Sackers and Paddington - favouring a boss gambler could be why it was done. Another reason might be that the Mob didn't entirely trust probabilities and thought some punter might come up with a system to defeat the odds.
Unfortunately, because of a plague of spam comments, you need to be a "registered user", otherwise your observations will be buried in a torrent of multilingual nonsense. Please do comment!
Say what you please, so long as it's phrased politely and is not libellous or legally proscribed. Fact, reason and wit are keenly welcomed.
Just imagine, the Mob being cheaters. And 1929 - 31: some people still had money, then.
ReplyDeletePoor people always spend money on gambling. It is perceived as the only way out for some.
ReplyDeleteThe crazy thing is that there is no need to cheat. The house percentage in that game is very high.
ReplyDeleteCould it be rigged for the opposite reason, to favour a boss gambler?
ReplyDeleteSackers and Paddington - favouring a boss gambler could be why it was done. Another reason might be that the Mob didn't entirely trust probabilities and thought some punter might come up with a system to defeat the odds.
ReplyDelete