opens with what it calls the imperatives of the sport. Matches should be played on identical licensed software, with outcomes decided on merit and uncertain until the end. ESIC and its members commit to taking every step in their power to prevent corrupt practices and to keep public confidence in their ability to do so. The code gives one example of such a step: providing live data through ESIC, by means of programming interfaces, so that its fraud detection service can work effectively. Betting is therefore watched from two sides, the markets on one and the conduct of the people in the game on the other.

The people bound are those the code calls Participants. Article 1.4 names three groups: players registered on a game published, offered or streamed by an ESIC member who play matches against other players; support personnel affiliated with a team or a player, now or within the preceding 24 months; and teams and organizations taking part in an esports event or activity. Anyone serving a period of ineligibility is also covered. Under Article 1.5, Participants are bound automatically and agree not to engage in corrupt conduct in any match or event, wherever it is held.

ESIC's definitions spell out who counts as support personnel: coaches, trainers, managers, team owners and officials, doctors, physiotherapists, nutritionists, masseurs, player agents, team agents and others in the same position. A coach who left a team a year ago is therefore still a Participant, since the affiliation falls within that window.

The obligations also last. Under Article 1.6, a Participant stays bound until they no longer meet the definition, and ESIC keeps its jurisdiction over matters that arose before they left. Leaving a team, or the scene, does not close the file on what happened while the person was in it.

What the code counts as a bet

The betting rules turn on one word, and the definition is wide. ESIC's definitions describe betting as any wager or financial speculation, including those that involve virtual items. A bet does not need cash on either side to fall under the code.

Two extensions follow from that wording. The first concerns skins and other in-game items. The code's betting article covers in-game betting with items that have a real value, and it names skins as the example. A player who stakes an item that can be sold for money is betting in the code's sense, even if no currency changes hands.

The second concerns fantasy games. Daily or short-term fantasy competitions played for prize money count as betting where a state, federal or national gambling regulator treats them as gambling. The code's betting article makes the same point from the other side: such games are covered where a gambling authority regulates them, or where they count as betting in a legal or regulatory sense in that jurisdiction. Whether a given fantasy product falls inside the rule therefore depends on where it is offered and how its regulator treats it.

The core rule: no betting on your own game

Article 2.2.1 is the heart of the betting rules. A Participant may not place, accept, lay or otherwise enter into a bet with any other party, whether a person, a company or anyone else, on the result, the progress, the conduct or any other aspect of a match or event in the game they play professionally, or in which they are otherwise involved, for example as a manager, a coach or an agent.

Three features of that wording matter in practice. It covers any aspect of a match, not only who wins: the result, the progress and the conduct are all named. It covers taking bets as well as placing them, since accepting and laying a bet are named next to placing one. And it is tied to the game, not to the team: a player is barred from betting on every match in the game they play professionally, including matches in which their own team does not play.

The ban does not stop at a Participant's own account. Article 2.2.2 makes it an offense to solicit, induce, entice, instruct, persuade, encourage, intentionally facilitate or authorize any other party to place a bet on any aspect of a match, directly or indirectly.

Under that wording, asking, encouraging, instructing or helping another person to place a bet is an offense, whether or not the Participant places anything in their own name. Article 6.2 sets the same range of penalties for both betting offenses.

Owners and officials across several games

Organizations often field teams in several games, and the people who run them are involved in all of them. The code deals with that case directly. A Participant with significant involvement in several games, such as a team owner or a team official, may not bet on any of the games in which they are involved.

Whether an involvement is significant is decided by the Integrity Commissioner, an appointee of ESIC's executive board who supervises its codes, at what the code calls the commissioner's entire discretion. For an owner or an executive, the practical scope of the betting ban can therefore extend to every game the organization plays, depending on the role they hold.

Teams themselves are Participants too. When the Participant is a team or an organization, Article 6.1 lets ESIC opt, at its discretion, between a sanction under the code's ordinary table and a monetary fine or penalty.

Inside information: what it is

The second family of rules concerns what Participants know. ESIC's definitions describe inside information as information about a match or event that a Participant holds because of their position in esports. It includes facts about the competitors, tactical considerations and other aspects of the match or event.

The definition also says what is not inside information, and the exclusions matter as much as the rule.

In practice the line falls between what a Participant learns through their position in a team or an event and what anyone can read, watch or find.

Using it, and passing it on

Article 2.3 sets three offenses. Under 2.3.1, a Participant may not use inside information for betting purposes in relation to any match or event. Under 2.3.2, they may not disclose inside information to any person when they knew, or should have known, that it might then be used for betting on a match or event. Under 2.3.3, they may not solicit, induce, entice, persuade, encourage or intentionally facilitate another Participant to commit either of those offenses.

The notes that follow the article explain how it is applied. Each potential offense is judged on its own facts and circumstances. A disclosure to the media, or on social networks or game chat boards, may be an offense if the Participant knew or should have known that the information might be used for betting. A disclosure within a personal relationship, to a family member for instance, is not prohibited where the Participant reasonably expects the information to stay confidential and not to be used for betting.

The test, in other words, is not whether information leaves the team but whether the Participant knew, or should have known, that it could end up behind a bet. The penalties reflect the range of situations: for misuse of inside information, Article 6.2 sets no minimum period of ineligibility and a maximum of a lifetime.

The code does not ask players to stay away from betting markets in general. It asks them to stay away from the ones they can influence, and to tell ESIC when someone tries to change that.

Gifts and benefits: the US$500 register

The code also asks Participants to declare what they are given. Under Article 2.4.3, a Participant must disclose to ESIC, without unnecessary delay, every gift, piece of hospitality or other non-contractual benefit offered to them with a value of US$500 or more. The duty applies whether or not there is any sign that the gift was meant to buy a breach; a separate article, 2.4.2, covers the failure to disclose benefits that were. The duty also runs the other way: under Article 2.4.1, giving a benefit to procure a breach of the code, or one that could bring the sport into disrepute, is itself an offense.

Three kinds of benefit are exempt: personal gifts or hospitality offered by or for a relative of the Participant, gifts of food or drink, and hospitality at the events and matches in which the Participant is taking part.

The disclosures go to ESIC, which keeps a register. The Integrity Commissioner may share it with the ESIC member concerned, at the commissioner's entire discretion. The code also addresses money sent by fans through an official donation tool on a player's social media or other online presence. As best practice, the player publicly acknowledges the gift there, and the player also reports it to ESIC by email without delay.

The duty to report approaches

The last of the betting-related duties is the duty to speak up. Article 2.4.4 requires a Participant to disclose to ESIC, without unnecessary delay, full details of any approach or invitation to engage in corrupt conduct. Article 2.4.5 extends the duty to what they learn about others: any incident, fact or matter that comes to their attention and may show corrupt conduct by another Participant, including approaches that another Participant has received.

ESIC's definitions describe corrupt conduct broadly. Bribery, match manipulation, giving inside information for betting purposes and fraud are named as examples, alongside conduct that undermines the integrity of esports and behavior that creates an appearance or suspicion of improper conduct.

The notes to the article add that the duty is continuing. A Participant who has already reported something must report any new incident, fact or matter that comes to their attention, even when it is related to what they reported before. A failure to disclose is itself an offense, and Article 6.2 places the general offenses, the reporting duties among them, in a range from two events of ineligibility to a lifetime ban.

What the code sets as penalties

Every betting-related offense in the code carries a range rather than a fixed penalty. ESIC's definitions describe an event as a live esports event or tournament attended or watched by the public, or another event organized, sanctioned or promoted by members, and the minimum periods are counted in events.

The last line of that table belongs to the corruption offenses. Article 2.1.2 forbids ensuring, for betting or other corrupt purposes, that a particular incident happens in a match or event, and Article 2.1.3 forbids seeking or accepting a bribe or other reward to do so. The code's definitions exclude official prize money and contracted payments, such as playing, sponsorship or endorsement fees, from what counts as a reward. A note to Article 2.1 also separates corruption from tactics: a team that deliberately loses a pool match to affect other teams' standings is dealt with under ESIC's Code of Conduct, not as an anti-corruption offense.

Rejection orders

The code gives ESIC one more tool that acts before any sanction. Under Article 2.A, when information shows, on the balance of probabilities, that a person or a group has acted or planned to act in breach of the code, it may issue a Rejection Order to its membership. ESIC's definitions describe it as an order that strongly recommends that a member refuse to accept the Rejected Participants in tournaments ESIC sanctions.

The order must set out the alleged breach, the information ESIC assessed as evidence, the people concerned, a start date and an end date, and anything else the commissioner considers relevant. The dates follow the code's ordinary sanctioning principles. A member that wants to admit a Rejected Participant to a tournament must notify ESIC in writing of that permission and its reasons within five business days. ESIC makes reasonable efforts to tell the person that the order exists, and a Rejected Participant may contest it in writing to the commissioner.

Other rulebooks apply alongside

The ESIC code is one layer among several. Publishers write integrity rules into the licenses they grant to tournament organizers. Valve's license for tournaments of its games, for example, requires organizers to bar their own staff from betting and to ban players and other team members, through their agreements with the teams, from betting on matches in the tournaments their teams play. It states: "Licensee will prohibit any of its employees and contractors from betting on any aspect of the Tournament."

Leagues and publishers also run their own disciplinary rules, and national law applies on top of all of them. Which rule governs a particular situation depends on the event, the game and the country, and conduct permitted by one text may still be barred by another.

The .esports registry publishes Esports Observer, so the whole scene can read its news for free.