question Star ratings for bookies mean bugger all — what do you lot actually check?

Been around the Aussie books long enough now that I barely look at those big shiny scores anymore. A site can get talked up like it's the second coming, then you jump on and the app lags during a busy Saturday arvo, multis get restricted quick, or you finally jag a decent win and suddenly the ID checks turn into a whole drama.

For me the stuff that actually matters is pretty boring compared to the sales fluff — how fast they pay, whether the odds hold up on NRL/AFL compared to the rest, if same game multis are priced fairly, and whether support is any good when something goes sideways. Bonus bets are nice, sure, but if the bookie is a pain once real money is involved, I'm out.

Keen to hear how everyone else judges a betting site these days. What makes a review useful to you, and what do you skip straight past? Also interested in which books get heaps of praise but haven't been that flash once you've actually used them for a few months.

Chuck in the good, the bad, the ones you'd happily use again, whatever. Proper user feedback is worth more than another generic 9.6 out of 10 if you ask me.

I wouldn't toss the ratings out entirely. If the person doing the writeup actually mentions stake limits, verification hassles and promo terms in plain English, the score at the top is just a quick filter. Forum comments help, but they can be all emotion after one bad beat too.

100% on checking how they act after you've been there a while. Old writeups catch heaps of people out, a book can look sweet in a review then they tweak the app or support falls off and it's a different experience. I usually jump to the newest forum posts first now, saves a lot of mucking around.