Dear Michal,
We have carefully reviewed the relevant sections of Casino Guru’s Fair Gambling Codex in detail and would like to respond thoughtfully and in the spirit of constructive professional dialogue.
1. OUR RULE IS FUNDAMENTALLY DIFFERENT FROM THE CODEX EXAMPLES
Our Rule 9.2 is fundamentally different in nature. It applies exclusively to new accounts with five or fewer deposits. It is a structured risk management measure for early-stage accounts, where the casino has had limited opportunity to assess the player’s profile, transaction history, and behaviour. Once a player moves beyond this initial threshold, the rule no longer applies. This is not a blanket, indefinite cap on winnings; it is a transparent, scoped condition tied specifically to account maturity.
The Codex examples describe permanent restrictions applied to all players without limitation. Our rule is temporary by design, clearly defined, and directly tied to the account’s stage of development. This is a meaningful and material distinction.
2. OUR PLATFORM ALREADY MEETS THE CODEX WITHDRAWAL LIMIT STANDARD
This point is particularly important. Casino Guru’s Fair Gambling Codex states in its section on Withdrawal Limits that the recommended minimum is €10,000 per month - and notes that withdrawal limits are accepted "as part of the online gambling ecosystem."
We want to draw your attention to the fact that Ritzo Casino’s published monthly withdrawal limit is €10,000 - precisely in line with Casino Guru’s own recommended standard. This limit is clearly published on our website and applies to all players, including the current case.
Rule 9.2 is a separate and additional condition applicable only to new accounts in their earliest stage. It exists alongside, not instead of, our standard withdrawal framework. Any player is fully subject to the standard €10,000 monthly withdrawal limit - the exact figure the Codex recommends.
With this in mind, we respectfully suggest that our overall framework is broadly consistent with the standards the Codex promotes.
3. THE CODEX IS AN EDITORIAL STANDARD, NOT A REGULATORY REQUIREMENT
We note that throughout the Fair Gambling Codex, Casino Guru consistently uses language such as "we believe", "we recommend", "in our opinion", and "we would like to see". This reflects Casino Guru’s editorial position and aspirational guidance - which we respect, but it does not constitute a binding legal or regulatory obligation.
Ritzo Casino’s binding obligations are defined by Curaçao law and our CGA license conditions. No provision of either prohibits Rule 9.2. We have not been presented with any evidence to the contrary, and we would welcome the citation of any specific law or binding regulatory rule that our terms violate.
4. FULL TRANSPARENCY AND INFORMED PLAYER CONSENT
Ritzo Casino operates under a valid Curaçao Gaming Authority license and in full compliance with all applicable regulatory requirements. Rule 9.2 was:
• Published in plain, unambiguous language
• Accessible on our website prior to registration, within one click from the homepage
• Actively acknowledged and accepted by the player at account creation - before any deposit was made
• Applied consistently and exactly as written
The Fair Gambling Codex itself places significant emphasis on transparency and informed consent. We have met both standards fully. The player had every opportunity to review the Terms and Conditions before choosing to register and deposit.
5. A FAIR CLASSIFICATION SHOULD REFLECT THE FACTS
We are not an operator that hides rules, applies them selectively, or introduces conditions after the fact. We are a licensed, regulated operator that publishes its rules clearly and applies them consistently and equally to all players.
We would respectfully suggest that the classification "Against Fair Gambling" should be reserved for operators who act deceptively, apply hidden rules, or violate their own published terms, not for operators who apply clearly disclosed, lawfully published conditions that a player has explicitly and actively agreed to.
We value our relationship with Casino Guru and the important role your platform plays in the industry.
We simply ask that the full context of this case - the scoped and temporary nature of Rule 9.2, our platform’s compliance with the Codex’s own €10,000 withdrawal standard, our full regulatory compliance, and the player’s informed consent - be given fair and complete consideration before any final classification is made.
We remain available for further dialogue and look forward to your response.
Kind regards,
Ritzo Casino Representative
Dear Michal,
We have carefully reviewed the relevant sections of Casino Guru’s Fair Gambling Codex in detail and would like to respond thoughtfully and in the spirit of constructive professional dialogue.
1. OUR RULE IS FUNDAMENTALLY DIFFERENT FROM THE CODEX EXAMPLES
Our Rule 9.2 is fundamentally different in nature. It applies exclusively to new accounts with five or fewer deposits. It is a structured risk management measure for early-stage accounts, where the casino has had limited opportunity to assess the player’s profile, transaction history, and behaviour. Once a player moves beyond this initial threshold, the rule no longer applies. This is not a blanket, indefinite cap on winnings; it is a transparent, scoped condition tied specifically to account maturity.
The Codex examples describe permanent restrictions applied to all players without limitation. Our rule is temporary by design, clearly defined, and directly tied to the account’s stage of development. This is a meaningful and material distinction.
2. OUR PLATFORM ALREADY MEETS THE CODEX WITHDRAWAL LIMIT STANDARD
This point is particularly important. Casino Guru’s Fair Gambling Codex states in its section on Withdrawal Limits that the recommended minimum is €10,000 per month - and notes that withdrawal limits are accepted "as part of the online gambling ecosystem."
We want to draw your attention to the fact that Ritzo Casino’s published monthly withdrawal limit is €10,000 - precisely in line with Casino Guru’s own recommended standard. This limit is clearly published on our website and applies to all players, including the current case.
Rule 9.2 is a separate and additional condition applicable only to new accounts in their earliest stage. It exists alongside, not instead of, our standard withdrawal framework. Any player is fully subject to the standard €10,000 monthly withdrawal limit - the exact figure the Codex recommends.
With this in mind, we respectfully suggest that our overall framework is broadly consistent with the standards the Codex promotes.
3. THE CODEX IS AN EDITORIAL STANDARD, NOT A REGULATORY REQUIREMENT
We note that throughout the Fair Gambling Codex, Casino Guru consistently uses language such as "we believe", "we recommend", "in our opinion", and "we would like to see". This reflects Casino Guru’s editorial position and aspirational guidance - which we respect, but it does not constitute a binding legal or regulatory obligation.
Ritzo Casino’s binding obligations are defined by Curaçao law and our CGA license conditions. No provision of either prohibits Rule 9.2. We have not been presented with any evidence to the contrary, and we would welcome the citation of any specific law or binding regulatory rule that our terms violate.
4. FULL TRANSPARENCY AND INFORMED PLAYER CONSENT
Ritzo Casino operates under a valid Curaçao Gaming Authority license and in full compliance with all applicable regulatory requirements. Rule 9.2 was:
• Published in plain, unambiguous language
• Accessible on our website prior to registration, within one click from the homepage
• Actively acknowledged and accepted by the player at account creation - before any deposit was made
• Applied consistently and exactly as written
The Fair Gambling Codex itself places significant emphasis on transparency and informed consent. We have met both standards fully. The player had every opportunity to review the Terms and Conditions before choosing to register and deposit.
5. A FAIR CLASSIFICATION SHOULD REFLECT THE FACTS
We are not an operator that hides rules, applies them selectively, or introduces conditions after the fact. We are a licensed, regulated operator that publishes its rules clearly and applies them consistently and equally to all players.
We would respectfully suggest that the classification "Against Fair Gambling" should be reserved for operators who act deceptively, apply hidden rules, or violate their own published terms, not for operators who apply clearly disclosed, lawfully published conditions that a player has explicitly and actively agreed to.
We value our relationship with Casino Guru and the important role your platform plays in the industry.
We simply ask that the full context of this case - the scoped and temporary nature of Rule 9.2, our platform’s compliance with the Codex’s own €10,000 withdrawal standard, our full regulatory compliance, and the player’s informed consent - be given fair and complete consideration before any final classification is made.
We remain available for further dialogue and look forward to your response.
Kind regards,
Ritzo Casino Representative