Sport has always been about more than just who wins and who loses, or what the final score is. It’s about strategy, athleticism, teamwork and rivalries, and for a few hours, spectators become part of something greater than themselves. Whether that’s supporting a specific team or athlete, or even just being part of a larger group of people who are all passionate about a single sport, match or game.
But, the way in which we experience sport is changing, and that change is happening for a number of reasons. For instance, we know far more about athletes now than we ever did before by means of things like Instagram and other similar platforms. Ordinary people have increased insight into the dynamics within sports, rivalries and even within teams themselves. And all these things fundamentally change how we view and enjoy the spectating side of the experience. And it’s about more than just knowing more.
Overall, technology is changing how we experience it in the moment. From live statistics and real-time betting to interactive platforms that let fans track multiple games and predict what happens next, watching sport increasingly comes with another layer of participation. In the past, you were following the action, but now, you can be analyse it, predict it and potentially put money on it, too.
At SBC Lisbon 2026, where basketball legend Michael Jordan participated in a panel discussion alongside Carsten Koerl, CEO and Founder of Sportradar, and Jason Robins, CEO and Founder of DraftKings, this changing relationship between sport, technology and betting came into sharper focus, perhaps unexpectedly. What was particularly refreshing was hearing Jordan speak candidly about some of the difficulties this evolution presents from his unique perspective as a (retired) professional athlete, rather than simply celebrating sports betting as the next great thing for fans.
Because while betting and predicting can undeniably make sport more interactive and has a lot of good to offer fans and spectators, it also raises some more complicated questions, and not just the most expected ones, about concerns surrounding gambling and betting. Rather, it’s made us start questioning whether sports betting is actually fundamentally changing both what it means to watch a game, and what it means to play one too.
From Watching The Game To Becoming Part Of It
During the panel discussion, Jordan reflected on how the relationship between athletes and fans has changed. As he put it, “Fans used to live vicariously through the athletes; now fans are the athletes.” Of course, we’re still speaking metaphorically, but this certainly does quite clearly depict the shift we’ve seen in sports spectating over the years.
Previously, if you were into say, football, you’d check who was playing when, watch the game and then perhaps chat to your mates about it afterwards. But these days, fans can do that, and they can also engage with sport through things like live odds, fantasy leagues, predictive games and increasingly detailed data about players and teams. It’s almost as if being a spectator isn’t about sitting back and seeing what happens anymore. Now, fans are actively participating in the outcomes, even if that participation takes place through a screen.
Sportradar founder and CEO Carsten Koerl has also observed that “Now people follow the players, not just the teams.” It makes sense in an environment where data and digital platforms can turn individual performances into a constant stream of information to analyse, but still, this is becoming far more of a trend than it ever really used to be. Sure, people used to have a favourite player, but it’s become far more than that.
Of course, there’s an obvious commercial opportunity here, and that’s exactly what we’ve seen some savvy entrepreneurs acknowledge and take advantage of. After all, more ways to engage can mean more reasons to follow a match, return to a platform and spend time with a sport. So for technology companies, the challenge is to make that experience compelling enough to keep people coming back, one game after another, whether the team they’re supporting wins or loses.
But, there’s a difference between making a game more engaging and making the game itself secondary to everything happening around it. Jordan himself questioned whether fans are really watching sport in the same way when they’re following several games and tracking multiple things at once. He sees the appeal of the change and the increased engagement, but he also raised a fair question that I was surprised to hear him bring up: that is, if your attention is split between the match, the statistics and your predictions, what exactly are you enjoying?
Perhaps the answer is that it doesn’t matter. Who cares whether the basketball fan sitting in seat C45 is more concerned about who wins the game or how many X, Y and Z moves players 1, 2 and 3 make before the final whistle? People have always enjoyed sport differently, so there’s an argument to be made that this is no different. But still, there seems to be an issue and a discomfort niggling at Jordan that I feel too: that is, is technology is enhancing the experience or gradually redefining it completely?
More from SportsTech
Is the Athlete Playing A Different Game, Too?
This evolution of how people watch and enjoy sports is also quite different from the athletes’ perspective. In the past, the public had relatively limited insight into what players did away from the court or pitch. Spectators didn’t necessarily know what their game day ritual was, how the atmosphere felt in the locker room, what happened on the bus en route to the match or anything else like that. Today, however, social media, digital coverage and data-driven analysis mean athletes can be scrutinised far beyond their performance during a match, and it can be based on a plethora of factors one may not even have realised would contribute to something like this.
And when betting becomes part of the viewing experience, individual moments can take on a different significance. A missed shot, an unexpected substitution or a player having an unusually quiet game can matter not only to the team and its supporters, but also to people following specific outcomes.
Jordan made it clear that he doesn’t envy modern athletes having to navigate these additional pressures. Branding, public perception and the constant attention surrounding their personal and professional lives has always been tough, but adding in yet another dimension of visibility can surely become an additional distraction from the sport itself.
The contrast between what athletes want and what betting audiences want is particularly interesting. As Jordan explained, “I want to be the best athlete I can be,” which isn’t particularly shocking to hear from the man who many people view as the GOAT of the NBA. But, what Jordan explained is that for someone trying to predict a result, the objective is different. While the athlete wants to be the best they can be, the spectator is increasingly trying to analyse: to identify weaknesses, assess probabilities and work out what might happen next.
“You’re trying to find my weakness,” he said.
Now, that’s not necessarily an outright criticism of betting. Analysing a player’s strengths and weaknesses is part of sport, and data has long been used to improve performance. This, in itself, is nothing new. However, what modern technology does is make that analysis more accessible, immediate and commercially valuable, potentially increasing the scrutiny that athletes face.
Jordan also joked, “I am the worst guy to be betting on. You should bet with me, not against me.”
Behind the humour, however, lies a very real conflict that lies at the heart of sports betting, which is that an athlete’s job is to compete and perform, not to satisfy every expectation created by the audiences watching them. The objective of the spectator who is betting on the athlete or the team, however, is to try and anticipate the actions of the athlete. Thus, there’s an inherent disconnect between the two.
Can Technology Simultaneously Respect the Game And Still Change It?
None of this means that sports betting is inherently bad, and Jordan’s take on the situation echoed this sentiment. Technology can bring fans closer to the action, help them understand performances in greater depth and create new ways to enjoy competitions. Sports data can also serve purposes well beyond betting, from improving training to supporting analysis and broadcasting.
The difficulty, however, is balancing those benefits with the risks of turning every moment into yet another opportunity for engagement. Unsurprisingly, there’s a temptation for companies operating in this space to measure success through activity: how long users stay on a platform, how often they return and how many interactions they make. But more engagement does not automatically mean a better relationship with sport, nor should the commercial value of an athlete’s performance eclipse the fact that they’re there to compete.
Jordan’s comments were particularly notable because of his involvement in the wider sports and gaming ecosystem, including his association with Sportradar as a special advisor and investor in the company. He wasn’t dismissing the industry outright, but it was still quite a noteworthy stance to take in an industry that often has its more potentially problematic sides written and spoken about more so than its positive and exciting components.
There’s no doubt in my mind that sport, much like probably everything else in the world, will inevitably involve more and more technology, data and interactivity than ever before as time goes on. But this discussion between Michael Jordan, speaking from an athlete’s perspective, and Carsten Koerl and Jason Robins, as key figures in the iGaming industry, specifically in sport, highlighted a potential disconnect between the “old-school” objectives of sports spectating and modern engagement in sports. That is, it seems as though the objectives of the different parties don’t exactly line up. Does that mean we’re at risk of forever changing the very essence of sport?
