Probability of Winning ZERO hands in 6 deck shoe
If there were a black cloud phenomenon, that would be me. I'm consistently a flat better, maybe add a few chips if winning. I never win. I like it when the wizard says things like you might win in the short term but of course we all lose in the long-term, I'm a perfect example of the perfect statistic. I consistently lose all the time.
Now that I'm done whining, here is the question. Twice in the past two months, I have begun a shoe in high limits, six-deck shoe, no other players the table, playing one hand, stand on soft 17 and surrender available, and I have proceeded to lose every single hand in the shoe. You read that correctly, I lost every hand, not a push but actually lost every hand playing perfect basic strategy. What are the odds of that happening? How do the odds increase per next hand? The first time it happened, they had just done a card change, and the supervisor took note because they had never seen it before and even called surveillance to verify that the deck of cards that had been replaced weren't fouled up. again me being logical, even if they were fouled up they would also be fouled up for me and us I should also be able to win or lose as much as the dealer would. It happened again tonight. same exact scenario, I lost every single hand in the entire shoe. No pushes nothing. So again what are the odds of losing every single hand, and what are the odds of doing that twice?
Edit - unless there is like no penetration
Quote: DoctorPhilIt did, twice in a couple months. Thanks though for that helpful response.
Rough estimate 500 billion to 1. So that happening twice to the same person, come on.
If it’s happened once in history, I’d be shocked.
With 1 player at the table the dealer averages using 2.78 cards per round and the player 2.74.
therefore you are saying you lost about 43 hands in a row.
For a basic strategy player, if the shoe stopped at about 208 cards into the shoe, it would be roughly 38 hands played for one player vs dealer (playing one hand per game).
If the shoe stopped at about 260 cards into the shoe, it would be roughly 48 hands played for one player vs dealer.
The chance of a player losing 1 hand is about 49.09%, from the site below (once on the page scroll down to the "Summarized Net Win in Blackjack" table).
https://wizardofodds.com/games/blackjack/appendix/4/
The chance of losing 38 hands in a row is about 1/552,414,131,902 (0.4909^38)
The chance of losing 48 hands in a row is about 1/679,726,902,915,061 (0.4909^48)
Note: The above are just estimates for a player having zero wins and/or pushes in one shoe.
Those are some "hard to believe" numbers.
is this for real (as I am a pretty GULLIBLE person)?
If this happened to you at any casino. I would consider not playing there at all or playing a different game (maybe try the lottery).
The chance of winning the Mega Millions is 1/302,575,350.
In other words, your chance of winning the Mega Millions is about 1825 times more likely (compared to losing 38 out of 38 hands at blackjack).
I "suggest" you go buy a lotto ticket.
----------------------------
Update: I wasted 40+ minutes on this post, because when I started writing this reply there were no other posts (I started writing this reply at about 9 pm) : )
Also, you should have got them to spread all the cards on the table, if they don't normally do so, especially before the 2nd game.
One way I could "believe" that this happened to a basic strategy player, is if there were no 5's to Kings in the shoe.
----------------------------
Update 2 (about 11 PM):
For another comparison, you are about 345,258 times more likely to die from an impact by a "meteorite, asteroid, or comet" in a "lifetime", when compared to losing 38 out of 38 hands in BJ.
Note: the chance of a being killed in a "lifetime" is about 1,600,000 (according to the link below).
https://news.nationalgeographic.com/2016/02/160209-meteorite-death-india-probability-odds/
--------------------------
Update 3 (about 1150 pm, last update in this post, I "promise")
If you played 38 hands per shoe @ 100 shoes per month for 50 years, the chance of this happening for "at least one shoe" would be about 1 in 9.2 million.
By the way, the win rate at BJ is 43% (actually 42.4%), not 50% or 49% as has been quoted above, so all of the numbers that have been provided are probably slightly inflated.
Quote: gordonm888If this did happen to you (and twice, OMG) , then it would constitute proof that the game is rigged in some way. That is far more probable than this was just bad luck.
By the way, the win rate at BJ is 43% (actually 42.4%), not 50% or 49% as has been quoted above, so all of the numbers that have been provided are probably slightly inflated.
According to the wizard, the chances of losing a blackjack hand is 49.1%
So in calculating the OPs chances of losing 43 straight hands , 49.1% is the number to use.
OP said he didn’t push any hands either.Quote: gordonm888If this did happen to you (and twice, OMG) , then it would constitute proof that the game is rigged in some way. That is far more probable than this was just bad luck.
By the way, the win rate at BJ is 43% (actually 42.4%), not 50% or 49% as has been quoted above, so all of the numbers that have been provided are probably slightly inflated.
Quote: DoctorPhilI am a super logical person, I know every hand and card is independent or the next, etc, etc.
If there were a black cloud phenomenon, that would be me. I'm consistently a flat better, maybe add a few chips if winning. I never win. I like it when the wizard says things like you might win in the short term but of course we all lose in the long-term, I'm a perfect example of the perfect statistic. I consistently lose all the time.
Now that I'm done whining, here is the question. Twice in the past two months, I have begun a shoe in high limits, six-deck shoe, no other players the table, playing one hand, stand on soft 17 and surrender available, and I have proceeded to lose every single hand in the shoe. You read that correctly, I lost every hand, not a push but actually lost every hand playing perfect basic strategy. What are the odds of that happening? How do the odds increase per next hand? The first time it happened, they had just done a card change, and the supervisor took note because they had never seen it before and even called surveillance to verify that the deck of cards that had been replaced weren't fouled up. again me being logical, even if they were fouled up they would also be fouled up for me and us I should also be able to win or lose as much as the dealer would. It happened again tonight. same exact scenario, I lost every single hand in the entire shoe. No pushes nothing. So again what are the odds of losing every single hand, and what are the odds of doing that twice?
Was this online or at a brick and mortar casino? Where is this located I want to stay away
I realize you need some constants. I'll never know exactly where cut card was placed, it's high limits so it's usually a bit less than outside. Let's assume 78 cards cut off. Let's also assume the lower end of average. I recall the first time many multi card hands.
I don't care whether I am believer or not. If it makes you answer the question from a statistics point of view, you can assume I'm lying.
Quote: DoctorPhilI know this doesn't matter, but I stated it was in a two month time period, not back to back. In addition it was a brick and mortar. As stated the first time garnered so much attention they called surveillance to review the cards that had just been placed.
I realize you need some constants. I'll never know exactly where cut card was placed, it's high limits so it's usually a bit less than outside. Let's assume 78 cards cut off. Let's also assume the lower end of average. I recall the first time many multi card hands.
I don't care whether I am believer or not. If it makes you answer the question from a statistics point of view, you can assume I'm lying.
My personal record is 16 in a row at Pai Gow. (I had a bunch of pushes).
The forum has to decide if it is more likely that you actually lost 40 or so hands in a row, with not even a single push, and then did it again, or that you 1. "mis-remembered, or 2. are just making up a story.
There was another member who claimed to have rolled 18 yo's in a row. If you were a member here, how would you respond to him?
By the way, Dr. Fill is a Crossword Puzzling Computer. I'm guessing you are a Doctor named Phil?
On page one, someone fid give you the probability already.Quote: DoctorPhilI know this doesn't matter, but I stated it was in a two month time period, not back to back. In addition it was a brick and mortar. As stated the first time garnered so much attention they called surveillance to review the cards that had just been placed.
I realize you need some constants. I'll never know exactly where cut card was placed, it's high limits so it's usually a bit less than outside. Let's assume 78 cards cut off. Let's also assume the lower end of average. I recall the first time many multi card hands.
I don't care whether I am believer or not. If it makes you answer the question from a statistics point of view, you can assume I'm lying.
Quote: DoctorPhilI know this doesn't matter, but I stated it was in a two month time period, not back to back. In addition it was a brick and mortar. As stated the first time garnered so much attention they called surveillance to review the cards that had just been placed.
I realize you need some constants. I'll never know exactly where cut card was placed, it's high limits so it's usually a bit less than outside. Let's assume 78 cards cut off. Let's also assume the lower end of average. I recall the first time many multi card hands.
I don't care whether I am believer or not. If it makes you answer the question from a statistics point of view, you can assume I'm lying.
I believe you but we need to figure out a little bit more so do you remember if there was an automatic card shuffler? Was it a continuous card shuffler? Hand shuffle?
I have been slowly analyzing and reconstructing the way these shufflers randomize the cards from videos on YouTube specifically the “slot lady” if you are curious and need some kind of contrasting data you can take a look at her blackjack sessions and report back
The only realistic way it happens once is cheating. Then to go back and do it again?
Quote: NathanCome on guys, let's give him the benefit of the doubt. I'm giving it to him. Stranger things have happened than what he said in his OP. :)
You’re right. This one member years ago pretended to be a guy that fell for a female member who was a spammer. He was so embarrassed. Then this guy made plans to meet up with another member and surprise him in real life that he was in face a she.
No reason not to believe someone who claims they had a 1/5,000,0000,000 occurrence happen to them twice in a month.
Quote: PokerGrinderYou’re right. This one member years ago pretended to be a guy that fell for a female member who was a spammer. He was so embarrassed. Then this guy made plans to meet up with another member and surprise him in real life that he was in face a she.
No reason not to believe someone who claims they had a 1/5,000,0000,000 occurrence happen to them twice in a month.
Oh crap! O.O I kind of walked right into that one inadvertently. ;) Oh well that gives more credence to what I said about stranger things happening
;)
Quote: NathanCome on guys, let's give him the benefit of the doubt. I'm giving it to him. Stranger things have happened than what he said in his OP. :)
Name one.
Quote: FinsRuleName one.
Poker Grinder named a BIG one. ;) A really Whopper one. ;)
Quote: PokerGrinderYou’re right. This one member years ago pretended to be a guy that fell for a female member who was a spammer. He was so embarrassed. Then this guy made plans to meet up with another member and surprise him in real life that he was in face a she.
No reason not to believe someone who claims they had a 1/5,000,0000,000 occurrence happen to them twice in a month.
So you are saying there is a chance this isn't BS?
Having been called out in my AP Nightmare thread as a liar multiple times when I know I was telling the truth I can attest to how frustrating it is
Now lets all agree that:
A) there is a possibility this person is telling the truth
And B) its mathematically impossible in an UNRIGGED deck
The only way both can be true above is if the casino cheated.
Therefore to consider this new member an out and out liar this forum must adhere to the belief that it is impossible for a casino to cheat!
So what are the statistical odds on that one? (Btw the OP seems to be intent on proving the casino cheated hence asking for the math help. Not to be called a liar. I see no reason anyone would want the latter)
Here are the real questions now that the math has been done?
Was this casino in the USA and/or in a highly regulated jurisdiction? Landbased or on a boat?
How high were your hands? You already stated it was high limits. If your limits were high thst might make more believable a casino would rig a deck. If it is in a small casino in a small country or on a boat it makes it even more believable
Quote: darkozIm not attacking the math here but why is everyone on this forun so quick to label a person a liar?
Welllll..... he said it happened TWICE!!!! So the 500 billion to one odds happened twice!!!!!! I am pretty sure he said it was in a high limit room, so a B and M casino.
Is it possible I am defaming a guy who is absolutely telling the truth? Yes, there is a one in a gazillion chance it did happen.
I believe a casino can cheat, but I don't think any casino would cheat to win 40 hands in a row! Do you?
(If this is an online casino and I misinterpreted the OP's post, then I apologize.)
The only way it’s possible is if the casino cheated. The op didn’t really say that was happening. He said he was unlucky.
If he thought they were cheating, why go back and have it happen again???
That’d be fun to rig a deck to have the player lose every hand. If they made one strategy mistake, it would ruin everything.
So you’d need to make the hands all easy decisions but nothing too suspicious.
Quote: FinsRuleDarkoz, I agree.
The only way it’s possible is if the casino cheated. The op didn’t really say that was happening. He said he was unlucky.
If he thought they were cheating, why go back and have it happen again???
That’d be fun to rig a deck to have the player lose every hand. If they made one strategy mistake, it would ruin everything.
So you’d need to make the hands all easy decisions but nothing too suspicious.
While he clearly thought the first time suspicious he does not have the math skills to do the exact odds (neither do I BTW) so he may have chalked it up to a once in a lifetime occurrence
He is asking how its possible to have happened a second time. So the suspicion you ask about is being raised
As for returning to that same casino? Again we need to know where this happened
In Vegas? Astronomically against return to the same casino when he has a hundred other choices
Is it in spodunk idaho and the next casino over is 100 miles away (and where a high roller might make them queasy enough or greedy enough to cheat) and you might see why he would still return
For that matter is it in an Indian casino on US soil should be an question raised. Where such suspicions of cheating will be answered in tribal court
what else did the OP say?Quote: FinsRuleThe op didn’t really say that was happening. He said he was unlucky.
there is one wrong assumption or wrong fact.Quote: DoctorPhil"I am a super logical person, I know every hand and card is independent or the next, etc, etc.
confirmation biasQuote: DoctorPhilIf there were a black cloud phenomenon, that would be me.
I'm consistently a flat better, maybe add a few chips if winning.
I never win.
sure. losses ALL the time. perfect example. sureQuote: DoctorPhilI like it when the wizard says things like you might win in the short term but of course we all lose in the long-term, I'm a perfect example of the perfect statistic. I consistently lose all the time.
come on DocQuote: DoctorPhilNow that I'm done whining, here is the question. Twice in the past two months, I have begun a shoe in high limits, six-deck shoe, no other players the table, playing one hand, stand on soft 17 and surrender available, and I have proceeded to lose every single hand in the shoe."
how many hands played in each shoe U estimate?
any double down and split hands you remember?
too much to drink while playing?
How many times per shoe did you surrender?
surrender can be a good play.
some have it so easy
lose all the time
and still plays??
Quote: 7crapswhat else did the OP say?
there is one wrong assumption or wrong fact.
confirmation biassure. losses ALL the time. perfect example. sureQuote: DoctorPhilI like it when the wizard says things like you might win in the short term but of course we all lose in the long-term, I'm a perfect example of the perfect statistic. I consistently lose all the time.
come on Doc
how many hands played in each shoe U estimate?
any double down and split hands you remember?
too much to drink while playing?
How many times per shoe did you surrender?
surrender can be a good play.
some have it so easy
lose all the time
and still plays??
Good points
Confirmation bias against himself may be a possibility as well
But lets get all the questions answered as to where this took place before we rule out casino cheating
Quote: darkozQuote: 7crapswhat else did the OP say?
there is one wrong assumption or wrong fact.
confirmation biassure. losses ALL the time. perfect example. sureQuote: DoctorPhilI like it when the wizard says things like you might win in the short term but of course we all lose in the long-term, I'm a perfect example of the perfect statistic. I consistently lose all the time.
come on Doc
how many hands played in each shoe U estimate?
any double down and split hands you remember?
too much to drink while playing?
How many times per shoe did you surrender?
surrender can be a good play.
some have it so easy
lose all the time
and still plays??
Good points
Confirmation bias against himself may be a possibility as well
But lets get all the questions answered as to where this took place before we rule out casino cheating
In order for the shoe to be rigged they’d have to know exactly where’s he’s going to cut the cards, and how he’s gonna play every hand.
Was the table reserved and were table limits discussed?
Was there any prohibition against others playing the table because you wanted it all to yourself?
These questions go to likelihood of the casino having time to set the deck in advance. Slight of hand with the cut card and a rigged deck can achieve this result
Quote: michael99000Quote: darkozQuote: 7crapswhat else did the OP say?
there is one wrong assumption or wrong fact.
confirmation biassure. losses ALL the time. perfect example. sureQuote: DoctorPhilI like it when the wizard says things like you might win in the short term but of course we all lose in the long-term, I'm a perfect example of the perfect statistic. I consistently lose all the time.
come on Doc
how many hands played in each shoe U estimate?
any double down and split hands you remember?
too much to drink while playing?
How many times per shoe did you surrender?
surrender can be a good play.
some have it so easy
lose all the time
and still plays??
Good points
Confirmation bias against himself may be a possibility as well
But lets get all the questions answered as to where this took place before we rule out casino cheating
In order for the shoe to be rigged they’d have to know exactly where’s he’s going to cut the cards, and how he’s gonna play every hand.
If you are rigging the deck you can rig the cut card motion. You will be surprised what sleight of hand can do
And he already said he plays basic strategy which is somewhat predictable.
What were the rules where he might make unpredictable decisions is another question
Quote: darkozQuote: michael99000Quote: darkozQuote: 7crapswhat else did the OP say?
there is one wrong assumption or wrong fact.
confirmation biassure. losses ALL the time. perfect example. sureQuote: DoctorPhilI like it when the wizard says things like you might win in the short term but of course we all lose in the long-term, I'm a perfect example of the perfect statistic. I consistently lose all the time.
come on Doc
how many hands played in each shoe U estimate?
any double down and split hands you remember?
too much to drink while playing?
How many times per shoe did you surrender?
surrender can be a good play.
some have it so easy
lose all the time
and still plays??
Good points
Confirmation bias against himself may be a possibility as well
But lets get all the questions answered as to where this took place before we rule out casino cheating
In order for the shoe to be rigged they’d have to know exactly where’s he’s going to cut the cards, and how he’s gonna play every hand.
If you are rigging the deck you can rig the cut card motion. You will be surprised what sleight of hand can do
And he already said he plays basic strategy which is somewhat predictable.
What were the rules where he might make unpredictable decisions is another question
Ok just so I have it straight:
- The shoe is rigged so that literally every hand is a loser. 40 straight hands. They don’t throw in a winner here n there to make it look good. The casino has no problems creating a 500 million to 1 scenario
- the cut of the cards is rigged
- the player must play every hand to an exact set of basic strategy rules. Hitting/doubling soft hands. Splits. Hitting 12 vs 2, etc
-there cannot be any point in the shoe where a dealer goes on break and the relief dealer burns a card
- the player can never switch to 2 hands at any point in the shoe
Bottom line. This didn’t happen
Quote: michael99000
Ok just so I have it straight:
The casino has no problems creating a 500 million to 1 scenario
billion. With b.
Quote: michael99000Quote: darkozQuote: michael99000Quote: darkozQuote: 7crapswhat else did the OP say?
there is one wrong assumption or wrong fact.
confirmation biassure. losses ALL the time. perfect example. sureQuote: DoctorPhilI like it when the wizard says things like you might win in the short term but of course we all lose in the long-term, I'm a perfect example of the perfect statistic. I consistently lose all the time.
come on Doc
how many hands played in each shoe U estimate?
any double down and split hands you remember?
too much to drink while playing?
How many times per shoe did you surrender?
surrender can be a good play.
some have it so easy
lose all the time
and still plays??
Good points
Confirmation bias against himself may be a possibility as well
But lets get all the questions answered as to where this took place before we rule out casino cheating
In order for the shoe to be rigged they’d have to know exactly where’s he’s going to cut the cards, and how he’s gonna play every hand.
If you are rigging the deck you can rig the cut card motion. You will be surprised what sleight of hand can do
And he already said he plays basic strategy which is somewhat predictable.
What were the rules where he might make unpredictable decisions is another question
Ok just so I have it straight:
- The shoe is rigged so that literally every hand is a loser. 40 straight hands. They don’t throw in a winner here n there to make it look good. The casino has no problems creating a 500 million to 1 scenario
- the cut of the cards is rigged
- the player must play every hand to an exact set of basic strategy rules. Hitting/doubling soft hands. Splits. Hitting 12 vs 2, etc
-there cannot be any point in the shoe where a dealer goes on break and the relief dealer burns a card
- the player can never switch to 2 hands at any point in the shoe
Bottom line. This didn’t happen
What is the possibility that the casino DID rig the deck but NOT for the OP to lose 40 straight
What if BECAUSE it was rigged the OP wound up losing 40 straight due to the unpredictable outcomes caused by a rigged deck
I.e. the casino just rigged it for him to lose without specifically going for 40 straight losses. Just a preponderance of losses. And that led to such a staggering loss
How are the mathematical odds of losing 40 straight affected when the deck is NOT fair?
The first link is to some sort of "betting system" site, so wouldn't put much faith in the "facts" for that one, but the second link seems to be better and the third and fourth link are just for working out EOR.
Below is a link of the first site that came up when I looked up, "probability of a casino cheating"
http://www.progamblingsystems.com/how-casinos-cheat-us/
Below is a link of the first site that came up when I googled, "do casinos cheat at blackjack"
https://www.blackjackchamp.com/casino-news/24780-4-dirty-blackjack-tricks-casinos-used-cheat/
Also, removing sixteen 10 value cards and four Aces will increase the house edge by about 2.11%***.
***: 6-Deck, S17, OBO, DA 2 Cards, DAS, Late Surrender, ALWAYS playing basic strategy (see link below to work out/check yourself)
http://www.bjstrat.net/cgi-bin/cdca.cgi
Originally found the above link on the site below, when I searched "wizard of odds effect of card removal"
https://wizardofodds.com/games/blackjack/appendix/7/
Then clicked on "The source for this table is the amazing Composition Dependent Combinatorial Analyzer at bjstrat.net."
Even with 20 really good player cards removed from the start of a 6-deck shoe, the OP's situation would still be very hard to believe.
Hope this helps the OP in working out that the casino most likely cheated by "sleight of hand^^^" (if they did cheat).
^^^: From the "blackjackchamp" website, this is when: "...The dealer has extremely quick hands and notices that the player has had a few too many frosty umbrella drinks or is simply not paying attention, so rather than dealing the card from the top of the deck, the dealer intentionally hands out a bust card."
Question to Op: do you remember how many times you busted? (if it was nearly all or all the hands that you chose to hit on, then that could be an INDICATOR of "sleight of hand" type "cheating by the casino")
-----------------
Update:
If the shoe had the 20 cards mentioned above removed from the shoe, it would still be a 1/ 246,235,034,862 (or 0.50145^38)^*^ chance of losing 38 hands out of 38.
^*^ : the basic strategy player "losing a hand" chance goes from about 49.09% to about 50.145% (so 0.50145^38) when these cards are removed.
Also after looking into it further, the first website I mention may be a "betting system" website, but it does illustrate some "pretty good" ways a casino can cheat, if they wanted to (it is about half-way down the page, and starts with "blackjack" as the title).
Quote: michael99000
In order for the shoe to be rigged they’d have to know exactly where’s he’s going to cut the cards, and how he’s gonna play every hand.
No, not true. In some shufflers the entire shoe is not preshuffled. Instead, an RNG selects the cards to be dealt as they are dealt and the cards are removed from their location and dealt.
If you don't want to provide the answer and more concentrate on the validity, fine I'll just figure it out elsewhere.
I do recall doubling and splitting. They didn't win.
Quote: DoctorPhilSorry for not replying as quickly. First, I'm not a cussing any casino of cheating. Why would they? Second, this is a high limit room, hand shuffled, shoe with 6 decks. Someone did ask about surrender, I said in OP they have surrender. I did not track but since I started basic strategy, I do recall surrendering a few hands. I considered that a loss, I realize it's half a loss. I'm not sure that changes much. Again, I certainly can't tell you where the cut card was, but I gave a few constants.
If you don't want to provide the answer and more concentrate on the validity, fine I'll just figure it out elsewhere.
I do recall doubling and splitting. They didn't win.
I gave you the rough chance*** of this happening in one shoe earlier in this thread, it is between 1/552,414,131,902 and 1/679,726,902,915,061, depending on how many hands you played per shoe.
***: for a fairly dealt game.
I also gave you the WoO site that you can go to, so that you can work out the chance of having a bad session like yours (the chance of losing is about 49.09% for each hand you play).
Can you guess/estimate how many shoes you have played in your life so far?
We could find a more "accurate" estimate if we had that figure, but It would still be at most a 1 in a million chance over a "life-time" of playing bj (that figure is for a player who plays every day for 50+ years)
Ps I couldn't estimate the chance figure for it happening in two shoes, because my calculator came back with an error message when I tried to find out.
------------------
update (about 3am pacific time)
Just did 100,000,000 simulations and the "minimum return" was -36^^^ units "wagering" 38 units in total and "bet size" 1 unit
^^^The sim doesn't tell me how this "minimum return" occurred, but It gave me these details/figures below:
House edge (per hand): 0.35% (estimate)
Standard Deviation (per hand): 1.15 (estimate)
Average return: -0.12 units (u)
Minimum Return: -36 u
Maximum Return: +37 u
Standard Deviation: 6.71 (don't know how to use that figure, someone else may be able to explain it)
This website was used to simulate the above: http://www.beatingbonuses.com/simulator.htm
Note: my computer won't run the java script simulator, but it is supposed to be a lot faster (see below)
http://www.beatingbonuses.com/simulator_java.htm
Quote: NathanThe fact that an esteemed long time Member also mentioned that the same exact thing happened to him at least once gives credible credence to what the OP claimed.
I don’t remember this. Can you explain?
Quote: FinsRuleI don’t remember this. Can you explain?
Chump Change. "I've lost 40 hands fairly quickly. I'd call it a quantum leap." :)
Quote: NathanChump Change. "I've lost 40 hands fairly quickly. I'd call it a quantum leap." :)
Fairly quickly is not the same thing as 40 in a row.
Quote: CrystalMathFairly quickly is not the same thing as 40 in a row.
But it does kind of give credence that the OP was telling the truth. ;)
Quote: NathanBut it does kind of give credence that the OP was telling the truth. ;)
No it doesn’t at all.
It never happened
