All casino cases
SHERLOCK CASE FILE · CASINO
MX
Max Casino
The old casino closed. A different MaxCasino appeared years later.
HISTORICAL MAX CASINO CLOSED INVICTA COMPANY SIGNAL SUPPORTED 2 HISTORICAL ACQUISITION FRONTS CURRENT NAMESAKE SUCCESSION UNPROVEN LAST CHECKED 26 AUG 2026
CASE LIFECYCLECLOSEDCLOSED · EXACT SHUTDOWN DATE UNRESOLVED
CURRENT OPERATORNO VERIFIED CURRENT OPERATORHISTORICAL CORPORATE ROLES REMAIN SEPARATE
CURRENT LICENCENO VERIFIED CURRENT LICENCENO ACTIVE LICENCE STATE PUBLISHED
CURRENT SAME-NAME PRODUCTMaxCasino.ioSUCCESSION UNVERIFIED
SHERLOCK SCORENOT YET PUBLISHEDMethodology is not live.
CASE ASSESSMENT
Sherlock verdict
The old casino is closed; the current same-name product is a separate node until succession is proved.
There are two MaxCasino stories on the public web.
The first is the old Max Casino at `maxcasino.com`.
Historical records describe it as a Playtech casino associated with Invicta Networks N.V., marketed through Gambling Attack, active during the early-to-mid 2010s and now closed. Latvia's gambling regulator blocked maxcasino.com as an unlicensed interactive gambling site in March 2015. Historical complaint records show player accounts and withdrawals were still being handled later in 2015.
The second is a current casino using `maxcasino.io`.
Its own current footer identifies Green Champions Leader S.R.L., Costa Rica registration 3-102-917157, and states that MaxCasino and the related rights belong to that company. Current casino databases date this product to 2025 and identify its affiliate programme as MaxCasino Partners.
They use essentially the same name.
That is not enough to make them the same business.
Sherlock found no reviewed acquisition, trademark assignment, player-account migration, affiliate migration or corporate transaction linking the old Invicta-era maxcasino.com to the current Green Champions Leader product.
Our finding is therefore:
SAME NAME · DIFFERENT STACK · SUCCESSION UNPROVEN
The old Max Casino remains a historical case. The current .io site is a separate current namesake unless evidence proves otherwise.
HISTORICAL CORPORATE LAYER
The historical Max Casino
CLOSED HISTORICAL CASINOMax Casinomaxcasino.comCLOSED · EXACT CLOSURE DATE OPEN
HISTORICALLY ATTRIBUTED TOsupported high historical
HISTORICAL COMPANY SIGNALInvicta Networks N.V.Curaçao · 123787SUPPORTED-HIGH · HISTORICALEXACT OPERATOR / OWNER ROLEUNRESOLVED
Invicta company attribution does not establish an exact operator/licence role; do not inherit Brivio roles from sibling brands.
HISTORICAL PRODUCT SIGNALPlaytechNOT AN OPERATOR EDGE
Current archival data from AskGamblers still identifies the closed Max Casino as:
- website:
maxcasino.com; - company: Invicta Networks N.V.;
- affiliate programme: Gambling Attack;
- software: Playtech.
This is a strong historical company association, but it does not answer every legal-role question.
Sherlock did not capture an original Max Casino Terms document showing whether Invicta itself was the casino operator, licence holder, owner or a combination of roles.
That distinction matters because other casinos in the same historical ecosystem used Brivio Limited and Invicta Networks N.V. in separate operator/licensor roles.
We will not copy that structure onto Max without Max-specific evidence.
Invicta association: supported-high.
Brivio operator role: not established for Max Casino.
HISTORICAL LICENCE BOUNDARY
The licence exists in the historical record. The number does not.
≠ EXACT CERTIFICATE
Do not inherit 8048/JAZ2012-009 from ICE/VulkanVegas without Max-specific evidence.
Historical databases describe Max Casino as Curaçao licensed.
What Sherlock did not recover is a Max-specific original certificate or first-party Terms page identifying the exact licence number.
That means we do not automatically assign Invicta's historical 8048/JAZ2012-009 licence to Max just because it appears in our ICE and VulkanVegas investigations.
Historical Curaçao licence: supported.
Exact Max Casino licence ID: unresolved.
That is a smaller claim, but it is the one the evidence supports.
PRIMARY REGULATOR RECORD
Latvia independently recorded maxcasino.com
HISTORICAL REGULATORY ACTION · LATVIAmaxcasino.comsupport@maxcasino.com
verified primary regulatorLatvia-specific blocking for unlicensed interactive gambling; not a global ban and not proof of no offshore licence.
A primary regulator record gives us a firmer historical date.
Latvia's Lotteries and Gambling Supervisory Inspection lists:
maxcasino.com · support@maxcasino.com · 23 March 2015
among blocked unlicensed interactive-gambling websites.
This establishes a Latvia-specific regulatory action against access to the domain.
It does not mean Max Casino had no offshore licence elsewhere, and it is not a global prohibition.
HISTORICAL AFFILIATE PROGRAMME
Gambling Attack directly sold Max Casino traffic
HISTORICAL CASINOMax Casinomaxcasino.comCLOSED
HISTORICAL AFFILIATE PROGRAMverified historical
HISTORICAL ACQUISITION FRONTGambling Attackclosed historicalverified historical direct programmeONE OLD CASINO · TWO ACQUISITION FRONTS · RELATIONSHIP UNRESOLVED
No ownership, sub-programme, replacement or simultaneous-operation conclusion is established between Gambling Attack and Welcome Partners.
PROGRAMME-TO-PROGRAMME RELATIONSHIP · UNRESOLVEDMax Casino historical reviewNew Casino Brands at Gambling AttackMaxCasino historical social profile mirrorGambling Attack Network Case
The historical affiliate relationship is much clearer than the exact licence number.
On 8 August 2014, Gambling Attack's own representative publicly recruited affiliates for exactly three casinos:
CrystalCasino
MaxCasino
IceCasino
The programme advertised RevShare, individually arranged CPA/hybrid models, weekly payouts and its own reporting/API layer.
MaxCasino's preserved social feed also repeatedly amplified Gambling Attack material.
So this relationship is not inferred from sister casinos:
Max Casino → Gambling Attack — VERIFIED HISTORICAL AFFILIATE PROGRAMME
SECOND ACQUISITION SIGNAL
But Gambling Attack was not the only acquisition trail
HISTORICAL CASINOMax Casinomaxcasino.comCLOSED
HISTORICAL COMMERCIAL PROGRAMME MAPPINGsupported high
HISTORICAL ACQUISITION FRONTWelcome Partnershistorical mapping current network state not reviewedsupported high historical commercial mappingONE OLD CASINO · TWO ACQUISITION FRONTS · RELATIONSHIP UNRESOLVED
No ownership, sub-programme, replacement or simultaneous-operation conclusion is established between Gambling Attack and Welcome Partners.
PROGRAMME-TO-PROGRAMME RELATIONSHIP · UNRESOLVEDWelcome Partners historical MaxCasino promotionWelcome Partners Affiliate Program ReviewMax Casino historical page
Max is the odd one out in the old three-brand Gambling Attack portfolio.
A contemporaneous publisher article dated 16 May 2014 describes actively promoting MaxCasino through Welcome Partners. Current historical WorldCasinoDirectory data also identifies Welcome Partners as Max Casino's affiliate programme, and later Welcome Partners reviews retain a special MaxCasino rule around negative affiliate balances.
That gives us a second real commercial signal:
Max Casino → Welcome Partners — SUPPORTED HISTORICAL COMMERCIAL MAPPING
But it creates a new question rather than an answer.
Was Max simultaneously distributed through two programmes?
Did one programme sit behind the other?
Did the relationship change during 2014?
Was one an internal acquisition layer and the other the public affiliate front?
We do not know.
There is no reviewed evidence that Welcome Partners owned Gambling Attack or Max Casino.
So the correct Sherlock label is:
ONE OLD CASINO · TWO ACQUISITION FRONTS · RELATIONSHIP UNRESOLVED
CLOSURE CHRONOLOGY
When did Max Casino actually close?
LIFECYCLE STATECLOSED · EXACT SHUTDOWN DATE UNRESOLVED
Do not generate Max→Crystal rebrand/successor edge from a user-observed redirect.
The casino is closed today.
The exact shutdown date is not clean.
One historical LCB user wrote in July 2014 that they had received an email saying the casino was closing.
But the public record clearly continues after that.
Players were still discussing deposits and withdrawals in early 2015. AskGamblers recorded a RUB 60,000 withdrawal dispute beginning in April 2015 and ultimately resolving after complaint escalation. Another account/comp-points dispute dates to September 2015.
Then a user comment from 23 November 2015 says the old Max link no longer opened a Playtech Max Casino and instead led to a casino called Crystal.
That is interesting, especially because Crystal Casino belonged to the same Gambling Attack portfolio.
But a user-observed redirect is not enough to publish:
Max Casino → REBRANDED_TO → Crystal Casino
There is no transaction or first-party migration notice behind that claim.
By 10 June 2016, Gambling Attack itself was being reported as non-operational.
Our closure state is therefore simple:
CLOSED
Our closure date is not:
EXACT SHUTDOWN DATE · UNRESOLVED
HISTORICAL COMPLAINT LEDGER
Withdrawal history: repeated friction, mixed outcomes
APPROX. AVG. AMOUNT$2,084
AVG. RESPONSEABOUT 2 DAYS
INTERPRETATIONMIXED OUTCOMES
RECURRING HISTORICAL WITHDRAWAL / ACCOUNT-CONTROL FRICTION · MIXED OUTCOMES
Complaint allegations are case-level historical evidence; mixed resolutions do not support a systematic non-payment conclusion.
AskGamblers currently preserves six historical complaints for the old Max Casino.
Four are resolved. Two remain unresolved.
The cases include:
- RUB 60,000 in delayed withdrawals that were ultimately paid after escalation;
- a EUR 5,000 Visa withdrawal problem that was resolved;
- a EUR 4,000 payment/verification dispute that was resolved;
- a smaller month-long withdrawal delay that was resolved;
- an unresolved EUR 80 delay;
- an unresolved RUB 80,000 account block / comp-points dispute.
The pattern is worth recording.
It is not evidence that Max Casino never paid.
Several of the most serious complaints ended with players receiving money or the dispute being closed as resolved.
Sherlock classification:
RECURRING HISTORICAL WITHDRAWAL / ACCOUNT-CONTROL FRICTION · MIXED OUTCOMES
CAPTURED HISTORICAL TERMS
What the historical payment contract looked like
SOURCE / FRESHNESS STATEhistorical directory and complaint capture original terms not captured
Historical captured terms only. No current casino contract is implied.
REPORTED PROCESSING DAYSMondayWednesdayFriday
Archived casino data describes:
- withdrawal limits of USD 5,000 per day;
- USD 10,000 per week;
- USD 20,000 per month;
- pending periods of 24–72 hours;
- e-wallet withdrawals around 24–48 hours;
- card withdrawals around two to five days;
- no weekend cashouts.
Historical user records also repeatedly mention processing withdrawals only on Monday, Wednesday and Friday.
One complaint reproduces old contract language allowing broad action where the casino suspected comp-points or promotional abuse.
We did not recover the original first-party Terms page containing that clause.
These are therefore captured historical contractual signals, not current rules and not a reconstructed first-party contract.
HISTORICAL PROMO SNAPSHOT
A small 2014 Bonus Autopsy
2014 SNAPSHOT
HISTORICAL PROMO SNAPSHOT · 2014
Not a current MaxCasino.io offer and not a universal historical contract.
Historical LCB material preserves a small no-deposit promotion of roughly EUR/USD 10 with unusually low wagering around 3x.
It is useful as a snapshot of what Max Casino was advertising in 2014.
It tells us nothing about the current MaxCasino.io product.
HISTORICAL PROMO SNAPSHOT · NOT A CURRENT OFFER
CURRENT NAMESAKE
Then MaxCasino appeared again
maxcasino.com
HISTORICAL COMPANY SIGNALInvicta Networks N.V.
HISTORICAL ACQUISITION FRONTSGambling AttackWelcome Partners
SAME NAMESUCCESSION
NOT ESTABLISHEDNO TRANSACTION / IP / ACCOUNT BRIDGE
NOT ESTABLISHEDNO TRANSACTION / IP / ACCOUNT BRIDGE
maxcasino.io / maxcasino25.io
CURRENT COMPANY DISCLOSUREGreen Champions Leader S.R.L.Costa Rica · 3-102-917157
CURRENT AFFILIATE PROGRAMMEMaxCasino Partners
CURRENT_NAMESAKE_SAME_NAME_AS · SUCCESSION UNVERIFIED
Same name does not create rebrand, acquisition, account migration, trademark assignment or corporate succession.
Current MaxCasino site/footerCurrent MaxCasino.io reviewMaxCasino.io reviewMax Casino PartnersTerms & Conditions
There is now an active MaxCasino product at maxcasino.io.
In fact, visiting that address currently redirects to `maxcasino25.io`.
The current footer is unusually useful because it identifies the company itself:
Green Champions Leader S.R.L.
Costa Rica
registration 3-102-917157
and says MaxCasino and related rights belong to Green Champions Leader S.R.L.
Current AskGamblers independently lists:
- established: 2025;
- company: Green Champions Leader S.R.L.;
- affiliate programme: MaxCasino Partners.
This is clearly a current MaxCasino identity.
What is missing is the bridge back to the old one.
CORPORATE / IP GAP
We found no bridge from Invicta to Green Champions Leader
Sherlock did not capture evidence of:
- an Invicta → Green Champions Leader sale;
- an old MaxCasino trademark assignment;
- a
maxcasino.com→maxcasino.iocorporate migration; - player-account continuity;
- historical balances moving to the new site;
- Gambling Attack affiliate accounts moving to MaxCasino Partners;
- Welcome Partners accounts moving to MaxCasino Partners;
- a formal “Max Casino is back” announcement from the historical operator.
So the two entities remain separate nodes in the graph.
Historical Max Casinomaxcasino.com
Closed
Invicta-era attribution
Gambling Attack / Welcome Partners
Current MaxCasino namesakemaxcasino.io / maxcasino25.io
Green Champions Leader S.R.L.
MaxCasino Partners
2025-era product
SUCCESSION: UNVERIFIED
CURRENT SEPARATE PROGRAMME
MaxCasino Partners belongs to the new era
CURRENT SAME-NAME PRODUCTMaxCasino.iomaxcasino.io / maxcasino25.ioSEPARATE CURRENT ENTITY
AFFILIATE PROGRAMEDGE SUBJECT: CURRENT NAMESAKE
CURRENT AFFILIATE PROGRAMMEMaxCasino PartnersVERIFIED CURRENT
NO OLD-PROGRAMME SUCCESSION OR MIGRATION EDGE
The new programme has its own live site and current Terms.
It markets Revenue Share, CPA and Hybrid models, uses a separate current tracking/sign-up system and publishes its own current affiliate rules.
That proves:
current MaxCasino → MaxCasino Partners
It does not prove:
Gambling Attack → BECAME → MaxCasino Partners
or:
Welcome Partners → BECAME → MaxCasino Partners
Those old and new commercial systems remain separate until evidence links them.
THIRD-PARTY ENTITY CONTAMINATION
Current databases are already mixing the two Max Casinos
2025/crypto/current product attributes combined with Invicta Networks N.V. ownership claim
Max Casino Netherlands pageInvicta/Playtech historical attributes combined with a 2025 founding year and modern crypto bonus
MAX Casino pageCURRENT FIRST-PARTY COMPARISONTHIRD-PARTY ENTITY / DATA CONTAMINATION
Current MaxCasino site/footerDirectory mixing is not evidence that Invicta relaunched MaxCasino in 2025.
This case has another useful forensic layer.
Some current third-party pages combine facts from incompatible eras.
maxcasino.com.nl, for example, says the casino was founded in 2025 and promotes a modern crypto-style offer while identifying Invicta Networks N.V. as owner.
DappGambl similarly combines:
- Invicta Networks N.V.;
- a 2025 founding year;
- historical Playtech/payment/support attributes;
- a modern crypto bonus headline.
But the actual current MaxCasino footer identifies Green Champions Leader S.R.L.
This is not proof that Invicta relaunched Max in 2025.
It is proof that modern web databases can merge an old brand record with a new same-name product.
Sherlock classification:
THIRD-PARTY ENTITY / DATA CONTAMINATION
That is exactly why brand name alone cannot be the primary key in our graph.
TECHNICAL RESIDUE
The old domain still exists technically
HISTORICAL DOMAINmaxcasino.comCASINO CLOSED · TECHNICAL SIGNALS OBSERVED
SECONDARY NETWORK TELEMETRY
maxcasino.com currently resolves to 88.208.1.15.
DNS/IP presence does not establish active gambling operation, current licence, ownership or sister brands.
Current network telemetry still resolves maxcasino.com to an IP address.
That does not make the casino active.
Sherlock did not independently capture a current first-party casino operation on the old .com.
CLOSED CASINO ≠ DEAD DNS
Infrastructure residue cannot establish a current operator, current licence or sister-brand relationship.
BRAND RIGHTS
Brand IP: another open file
HISTORICAL ONLINE BRAND RIGHTSUNRESOLVEDNO HOLDER / APPLICANT EDGE PUBLISHED
no-reviewed-assignment-captured · Do not attach Nevada land-based MAX CASINO trademarks to the historical online brand.
We did not capture a reliable trademark record establishing ownership of the historical online Max Casino name.
Searches are polluted by unrelated land-based casinos using MAX CASINO, particularly in Nevada.
Those marks are not attached to this case.
We also did not capture a trademark assignment connecting the historical Invicta-era brand to Green Champions Leader.
Historical online Max Casino brand IP: unresolved.
THREE SHERLOCK FLAGS
Three things Sherlock would flag
1. Do not merge the old and new MaxCasino records.
The same name sits on two materially different public corporate/commercial stacks.
2. The old casino has two historical affiliate trails.
Gambling Attack is directly verified; Welcome Partners is separately supported. Their relationship is still open.
3. The closure and licence details are less precise than the modern web makes them look.
The casino is closed and Curaçao is part of the historical record, but neither an exact closure date nor a Max-specific licence number has been recovered.
UNRESOLVED EVIDENCE
What we could not confirm
- 01
the original Max Casino Terms;
OPEN LEAD - 02
the exact historical Curaçao licence number;
OPEN LEAD - 03
whether Brivio Limited had a Max-specific operator/payment role;
OPEN LEAD - 04
the exact launch date;
OPEN LEAD - 05
the exact closure date;
OPEN LEAD - 06
the reason for the reported Max→Crystal link behaviour in late 2015;
OPEN LEAD - 07
how Gambling Attack and Welcome Partners related commercially;
OPEN LEAD - 08
the historical online MAX CASINO trademark owner;
OPEN LEAD - 09
whether an actual sale of the historical brand occurred;
OPEN LEAD - 10
any corporate/IP/account succession to Green Champions Leader / maxcasino.io;
OPEN LEAD - 11
the incorporated legal entity behind MaxCasino Partners.
OPEN LEAD
CASE CONCLUSION
Sherlock conclusion
The old Max Casino belongs to the historical Invicta/Gambling Attack era.
It is closed.
The current MaxCasino belongs to a different visible legal and commercial stack led by Green Champions Leader S.R.L. and MaxCasino Partners.
The public internet increasingly mixes those records together.
Sherlock does not.
SAME NAME. DIFFERENT STACK. SUCCESSION UNPROVEN.
SOURCE LEDGER
Evidence used for this case
22 source records · primary evidence visually outranks corroborative inputs.
Primary/regulator and first-party evidence includes Latvia's official blocked-site record, Gambling Attack's historical programme post, the current MaxCasino footer and current MaxCasino Partners materials. Historical/archive evidence includes AskGamblers, WorldCasinoDirectory/LCB, Welcome Partners publisher material, complaint records and technical/domain observations. Every historical, supported and unresolved relationship is labelled separately in the structured case file.
Regulator / government1 RECORDS
Max Casino first-party4 RECORDS
M03
first party historical affiliate
New Casino Brands at Gambling Attack
affiliatefix.com
SUPPORTS
HISTORICAL AFFILIATE PROGRAM · VERIFIED-HISTORICAL
M13
first party current namesake
Current MaxCasino site/footer
maxcasino.io
SUPPORTS
CURRENT NAMESAKE SAME NAME AS · VERIFIED-NAME-REUSE-SUCCESSION-UNVERIFIED
CURRENT COMPANY DISCLOSED AS · VERIFIED-CURRENT-FIRST-PARTY
M16
first party current affiliate
Max Casino Partners
partner.maxcasino.io
SUPPORTS
AFFILIATE PROGRAM · VERIFIED-CURRENT
M17
first party current affiliate contract
Terms & Conditions
partner.maxcasino.io
SUPPORTS
AFFILIATE PROGRAM · VERIFIED-CURRENT
Corporate / corroborative3 RECORDS
Independent / complaint / corroborative14 RECORDS
M01
secondary historical database
Max Casino historical review
askgamblers.com
SUPPORTS
HISTORICALLY ATTRIBUTED TO · SUPPORTED-HIGH
HISTORICAL AFFILIATE PROGRAM · VERIFIED-HISTORICAL
M04
secondary social archive
MaxCasino historical social profile mirror
twstalker.com
SUPPORTS
HISTORICAL AFFILIATE PROGRAM · VERIFIED-HISTORICAL
M06
secondary affiliate history
Welcome Partners Affiliate Program Review
madcpa.pro
SUPPORTS
HISTORICAL COMMERCIAL PROGRAMME MAPPING · SUPPORTED-HIGH
M07
secondary historical database
Max Casino historical page
online.worldcasinodirectory.com
SUPPORTS
HISTORICAL COMMERCIAL PROGRAMME MAPPING · SUPPORTED-HIGH
M08
third party complaint ledger
Max Casino complaints
askgamblers.com
M09
third party complaint
No payouts after more than a month
askgamblers.com
M10
third party complaint
Locked account, comp points abuse allegation
askgamblers.com
M11
third party complaint
Delayed payment
askgamblers.com
M12
third party complaint
Visa not working for withdrawal
askgamblers.com
M14
secondary current database
Current MaxCasino.io review
askgamblers.com
SUPPORTS
CURRENT NAMESAKE SAME NAME AS · VERIFIED-NAME-REUSE-SUCCESSION-UNVERIFIED
AFFILIATE PROGRAM · VERIFIED-CURRENT
M15
secondary current review
MaxCasino.io review
casino.guru
M20
secondary infrastructure
88.208.1.0/24 IP range
ipinfo.io
M21
internal reviewed case
Gambling Attack Network Case
github.com
SUPPORTS
HISTORICAL AFFILIATE PROGRAM · VERIFIED-HISTORICAL
M22
internal reviewed case
Invicta Networks N.V. Company Case
github.com
SUPPORTS
HISTORICALLY ATTRIBUTED TO · SUPPORTED-HIGH
Connected investigations
Published files connected by reviewed structured relationships. A link reveals evidence already in the graph; it does not create a new relationship.
GA
Network
Gambling Attack
gamblingattack.comHISTORICAL AFFILIATE PROGRAMverified historical
Open connected file 
Network
WelcomePartners
welcome.partnersHISTORICAL AFFILIATE PROGRAMverified historical
Open connected file IN
Company
Invicta Networks N.V.
Curaçao · 123787HISTORICALLY ATTRIBUTED TOsupported high
Open connected file IN
Company
Invicta Networks N.V.
Curaçao · 123787HISTORICAL COMPANY ATTRIBUTIONsupported high historical
Open connected file