Currently, it is unknown whether treatment outcomes derived from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of cognitive–behavioural therapy (CBT) for problem gamblers still hold when applied to patients seen in routine practice. Thus, data from an RCT of cognitive therapy versus exposure therapy for problem gambling versus patients of a gambling help service were compared. Assessments of problem gambling severity, psychosocial impairment, and alcohol use were undertaken at baseline and post-treatment and evaluated within a counterfactual framework. Findings showed that the contrast between routine CBT for pokies and horse betting had a significant effect, indicative of a 62% lower gambling urge score if routine CBT recipients had all been horse/track betters opposed to gambling with “pokies.” However, the majority of contrasts indicated therapeutic outcomes achieved in routine CBT treatments were of equivalent robustness relative to RCT conditions. The present findings infer routine practice treatment outcomes are as efficacious as those generated in RCT contexts.