Could you expand on this?
Because you go back to base bet after each win you end up increasing your average loss in proportion to your win. You can only ever win the base bet amount but often risk much larger amounts. There are ways to gamble that make winning less likely but none that can give a better expectation than the house edge.
I just spent ages on Google trying to find a decent mathematical example of this and without finding my old maths teacher I can't remember exactly how to demonstrate it myself. This roulette example is the best I could find:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martingale_(betting_system)
I've tried to use bonus they gave, but always ended up losing all, including the amount they took from my balance.
Pretty much, if you have a balance of 0.05 and try to win 0.0005 in a few dice bets you have a fair chance of coming out a winner. If you try to get 0.0005 up to 0.05 then most times you'll end up busting.
They changed the hi-lo bonus requirements a while back. The "The maximum wagering requirements that you can fulfil in a single bet cannot exceed 10% of the original amount of your bonus account." makes it much harder to come out on top now. But the reward points quickly add up especially on the weekend when it is 4 or 5 points for every 500 satoshis wagered. So you end up with getting past the 100,000 minimum quite quickly with a few big bets.
OK, thanks for the explanations. It's true that new condition on bonus account (no bet higher than 10% of the total bonus) slows the decreasing of the "need to wager" amount, thus increases risk of bursting before reaching zero.
To make it decrease faster, I was reducing bet amount and played also for jackpots (roll 8888) as the full amount of jackpot cost is deduced from the remaining wager amount.