The Bammo Flim-Flam CONglomeration

Discuss products and their reviews in Genii.
Bob Farmer
Posts: 2648
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Short card above selection.

The Bammo Flim-Flam CONglomeration

Postby Bob Farmer » August 24th, 2015, 10:16 am

This fall, if the timing is right, will see the publication of my new book, The Bammo Flim-Flam CONglomeration. More than a mere compilation of my Flim-Flam columns, this will be a greatly expanded collection which will include a detailed Scamdex to allow the reader to find just the perfect item for that trip down to the bar to make a few bucks.

However, some columns are just too stupid to mess with. An example follows. I hesitate to explain this. Jonathan: don't ask.


“Huh?” Tony Forgio


This is Antonio Forgio talkin’. Don’t call me Tony. Only my close personal friends call me that. Some very rough people. Connected. Capisce?

By now you probably heard Farmer got whacked in Vegas. Tried some of the crap he’s dishes out here on two wiseguys and they popped him. Ended up with bullets for teeth in the trunk of a stolen car at the airport.

Let me tell you somethin’. You listenin’? Yeah, starting right now you’re gonna get the real work. No more of that namby-pampy Martin Gardner intellectual crap. Guy like Gardner try that stuff back in Jersey and they’d sew his ears to his toes.

He wears glasses, for cryin’ out loud.


There’s a guy I used to run with named Paulie. We called him Paulie the Beast because he was big and he was a beast. So we called him that. Back in the old days we always called guys names like that. Capisce?

Not like today. Today you got people wit’ names like “Darren” and “Stanley.” Back in the old days, you say you’re name was “Darren,” they’d jack up your chest and suck out your heart.

Okay, so Paulie the Beast and me we’re in Saratoga. This is the early fifties, maybe the middle fifties, so the place is jumping with high rollers. And we’re in this stud game with this guy from Boston, a total sucker, with lots of moolah (“moolah” is the word Hustlers use to mean money).

Anyway, Paulie’s real good with a cold deck and I’ve been dealin’ the guy great hands all night so he’s got like a ton of cash in front of him.

I give Paulie the high sign so he knows that on this deal we’re gonna take this guy. So the deal goes down and we wait.

Guy looks at his hand. Don’t say nuddin’. So now it’s our move.

I hit the guy right across the forehead with a tire iron.

Paulie the Beast runs around the table, and as the guy hits the floor, Paulie sits right on him.
The guy’s like crushed under Paulie.

I grab the money. I give Paulie the scram signal and we get the hell outta there.


Okay, now people ask me this all the time. Did you ever see Vernon hit a guy with a tire iron to get the money?

Let me tell you, Vernon never did this. Charlie Miller, now he’d do this. Actually Miller never used a tire iron, he always used a big rock.

Charlie would practice for hours on me. We’d sit at a regular card table and as soon as I caught a good hand, Charlie’d rock me, grab my moolah and run outside.

I’d say, “Charlie, enough with the rock, I’m gettin’ a headache.” But Charlie’d practice somethin’ ‘til it was right.

I still got Marks where that rock used to land. People say, what’s wrong wit’ your face and I say, that’s Charlie Miller’s rock.


There’s more suckers losin’ money on dice than any other thing. Mostly because suckers just don’t know the real odds.

Hey, I’ll prove it to you.
You throw a six.

Okay, what are the odds someone will hit you with a tire iron or a big rock before you make your point?


A lot of the so-called “gambling experts” think that Erdnase knew whereof he spoke. Let me tell you this: nowhere in Erdnase—and I challenge you to prove me wrong—does he mention the use of tire irons or big rocks.


You wanna end up wasted like Farmer, use the wrong lingo. You gotta know the vernacular, see what I’m sayin’?

Like you’d never say, “Yes, I believe I would enjoy a few rounds of that game with you chaps where each participant gets five cards.”

Just spit on the floor and say, “Deal’em.”

Whenever you fold a hand, always say, “Too rich for my blood.”

And right after you’ve used the hold-out to switch in the royal flush, show your hand and say, “Read’em and weep.”

When the big guy with nine fingers and a Sicilian accent cuts the deck look at him cold in the eye and say, “Cut deep to win a heap,” and wink. Real Hustlers always do this.


Until next month, I’m Tony Forgio. Keep your mouth shut.

Bob Farmer
Posts: 2648
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Short card above selection.

Re: The Bammo Flim-Flam CONglomeration

Postby Bob Farmer » September 20th, 2015, 9:40 am

Right now I’m working on my new book, The Bammo Flim-Flam CONglomeration. This will be a greatly expanded compilation of all of my Flim-Flam columns, along with a Scamdex to allow you to pick the perfect scam to use at the bar down the road from the auto plant.

Those of you who have The Bammo Ten Card Deal Dossier, will find many things of interest. One of them, I have included below in a shorter version for this post.


Based on IF THREE STRIKES, YOU’RE OUT created By Robin Dawes


You use a Ten Card deal set: AC, AD, AH, JD, JH, JC, 6S, 6D, 6H, 9H.

The Mark mixes the ten cards and deals them out into two face-down rows.

You explain that the Mark can turn the cards face up in any order he pleases:

1. If he turns up the black Ace, the AC, he loses.

2. If he turns up the red Aces, AD, AH (in any order) BEFORE he turns up the AC, he wins.


You tell the Mark he has only 1 chance in 10 of hitting the AC and losing. He has a tremendous advantage, but even so, you’re willing to bet even money on the outcome (he bets a buck, if he wins, he gets his buck back, along with one of yours).


In fact, the Mark is going to lose two-thirds of the time and this counterintuitive reality, combined with the even-money payoff, is going to mean big money for you. But how come the intuitive odds (that is, the ones that just feel so right) are so far from the true odds?

The answer lies, first, in psychological predispositions (no space to explain here—see the new book) and, second, in two elements of the game that, though they appear to be affective, are nothing more than misdirective.


First, and most important: it doesn’t matter how many cards you use.

You can include the three Aces in ten or ten thousand cards, it doesn’t affect the odds at all. The extra cards have no effect other than to delay the discovery of the Aces. Look at the rules of the game again:

1. If the Mark turns up the AC, he loses.

2. If he turns up the red Aces, in any order, before he turns up the AC, he wins.

Consider a simpler version of this game using the Aces and a single court card.

If the single court card is the first card turned over, it has absolutely no effect on the outcome of the game: the Mark has neither won nor lost.

All the court card has done is delay the turnover of the next card. Only when an Ace is turned over does the game advance (or end).

Similarly, if the court card is the second card turned over, the game is not advanced nor ended and the odds remain the same. And this doesn’t change whether you have one court card or seven million (though more dummy cards means it takes longer to play the game).

The true game being played here is essentially this: you have three Aces, one black and two red. The Mark can mix the three cards up and arrange them in any order.

If the particular order shows an AC, before a red Ace, he loses.

If a red Ace (in any order) coms up before the AC, he wins.

Looked at this way, there are only six arrangements possible:

1st card turned over AD AD AH AH AC AC
2nd card turned over AH AC AD AC (AD) (AH)
3rd card turned over (AC) (AH) (AC) (AD) (AH) (AD)
Mark Wins or Loses: Win Lose Win Lose Lose Lose

The cards in brackets are not turned over because the Mark has already won or lost—but it is necessary in determining the true odds to include them in the calculation.

The other element of this game that seems to affect the odds, but doesn’t, is the Mark’s right to turn over the cards in any order. As cards are revealed this seems to influence the odds applicable to the rest of the game - but it doesn’t, it’s just so much irrelevant randomness.


An even sneakier way of stating the false odds is to say:

“On the first card, the odds are 9 to 1 that I won’t win. On the second card, they are 8 to 1 that I won’t win.”

Here you’re focusing on the first rule: if the Mark turns over the AC, he loses; and; ignoring the second rule, if he turns over two red Aces, before the AC, he wins.

Going for broke, you add the bigger lie:

“So, if you add all those together, the odds that I won’t win are pretty substantial—and a loss for me is a win for you.”

Adding the odds together like this is completely wrong, however, according to scientific research (see the new book, below), given a choice between adding the probability of events (which results in a higher probability) and multiplying the probability of events (which results in a lower probability), Marks, like rabbits, have a tendency to add rather than multiply.

Posts: 3510
Joined: August 7th, 2015, 10:35 pm

Re: The Bammo Flim-Flam CONglomeration

Postby performer » September 21st, 2015, 12:11 pm

The word "mark" should not have a capital M in the context you are describing. Unless of course you are trying to make a subtle point of course.

There. Just trying to help.

Return to “Light From the Lamp”