Talk:Numbers game

Otto Berman

Why Isn’t the Internet Secure Yet, Dammit? mentions that the math-expert Otto Berman fixed the numbers racket for Dutch Schultz:

Then organised crime moved in…

• Dutch Schultz took over from existing operators
• They weren’t career criminals and were intimidated by explicit death threats

Dutch hired mathematician Otto “Aba Daba” Berman to fix the numbers racket

• Ensure that heavily-played numbers never won
• No-one had ever considered this level of attack

Could you explain what did Berman do? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.250.143.131 (talk • contribs) 20 Feb 2006 (UTC)

• According to our Dutch Schultz article, "Berman was able to mentally calculate the minimum amount of money Schultz would need to bet at the track at the last minute in order to alter the odds, thereby ensuring that he always controlled which numbers won." According to our numbers game article, the winning numbers were generated from the three unit dollars figures in the parimutuel betting "daily handles" from the local racetrack. Now, I am not certain of the meaning of "daily handle", but from some brief googling it seems to simply mean the total amount wagered on each type of bet. If so, this makes Berman's feat impossible unless he knows how much was already wagered, and rather simple otherwise: and I suspect Dutch Schultz' accountant could get that information fairly easily. With knowledge of how much has already been wagered, all that is necessary is to see which result number gives you the best payoff (reasonably straightforward accounting, perhaps made easier if all the street runners had already subtotalled everything), and then select bets of from 0 to 9 dollars for each of the three types (hence, a maximum of $27) to get the result you want. For example, if you wanted the number to be 123 to minimise your payout, and it was currently sitting at 321, then you need to make a $2 bet to win and an $8 bet to show. The exact horse you choose is completely unimportant. Actually, these "daily handle" numbers seem to be a really lousy random number generator. -- Securiger 09:41, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

This is not as simple as it sounds. First off the track percentage must be deducted from the betting pool because the payoff for win, place and show will be the division of the net amount of betting after the track take. Also, the window at the track closes as the horses go off, so someone in the back must be in on the fix to place a bet late - and such a person can cheat on the races themselves, so the track has a strong incentive to prevent it. To do it therefore one would need to circumvent the track's own systems for preventing cheating (called passed posting), so the track management would need to be in on it. This is probably now impossible with automated parimutual machines, but who knows. Also, later, in the 1950, the number was derived from the win, place and show payoffs from three separate races. For a time the number in the 1950's was derived from a Federal Reserve Bank daily reported figure, resulting in the somewhat comical situation of a solitary financial statistic being read out to many digits just after the race results were reported on the radio. I understood that they stopped doing that when someone managed to fix the Fed clerk who reported the figure, and got away with it for a while because it was the small lower level digits that were being manipulated.70.20.230.89 (talk) 04:24, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Insularity

The introduction to this article needs rewriting to include details of the country or countries in which “numbers games” take place. I have not come across them in my part of the world. The article refers to “state lotteries” but most counties are not divided into states although many have “national lotteries”. I’m guessing that perhaps this is only a US thing? If so the article should make this clear. Can someone who knows the details sort this out? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Arthur Clarke (talk • contribs) 21 June 2006.

Looks like someone provided the context almost immediately after this remark was made. - Jmabel | Talk 15:55, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Two different types of state lotteries

I believe that our article has become confused between two different types of state lotteries. Yes, the major state lotteries with the big jackpots are pari-mutuel, but I believe that in most (if not all) states that offer a "daily numbers"-type lottery the payoff is fixed.

I'm also pretty certain that Pennsylvania is not at all unique in calling this lottery "The Daily Numbers". It's a while since I lived in New York, but I remember that name there as well. This official site bears that out. Also, this page bears me out for the fixed payoffs, at least for New York.

Unless someone can cite something to the contrary for other states in the next few days, I will edit accordingly. - Jmabel | Talk 06:56, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

No response. I will edit. - Jmabel | Talk 05:08, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Penny game

I removed "In the 1920s, the "penny ante" game was popular. While long popular in Harlem, only then did it spread; before that, $0.50 or $1 bets were standard." The Lexow Committee report of 1894 talks of penny betting, with a nickel or a dime a popular bet.

In the 1950's bets as low as 0.10 were taken on a number, although usually such a low bet would be made when someone "boxed" their favorite number. Example - if someone's house number was 409 they would "box" it by betting 0.60 spread among all of it's six possible combinations: 409, 094, 940, 904, 049, 490. If any one of those numbers came out they would win $50. Or they might bet 0.90 on 409 and then also "box" 409 for a dime, meaning they would now have $1.00 on 409 and 0.10 each on its five other combinations. If 409 came out they would win $500, and if it came out in any of its other combinations they would win $50 as a consolation prize.70.20.230.89 (talk) 04:12, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Popular culture

There is a pretty extensive history of literature and films that center on the numbers game. Not sure if we want it on this page as such, but I'd like to start accumulating a list. - Jmabel | Talk 18:06, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

• Nick Tosches, Cut Numbers (novel; despite its title, though, this is really more about a small-time loanshark)
• Oscar Micheaux, The Girl from Chicago (film, 1932)

I want to see it. It would be good if you gave a summary of how the numbers game is involved in each. I am still compiling a bibliography from the New York Times and the Washington Post. Do you know of any other historical "policy dealers". I just have the few from the Lexow Report, but the New York Times goes back to 1884 with references to "policy dealer" or "numbers game". --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 22:01, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

In Tosches book, the central character is a small-time loanshark; a major theme of the book is how speculating in the stock market resembles playing the numbers (except that there are no cut numbers in the Big Board).

Micheaux's film centers on the Harlem numbers; a numbers boss is robbed and killed, an innocent person is accused. I don't remember the details, it's not the most memorable of films. - Jmabel | Talk 01:07, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm afraid I couldn't offhand name any historical figures involved in the numbers gams other than those already mentioned in the article. - Jmabel | Talk 01:08, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

• The Sting references the numbers game, but wasn't devoted to the subject (film) 128.113.144.96

Why is it so bad

There are several references in the article to the numbers game being 'bad' or 'the worst form of gambling' but no indication of what made it so bad, or the consequences for the victims. How come it was 'bad' when the Families were doing it, but not bad now the state is doing it?206.191.28.35 19:23, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Your statement that "the Families were doing it" also distorts the real situation. Betting on the daily number and on horse racing was essentially a local franchise type business. Examine the cash flow in a small town such as Norristown, PA. Of each $100 bet: $50 was paid back to winners, $5 was kept by the sub-runner/collector of bets, $15 was kept by the runner, and a large portion of the next 30% was retained by the bookie and the local banker who served as "layoff man" for the bookie. None of these people were members of "The Families." They were small entrepreneurs. A percentage passed upward to higher level bankers as a sort of tax which went to someone who could be called a member of "The Families." From that money, in turn, had to come payoffs to local politicians to keep heat off the entire business, and, people being people, someone had to act as a sort of overseer to guarantee that large wins being paid down would not get lost enroute to the winners. When all was said and done "The Families" probably earned a few percent on the total betting volume, much as the owner of a privately held corporation earns a few percent on it's total sales volume. It should be noted that no one in this chain, including "The Families" had interest in using actual violence as a means of enforcement, because that would make it impossible for local politicians and police to ignore the business. In situations involving a large win the bookie and/or a well trusted runner would make the payoff in person in company with a witness, to reduce potential for complaints. If there was a credible complaint it was most likely resolved by satisfying the complainant and then banning the bettor from further betting and the runner from further participation in the business.70.20.230.89 (talk) 04:00, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

The state never dumped anyone over the side of a boat in the East River.

Norristown, PA?

Someone went to a lot of trouble to explain the situation in Norristown. For years I've seen "Numbers" games mentioned in mob movies but never understood. This explains it well. (Thx) It seems like this person had first-hand experience with the people in this racket. Has anyone written a newspaper article or book that could be used as a more traditional source? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.110.237.188 (talk) 04:21, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Suggested merger: Pea-shake house => Numbers game

This is a continuation of a discussion begun during the AFD for Pea shake. I am opening the discussion here as the closer of the AFD; I am neutral on the matter. --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 00:10, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

This is basically my suggestion. I don't see what makes the pea-shake (originally, from what I can tell, slang for any dice roll, but purportedly involving real dries peas here) significantly different from any other numbers game, of which there are doubtless other regional variants. Probably better that they be handled together. --Dhartung | Talk 04:38, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Vote to merge. chris4682 sept 08

Commented out sentence

In the northeastern United States this game was known as the "Pool", because of its presence in poor African-American communities.

I've commented this out until it can be verified and explained. I'll go to the library tomorrow. For example, why would poor African-American communities lead to it being called 'Pool', rather than being (like The Pools in the UK) linked to the pooling of money? -109.155.33.219 (talk) 02:34, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

On closer inspection, this edit is the problem. I'm still going to check at the library, but I think I'll need a logged-in user's help. 109.155.33.219 (talk) 02:39, 23 September 2010 (UTC)