He was at war with them
and they killed him before he could kill them

The Secret Service stood down.

Dallas and Texas law enforcement stood down.

Military intelligence, which is normally enrolled to provide presidential security, stood down.

The FBI stood down.

These elements opened the door to the assassination, but did not have the resources to deliver the shooters and the complicated cover story and witness elimination program that followed.

Corrupt elements of the CIA and their long term friends and colleagues in organized crime did.

And they did it because their very survival was at stake.

After decades of non-investigation by the epically corrupt Herbert Hoover, Robert Kennedy - the president's brother and Attorney General - was going after organized crime full force.

JFK was going after the criminal elements that had taken over the CIA.

Neither of the Kennedy brothers were choir boys, but this was a heroic effort on their parts and done for the good of the country. Had they succeeded, they would have averted many of the catastrophes that have befallen the US - and other countries (many hundreds of millions of people) - in the last 49 years

The Kennedy brothers knew the risks involved in their operations and what they attempted required great moral and physical courage, the likes of which have rarely been seen in the history of this country.

It's noteworthy that this story, one of the most important in post-war 20th century history, has been completely erased from the public mind.

http://youtu.be/MnwHQxbuPeE


I don't believe in a lot of the conspiracy theories that are thrown around on the internet but this was a sad day for America and the rest of the world at large.

Quote from: Bayes on November 20, 2012, 05:20:32 PM
This thread is going waaaay off topic. 

That would be my fault. 

Back on topic......

I was thinking about card counters back in the day.

You could argue they had a hit and run strategy. The term 'wonging' it was used when players just stood in the background monitoring the count waiting for it to turn positive.
They would then jump in and place some bets. They stopped playing once the count went negative again. This could also be applied to shuffle tracking techniques.

Now you may say what's that got to do with roulette and what does a negative expectation game have to do with a game which can be positive at times for the player.

Well it's my experience that 'wonging' it in roulette works just as good (if not better) for me than it ever did in blackjack. The triggers in blackjack are a positive count. The trigger in roulette is something working well along the lines of gizmo's theory of the three states.
(It's working, fair to middling, it's not working at all) And I always bail out at the first loss and look for the next opportunity.

I just don't think everything is as black and white as maybe some would like it to be.
Sure, some mathematical proof would back things up but you also have experienced players saying a 'kind' of hit and run works for them.

cheers.

Well I am happy to get the ball rolling if this gets the green light.

I have 2 books I can donate for now.

'How to win at roulette and blackjack' by Roy Ward Dickson.

This book does cover a lot of ground for anybody interested in hot numbers and the cyclic nature of roulette.

'Roulette for the millions' by Patrick O'Neil Dunne.

This book is about a group much similar to Norman Leigh who took on the casino in Macao.
There is a 20,000 spin supplement that comes with this book as well.

2-3 months or 6 months even! You are right Bayes. It would be a great addition to this forum as something unique to differentiate us from the rest.

cheers

I was just thinking of ways how we could be self sustaining without the need for ads and did come up with an idea which may work.

How about a roulette book library.

I have a lot of roulette books that I don't read anymore. I am sure there are a few of us like that.

How about donating them to the forum and setting up a bookshop.

The books could maybe be sold for £5.00 each + postage. This would be much cheaper than buying them new.

Let's see if we can come up with some good ideas.

Quote from: Bayes on November 20, 2012, 10:35:08 AM
I'm still keen on the idea of building an online roulette game which I talked about a while ago on the other forum, but I haven't got very far with the project yet, partly due to other commitments.

Hello Bayes

I always liked that idea of yours.

It would be great for the forum as well. We could have a monthly competition or something like it which would be fun.

I would be be prepared to stump up some cash for something like that. I don't know about anybody else. How time consuming would something like that be to build?

cheers

I wll likely get shot down in flames here from a maths perspective but I think the player who walks up to the table and puts it all on the first spin is more than likely a recreational gambler.

p.s. I do have to justify my years of research somehow.

I decided to run this through 150 spins just flat betting and playing on every spin without using any triggers.

It's only a small sample but the results were not bad. It reached a nice profit after about 50 spins and then dipped before holding it's own for the next 100 or so spins.

I will conduct some more tests this way and see how it stands up.

This is just my opinion but I don't think you should go against your basic nature in any areas of your life. The conflict just leads to dissapointment. I don't want to sound like a party pooper or anything because I believe we can still gamble and win even if we are conservative by nature.

A lot of what I am saying was in several books I read. I will see if I can dig them out and elaborate (bloviate) a bit more.

Quote from: GLC on November 18, 2012, 04:47:23 PM

My favorite bet is still the flat bet parlay.  Bet 1 unit and any time you win, you let your bet and all wins ride until you have enough money on the table to cover all previous losses and then you pull it back.  You may have to let it ride up to 5, 6 or more times.  When this happens, you can set a cap on the parlays of say 3 or 4 and recover in smaller chunks.

At least betting this way, we can quit at any point because all we lose on a loss is 1 more unit.

Sounds good to me George. I don't think I could stomach making a 100+ unit bet or whatever needing it to win.

My comment would be that I think it's important to take a break from gambling now and again and recharge the batteries or it all becomes a bit of a drudgery.

Especially for us guys!! Let's face it. Most of us are hardcore and obsessed with the game.
Sometimes you just have to take the money out and spend it on something and appreciate what you have done rather than churn it backwards and forwards for days.

Gambling is a strange affair and I got a lot more excitement and fun out of it when I was a losing reckless gambler rather than the studious accountant type gambler that I am now.
In fact I gamble far less nowadays because it's too much like bloody hard work.

They say a little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing. You have reached the twilight zone Sam. 

Hello Vic

Yes, that's the one. 

There is a french forum which you can get translated through google.

casino forum jackpots

Type that in google and you should be able to translate.

arteinvivo from the old GG days posts on this forum. I would say it is a lot more technical than a lot of the mainstream forums. Plus you also need to wrap your head around some of the dodgy translations. 

That only took about an hour doing it manually, lol.

3/9 win on 7th spin +64.

4/10 loss +52.

10/6 loss +40.

10/8 loss +28.

5/6 loss +16.

3/6 loss +4.

7/1 loss -8.

5/4 loss -20.

After such a promising start as well. I can't think of any other method to take on your challenge. I thought the RWD method might crack it as well.

Just to whet your appetite!

I am playing Roy Ward Dickson's hot numbers.

The first coup for anybody that knows it had a 3/9 split and came up on the 7th spin.

The formula boils down to this...

It's a number that comes up three times within 20 spins or less, after an absence of 30 spins or more - except when it does so three times in a row.

You play it for 9 spins.

1 chip on the first 6 spins and 2 chips on spins 7,8,9. (12 chips per coup)

There are a few notation rules which I will mention if it's successful in the challenge.