Every figure on this site comes from an account we funded ourselves. This page describes exactly how that works, what each of our three labels permits us to say, and where the method stops.

Two entries show the middle row of that table doing its work. Mexiwin: US$20 back in ten minutes is the most common shape of a real-money claim and the least informative. TrustDice: where the verification wall appeared is the one that tests what players actually worry about. The shortlist built on all of it is no KYC casino.

The sequence

• Register. With whatever the operator actually requires — usually an email address, sometimes a wallet.
• Deposit real money. Amounts in our ledger range from 30 USDT to 200 USDT for a first session. The network is recorded where we have it, because a payout time without a network attached is close to meaningless.
• Play. Normal sessions at normal stakes. We do not have a house strategy and we are not trying to demonstrate one.
• Request a withdrawal. This is the only step that tests anything the operator has an incentive to get wrong.
• Record what happened, including when it went badly.

The three labels

Label	What happened	What we may claim	Count
Withdrawal confirmed	Our money went in and came out	Payout times, amounts, whether documents were requested	11
Deposit only	Real money went in, no payout completed	Deposits, sessions, bonuses, support. Never a payout time.	8
Not tested	Our money was never in the account	Only what the operator’s own terms, licence and coin list say	10

The middle row is where most of the category quietly cheats. An operator that took a deposit and was never asked for a payout has told you nothing about payouts — but a withdrawal speed can be copied off its banking page and presented as a finding. Ours are blank instead.

What counts as a confirmed payout

Coins arriving in a wallet we control. Not a withdrawal marked “approved” in an account panel, not a support message saying it has been sent, and not a pending transaction. Until it has landed, it has not landed.

Where the time between request and arrival was measured, we quote it. Where we completed the payout but did not watch the clock, the cell says so. Six of our eleven confirmed withdrawals carry a time; five do not.

Impressions versus measurements

Some things in the ledger are measured: amounts, durations, whether an email arrived. Some are impressions: whether a session felt like it was running badly, whether support seemed competent. We mark the second kind as impressions every time, because an impression from one session is weak evidence and dressing it up as a rating would not make it stronger.

Our Mellstroy entry is the clearest example of the two mixing: a measured US$3,000 payout in about two minutes, alongside an impression that the games ran poorly and a plain statement that support was the worst of the nineteen.

Where the method stops

• Most of our tests are single sessions. A single session cannot distinguish a policy from a coincidence.
• Only two of nineteen operators were pushed far enough to find a verification limit. On the rest, “no documents requested” means we stopped before finding out.
• We cannot test what happens if you decline a document request and dispute it, because that requires losing access to a balance on purpose.
• Amounts are small relative to the sums that make this category interesting. One entry reaches four figures.

Those limits are the reason the site is a ledger and not a ranking. The record is on the payout ledger.