Should We Trust the Reviews?

I play at a lot of online casinos. Over the years, I’ve seen my share of strange policies, slow payouts, odd VIP schemes—you name it. But lately, one thing has been bothering me more than anything else:

The growing mismatch between what players experience and what casino review sites are telling us.

To avoid making this about too many factors at once, I’ll focus on just one example.

Vegasino Casino.

Currently ranked at the very top of Casino Guru’s "best casinos" list.

I’ve played there. I’ve won there. And based on my experience? There’s no way this casino deserves to be ranked first—let alone endorsed at all.

Withdrawals are slow. Support is borderline useless. The process drags on, with obstacles thrown in the way until you either give up or wait indefinitely.

This isn’t just a matter of opinion—it’s echoed again and again in the user reviews on the very same site that gave it the #1 spot.

So how did this casino end up as their top recommendation?

I’m not here to start a long debate. I’m just asking for one explanation: How can any review platform stand behind that rating?

I challenge the staff at Casino Guru—open an account at Vegasino, play like a regular user for a week, win some money, and try withdrawing it. No shortcuts. No admin flags. Just the player experience.

Let’s see how it holds up.

Thank you for your post here.

I believe that everyone’s experience always differs, and that is why we don't include players’ experience from user reviews in the safety index of the casino.

If you'd like to learn more about how we work and what the process behind all the casino reviews is, please read this article. Hopefully, it will help you a bit.

I'm sorry to hear that you didn’t have a good time at that particular casino, though, for sure.

We always appreciate our users’ opinions.

As an active casino player, I’ve experienced a wide range of sites—some bad, some decent, some truly excellent. But what’s starting to concern me more and more is the disconnect between casino ranking sites and the actual player experience.

Let’s take just one example to keep this simple:

Vegasino Casino.

It’s not a terrible casino. But it’s certainly not the best—not even close. Any seasoned player would spot that quickly. Withdrawals are slow. Customer support is clunky. The experience is average at best. So when I see it ranked at the very top of Casino Guru’s best casinos list, I have to ask: How did that happen?

That’s not a ranking that reflects what players actually go through. It’s a rating that makes you question what criteria are being used.

And it’s not an isolated case.

Cosmonaut Casino, for example, has locked up my money—and I’m far from the only one. Players have reported similar issues, yet it still has a high "Safety Index" on your platform. But from what I’ve seen, Cosmonaut is basically an empty shell that just collects deposits. Why is that still promoted?

If you don’t take real player experience into account, then your Safety Index becomes misleading. It stops protecting players and starts shielding bad behavior.

This isn’t just a suggestion—it’s a request:

Look into it.

Because active players can see through these ratings. And when the rankings don't reflect reality, trust starts to erode.

Hello,

Such a response, in my opinion, requires a more detailed comment. First of all, focusing solely on the Safety Index is the best approach. Did you read any of the free guides we provide to players?

I would start with this one:

How to choose the best online casino for you

Basically, the golden four consists of

Safety Index

User Reviews

Complaints

Forum

It is really not a coincidence that each casino page is full of details and leads to all sources mentioned, so please do not reduce all efforts into one number.

Additionally, the Safety Index can never reflect each player's experience; thus, it simply says how likely you are to receive the winnings. It has nothing to do with unique user experience because we all experience things differently. You can find the remaining information in the previously mentioned sources. So to say, if you take a closer look, you may find a casino with a quite high Safety Index to be "awarded" a negative user rating because the payouts have been slow.

I understand you had different expectations. if you ever face unfair treatment from any casino, feel free to complain, because complaints may directly affect the Safety Index. Perhaps you are referring to Vegasino Casino? Share your experience, please.

If you feel like you wish to discuss more or perhaps concrete details, we will be here.

I read some of the material, yes.

But I also play—a lot. I've played at many casinos, and based on real experience, I can say this with confidence:

There’s no world in which Vegasino is a number one casino. It’s not terrible, but it’s very far from the best. Any active player would see that quickly.

And then there’s Cosmonaut Casino. I’ve submitted a formal complaint through your platform. I’ve seen others do the same. This is a casino that withholds player funds—and yet it still ranks high. New players log on, see that score, deposit, play, and may end up in the exact same situation I and others faced.

Cosmonaut has already been blacklisted on other major sites like AskGamblers. So why hasn’t that been reflected here?

It honestly feels like some casinos get reviewed once during a "good phase," and then stay frozen in that moment—regardless of how they behave later. That’s what worries me. Because without real follow-up, these rankings stop helping players and start protecting bad operators.

Just being honest here.

Good day to you.

I greatly appreciate your openness, and I will respond in the very same manner. ??

Furthermore, let me thank you for reading some of the guides. That's extraordinary.

Vegasino - I was hoping for a specific incident, you see, saying, "There’s no world in which Vegasino is a number one casino. It’s not terrible, but it’s very far from the best. Any active player would see that quickly." actually says nothing concrete. Just that, you are not okay with the specific number representing the safety index.

Take it from my perspective for a sec - a new member comes to the forum questioning the Safety Indexes and the casino's top position, mentioning a bad experience without any detail.

With all honesty, there is nothing concrete to add, I'm afraid. Let's talk details, please.

Kosmonaut - as you can see, we are not Ask Gambler by any means, but I understand players love to compare, and we encourage everyone to track as many sites reviewing casinos. But we stick with our methodology, so do the AG, LCB, and CM. Well, let's focus on the complaint:

It has ended like unresolved; that's true, yet sadly the amount was too low for the Safety Index to go lower. It probably sounds weird but makes sense to me. Every unresolved complaint results in points being awarded to the casino in question. The amount depends on the severity of the issue. Therefore, more than a few unresolved complaints are needed. To put it simply, a single unresolved complaint does not guarantee voided payment to every player. Instead of applying such an approach, we could skip all the information about casinos and mark them all as either good or bad. This approach, in our opinion, is not the most effective.

Remember when I talked about four information sources? Thanks to you, the others may find the unresolved case before they decide to enter the casino.

Trust me that I understand your point of view. It must be hard to accept that we could not help, and the casino is still in "above average". Not among good casinos, however. Yet it is math and a systematic approach, and I get it if you disagree with the outcome. From your perspective, it may not be very convenient.

However, I just looked at the quantity of open complaints that have been submitted, and I anticipate that the casino's rating will drop once all of them are marked as unresolved. Based on the date of the withdrawal submission, it seems that the casino has been unresponsive for some time, which essentially fits your situation.

At least those do not seem like new players.

On Vegasino, no experienced player would rank it among the best. That damages the credibility of Casino Guru, full stop.

But Cosmonaut Casino is where things get dangerous.

Players visit your site, see a high Safety Index, and get no heads-up that they might be depositing into a place where they’ll never get a cent back. That’s not just a system flaw—that’s a warning failure.

At this point, it feels like Casino Guru is inviting people onto the Titanic. And when it sinks, you can’t say you didn’t see the iceberg.

More broadly—do you ever revisit casinos after six months, a year, and run anonymous player tests? Because that’s what’s missing. Real, repeat, unbiased check-ins. Without that, this disconnect between players and platforms will only grow wider.

Good day to you!

To be honest, it feels like we are circling around the same issues. Essentially, you are a unique individual—please provide a more detailed explanation of your unfair experience with Vegasino. Using the "others" as a demonstration of obvious events may only work if both sides know what they are talking about. I have no clue.

What has happened to you, please?

For the rest, Let me repeat what I already said:

"Basically, the golden four consists of

Safety Index

User Reviews

Complaints

Forum

It is really not a coincidence that each casino page is full of details and leads to all sources mentioned, so please do not reduce all efforts into one number.

Additionally, the Safety Index can never reflect each player's experience; thus, it simply says how likely you are to receive the winnings. It has nothing to do with unique user experience because we all experience things differently. You can find the remaining information in the previously mentioned sources. So to say, if you take a closer look, you may find a casino with a quite high Safety Index to be "awarded" a negative user rating because the payouts have been slow.

I understand you had different expectations."

It's important to remember what I told you about the complaints.

Once more, I understand that you may have expected a different outcome, but this is the reality.

In my opinion, "we would invite you to the Titanic" if you were only shown one number and nothing else.

Players who are ready to read have a large portfolio of information to work with.

But some casinos eventually change their approach and refuse to pay some players, and no one can predict who or why. I wish there was a real-time test for that.

If you disagree with our work, that's ok.

Thanks again.

Honestly, reading your reply, I had to smile a bit. I can’t help but feel that if we were sitting down over a cup of tea, you wouldn’t be saying half of what’s written here with a straight face.

Let’s just be real: Vegasino is not a number one casino. You know it, I know it, and anyone who’s played around knows it. It’s not terrible—but it’s not top-tier. And when it’s featured as such, it makes the whole system look out of touch.

Same with Cosmonaut. You say players can dig deeper, read more, use multiple tools. But come on—we both know the Safety Index is what catches the eye. No warning, no heads-up, just a green light. That’s not transparency—that’s marketing.

You mention the need for a real-time test. I’ve got one:

Play like a regular user, once in a while. Anonymously. Wait. Withdraw. Feel it for yourself.

That’s what your players are doing. That’s the missing data in your system.

So again, nothing personal—I actually appreciate the dialogue. But from the outside, it really does look like Casino Guru is patting people on the back while they board the Titanic.

Hello.

I find it amusing that someone who is quick to oppose anything without thinking about it is willing to judge what I would say in person simply because we have exchanged a few words.

You know, this seems pointless; therefore, I will not engage further. I value your insights. My colleagues, on the other hand, set up a completely different system. It is okay if you do not like it. Please be aware that this post may not lead to any changes.

You may contact the Data Team instead: [email protected].

Enjoy the tea without me.

Fair enough—I wouldn’t really know what would be said in person anyway. I just find it hard to understand how a casino like Cosmonaut, which seems completely gone, is still pulling in deposits daily without any warning on such a big site.

Luckily, a few other places have already flagged them. That’s something, at least.

All the best.

If I may, my honest opinion is that—as I said—once the current complaints are closed, the casino's reputation will drop. Believe me, I understand that it must truly sound stupid for someone with your experience, but our current system is partially based on CG complaint results. We all understand that this system isn't perfect, but without it, we wouldn't progress much anyway.

I'm sorry to see that Kosmonaut seems to set a new course and has decided to ignore players' issues!

Thank you and enjoy the Sunday.

It is what it is. But lol i got an idea i log Kosmonaut now, cancel the withdraw and take screenshots in the dozens.

While i play and then if i win i can make another complaint.

Well, I guess it is worth a try. Assuming the first complaint was closed as unresolved, I guess it should not affect the possible fresh one...