Thats me done with Intercasino

[Janek12]

That's not correct. The player had a session with zero win and 14 no-win. There is nothing unusual at all in such a session. In Pai-Gow the probability of a no-win is 71%, meaning that 0,8% of all sessions with 14 bets will be without a winning bet.

Mr. erp1, if I should response to your comment in your manner I would have to write: That's not correct. (Sorry to make fun of you, but it seems to me you were asking for it. )
I agree with KasinoKing; you merged ties and losses into one category; you are probably right that the chances of a tie OR a loss occurring (i.e. the chances of no win) are 71% but having 11 losses in 14 hands is something quite different. I am no mathematician but common sense tells me that the chances of 11 losses occurring in a row, with no win in between, expressed as a percentage, must be something like 1/3 multiplied eleven times (multiplied by 100 to express it in %). And with the 3 ties in between, the chances of this particular sequence occurring are actually even somewhat lower, IMO.

[chuchu59]

Always tread with caution when you play intercasino(crypto) table/card games. The baccarat and BJ games are the most streaky. I once lost 10 games in a row playing baccarat and always placing the bet on the banker. Not being a sore loser but just to test the statistics, I logged off the table after each game and immediately re-entered the same table with less than 15 secs each time. I observed that the statistics (past results) were entirely different each time. Many Baccarat players use the stats as reference for placing bets so I asked support why this was so. They were unable to give any sort of valid answer which does show that either the software is still undeveloped or that the game is rig###.

[erp1]

Maybe (?) but the point wasn't so much he didn't have a win in 14 hands, but that he had 11 losses.
That is statistically much more unlikely.

We expect to tie in 41% of our hands, but had only 3 ties. The probability of only 3 ties out of 14 hands is 11%. It's correct that if we choose not to estimate the probability of lack of winning hands (as I did), but in stead choose to estimate the probability of loosing hands, we get a different and more unlikely result. We expekt to loose 30% of our hands. The probability of 11 losses or more out of 14 hands is 0,025%.

What happened here is that we have a result that may look unlikely, but statistically just is the combined effect of a session where we happened to have both few wins (in fact no wins) and few ties.

It's completely natural with such sessions. We meet them all the time. It's definitely frustrating when it happens.

The only solution is not to panic and avoid to try to win back what is lost by increasing the size of the bets. And secondly: remember only play with money you can afford to loose.

[AussieDave]

The only solution is not to panic and avoid to try to win back what is lost by increasing the size of the bets. And secondly: remember only play with money you can afford to loose.

Some excellent advice that imho is worth its weight in gold

[steadman]

Hey, as the OP I openly admitted to increasing the size of the bets. I merely posted this because at the time I decided I didn't want to play at IC anymore and posting this was (in my own way) a way of defining it in my mind. I had a bad run. I played 14 hands and posted what happened.

I play poker. Poker is by definition a slow-burn game - you play well and can grind out a nice profit. I am a rational person BUT I get tempted to the casino because of the great bonus offers and it is easily accessible from the poker site (I asked IC to bar me from the casino but I could only opt-out of the whole package).

For months I have played the bonus at IC with Pai-Gow and Solitaire and have never had a winning session. I probably deserve it but this final casino session was the last straw. In my mind, I expected to lose and I did. I increased the bets because seeing as I was less than $50 into a $2.5K req I didnt want to spend hours grinding and slowly losing - if "they" wanted my money they might as well take it. I am therefore by default a bad bonus player (but, hey, at least I'm not an abuser).