Why Tennis Players Live Longer

As Wimbledon fills the courts and the calendar, it's worth knowing that a growing body of research has landed on a striking conclusion: racket sports are associated with a longer life than almost any other form of exercise — one study put tennis nearly ten years ahead of a sedentary life. And the reason appears to have less to do with the exercise than with something quieter.

For a fortnight each summer, tennis takes over. Wimbledon turns a niche pastime into national background noise, and courts across Britain briefly fill with people inspired to dig out a racket. Most will think of it, if they think about the health side at all, as a decent cardio workout. The research suggests they are underselling it dramatically.

More than one large study has now found that racket sports are associated with the greatest gains in life expectancy of any activity examined — and, more intriguingly, that the likely reason is not how hard they make you work, but who you play them with. What began as a single surprising result has, over several years and several studies, hardened into one of the more interesting findings in the science of exercise and longevity.

TL;DR

• Multiple large studies now link racket sports to exceptional longevity. A British cohort of over 80,000 adults found racket-sports players had a 46% lower risk of death from any cause than non-players — a bigger reduction than running, cycling, or swimming.
• The Copenhagen City Heart Study, which followed 8,577 people for up to 25 years, found tennis was associated with 9.7 extra years of life — the largest gain of any sport it examined, ahead of badminton (6.2), football (4.7), cycling (3.7), swimming (3.4), and jogging (3.2).
• A 2025 systematic review of research from 2006 to 2025 concluded that racket sports deliver significant benefits — and singled out their social nature as crucial for mental health and for preventing loneliness and depression.
• The consistent thread is that the sports involving the most social interaction are linked to the greatest longevity. It's not just the exercise — it's the connection.
• This fits a large, separate body of evidence that social connection is one of the strongest predictors of health, with isolation carrying risks comparable to smoking or obesity.
• Important caveat: these are observational studies, showing association rather than proof of cause. But the fact that the finding has replicated across different populations makes it far more compelling than a one-off result.

Not One Study, But Several

The reason this finding is worth taking seriously is that it has not rested on a single dataset. It has now shown up repeatedly, across different countries and different research groups, which is exactly what separates a robust result from a statistical curiosity.

The most cited is the Copenhagen City Heart Study, a well-regarded long-term project that followed 8,577 adults for up to 25 years, recording the sports they played and linking that to how long they lived. Published in Mayo Clinic Proceedings, it found that every sport beat being sedentary — but the differences between them were enormous. The life-expectancy gains, compared with the sedentary group, were: tennis, 9.7 years; badminton, 6.2 years; football, 4.7 years; cycling, 3.7 years; swimming, 3.4 years; jogging, 3.2 years; calisthenics, 3.1 years; and health-club activities, just 1.5 years.

Crucially, this was not the only study to find it. A separate British cohort of more than 80,000 adults, published in the British Journal of Sports Medicine, found that people who played racket sports had a 46% lower risk of death from any cause and a similarly reduced risk of cardiovascular death — a protective effect that outstripped running, cycling, and swimming. Two large studies, two different populations, the same conclusion: racket sports sit at the top of the longevity table. And a 2025 systematic review, pulling together the peer-reviewed evidence from 2006 to 2025, reinforced the pattern and pointed clearly at why it might exist.

The Counterintuitive Part

The ranking overturns an intuition most of us hold about exercise. We tend to assume the harder and more cardiovascularly intense the activity, the greater the benefit — that grinding out miles on a treadmill or in the pool is the serious, virtuous choice, and a game of doubles is comparatively frivolous.

The data says close to the opposite. In the Copenhagen figures, the solitary, endurance-focused activities — cycling, swimming, jogging, and especially the gym treadmill-and-weights routine at the very bottom — clustered well below the racket sports. The activities at the top, tennis and badminton, share an obvious feature the ones at the bottom lack: you cannot do them alone. They require a partner or an opponent. They are inherently, unavoidably social.

The Copenhagen researchers noticed this and said so directly, observing that the leisure activities involving more social interaction were associated with the best longevity — a finding they flagged as warranting further investigation. The 2025 review went further, identifying the social, interactive nature of racket sports as central to their benefit, particularly for mental health and the prevention of loneliness. The through-line across all of it is the same: it is not that the tennis players were fitter than the cyclists. It is that they were, structurally, less alone.

Why Social Connection Matters So Much

This slots into one of the most robust bodies of evidence in modern health science: that social connection is a powerful determinant of how long and how well we live.

Decades of research have established that strong social relationships are associated with substantially lower mortality risk, and that loneliness and social isolation carry higher risk — by some analyses, an effect on a par with smoking or obesity. The mechanisms are plausible and overlapping: social connection buffers stress and lowers the chronic low-grade inflammation that stress drives; it supports mental health, which feeds back into physical health; and it keeps people showing up, because others are expecting them.

That last point matters for exercise specifically. A solitary gym routine depends entirely on individual motivation, which fluctuates and fades. A regular tennis game is an appointment with another person — harder to skip, easier to sustain over years and decades. The social layer does not just add a psychological benefit on top of the physical one; it may be part of what makes the physical activity durable enough to accumulate a benefit at all.

Seen this way, tennis is almost the ideal longevity activity by accident. It combines genuine cardiovascular exercise, the balance and coordination demands of a skill sport, the strategic engagement of a game, and — the likely secret ingredient — a built-in dose of human connection, every single time you play.

The Caveats That Matter

Before anyone books a lifetime of court time on the strength of one number, the limitations deserve honest attention.

The most important is that these are observational studies. They show a strong, repeated association between racket sports and living longer; they do not prove the tennis caused the extra years. People who play tennis regularly may differ from the general population in ways that independently affect longevity — they may be wealthier, have more leisure time, or carry fewer health problems that would have stopped them playing in the first place. The researchers adjusted for a range of these factors, including age, income, and education, and the racket-sports advantage survived, which strengthens the case. But observational data can never fully rule out that some hidden difference between the groups explains part of the effect.

The precise figure — 9.7 years — should therefore be read as an illustrative headline rather than a promise. No one can credibly tell you that taking up tennis will add nearly a decade to your life. What the evidence robustly supports is the broader claim: that sports with a social component are associated with markedly greater longevity than solitary ones, that this has now been shown in more than one large population, and that it is consistent with everything else we know about connection and health. The replication is what turns an interesting number into a genuine signal. It's a similar distinction to the one that separates biological from chronological age: populations, not promises.

What to Actually Take From It

The practical lesson is not that tennis is the only exercise worth doing, nor that solo activities are a waste — every activity studied beat being sedentary, and cycling, swimming, and running remain excellent for you. The lesson is subtler and more useful.

It is that the social dimension of exercise may be a genuine, underrated ingredient in its long-term benefit — and that this is something you can deliberately build in. If you love the solitude of a long run or a swim, there is no need to abandon it. But adding a social layer somewhere — a running club rather than a solo route, doubles rather than the ball machine, a regular five-a-side, a walking group, a class where you actually know people — may pay dividends the raw physical activity alone does not.

Choose an activity you will keep doing, and where possible, choose one that involves other people. The consistency and the connection may matter as much as the exercise itself. Tennis just happens to bundle all three — movement, skill, and company — into a single game, which is as good a reason as any to make the most of the fortnight when the whole country is thinking about it.

Frequently Asked Questions

Does playing tennis really help you live longer? More than one large study suggests so. The Copenhagen City Heart Study, following 8,577 people for up to 25 years, linked tennis to 9.7 extra years of life expectancy — the most of any sport it examined. Separately, a British study of over 80,000 adults found racket-sports players had a 46% lower risk of death from any cause. Both are observational, so they show strong associations rather than definitive proof, but the fact that the finding replicates across studies makes it compelling.

Why are racket sports better for longevity than running or cycling? Across the research, racket sports consistently outperform solo endurance activities. In the Copenhagen study, tennis (9.7 years) and badminton (6.2) far exceeded cycling (3.7), swimming (3.4), and jogging (3.2). Researchers and a 2025 review have pointed to the social, interactive nature of racket sports as a key factor — suggesting the connection, not just the physical exertion, drives much of the benefit.

Is there recent research supporting this? Yes. Beyond the widely cited Copenhagen study, a British Journal of Sports Medicine cohort of more than 80,000 adults found racket sports were associated with the lowest all-cause and cardiovascular mortality of the exercise types studied. A 2025 systematic review of literature from 2006 to 2025 reinforced these benefits and highlighted the social nature of racket sports as crucial for mental health and preventing loneliness.

Is it the exercise or the social side that matters? Both, but the research increasingly points to the social component as a key differentiator. All the activities studied provided exercise, yet the ones requiring a partner or team were linked to far greater longevity. This aligns with extensive separate evidence that social connection strongly predicts health, with isolation carrying risks comparable to smoking or obesity.

Do I have to play tennis to get this benefit? No. The takeaway isn't that only tennis counts — it's that adding a social dimension to exercise may boost its long-term benefits. A running club, doubles instead of solo practice, team sports, or a group class can all build in the social element. The best activity is one you'll keep doing consistently, ideally alongside other people.

Are these studies reliable? They are large, long-term, and published in respected journals, and the racket-sports association held after adjusting for factors like age, income, and education — and, importantly, has replicated across different populations. But they remain observational, meaning they can't fully prove cause and effect. The broad finding (social sports are linked to greater longevity) is well supported; the exact 9.7-year figure is best treated as illustrative.

The Bottom Line

The claim that tennis is linked to nearly ten extra years of life is real, and — more importantly — it no longer rests on a single study. Across different countries and different research groups, racket sports keep landing at the top of the longevity table, and the newest evidence keeps pointing at the same explanation: the sports that connect us to other people are associated with markedly longer lives than the ones we do alone.

So as Wimbledon runs its course and the courts fill up, the most useful thing to take from the tennis is not the technique or even the cardio. It is the reminder that the company you keep while exercising may be as important as the exercise itself — and that the healthiest activities are often the ones we don't do alone.

This is general information rather than medical advice. If you're returning to sport after a break or managing a health condition, it's worth checking with your GP before starting, particularly with the higher-intensity demands of a game like tennis. If you'd like a lighter thinking partner for the habits that surround your sport — sleep, recovery, movement — Reset Companion can help you build them into something you'll actually keep up.

Related reading: Biological Age vs Chronological Age: Why They're Not the Same Number · Understanding Blood Pressure: What Your Numbers Actually Mean · Why Exercising at Altitude Is So Much Harder

Popular Articles