Keefer Roulette System

In my continued analysis of betting systems, I would like to turn my attention to systems one has to pay for. In doing a search on the topic, I came across the Keefer Roulette System. This book appears to be out of print, but used copies are going for about $23 on Amazon. It pained me greatly to have to pay for one.



That said, the whole system was easily fit on two pages. It is basically a nine-step Martingale with these tweaks:

1. Instead of jumping from 2 to 4 unit bet, the player goes to 3 after 2. In other words, the sequence is 1-2-3-6-12-24-48-96-192.
2. The player plays opposite bets at the same time.

I explain it in more detail and cover an analysis of the single-zero game at my new page at WoO on the Keefer Roulette System. My double-zero simulation is currently running and I'll update the page tomorrow with those results. I also plan to retake the pictures of the eight key pages.

For now, I throw it open to the forum for comments. Of the attorneys on the forum, I ask whether I am within the "fair use" rules to explain the system and/or show pictures of some of the pages?

The question for the forum is would you use the Keefer System?

Quote: Wizard

(snip)
For now, I throw it open to the forum for comments. Of the attorneys on the forum, I ask whether I am within the "fair use" rules to explain the system and/or show pictures of some of the pages? (snip)

Not a lawyer (or anything close to one) but here are are a couple of links that I found interesting:

https://stevelaube.com/how-much-can-i-quote-from-another-source-without-permission/#:~:text=Answer%3A,the%20entirety%20of%20your%20book.

https://www.janefriedman.com/sample-permission-letter/

Quote: Wizard

(snip)The question for the forum is would you use the Keefer System?

For the poll, I chose:
".No -- All betting systems are equally worthless."
"Wiz, why are you such a downer?"
and
"I like how the ball on the cover landed in zero."

.............................


"13 Against the Bank" is a very well written and fun to read book even though the author's claim of a winning system is obviously bogus
apparently some think the system is not bogus as the mass market is being offered on Amazon (linked) for $768
it's available free on the internet archive (linked) if you create a free account (I'm pretty sure)

in the book the author explains that his father was crushed playing a martingale in Europe and that the casino manager laughed in his face

he strikes back by forming a team of roulette players using a reverse labouchere on the even chances and they crush the house
he claims that they are looking for one of the 13 on the team to get a fabulous run on the even chances and that they clean up


https://archive.org/details/thirteenagainstb00leig

https://www.amazon.com/Thirteen-Against-Bank-Roulette-Unbeatable/dp/1843440326

Quote: lilredrooster

.............................


"13 Against the Bank" is a very well written and fun to read book even though the author's claim of a winning system is obviously bogus
apparently some think the system is not bogus as the mass market is being offered on Amazon (linked) for $768
it's available free on the internet archive (linked) if you create a free account (I'm pretty sure)

in the book the author explains that his father was crushed playing a martingale in Europe and that the casino manager laughed in his face

he strikes back by forming a team of roulette players using a reverse labouchere on the even chances and they crush the house
he claims that they are looking for one of the 13 on the team to get a fabulous run on the even chances and that they clean up


https://archive.org/details/thirteenagainstb00leig

https://www.amazon.com/Thirteen-Against-Bank-Roulette-Unbeatable/dp/1843440326

The book is selling for $20.78. I reviewed this book on here a few years ago.

I do agree it is a fun but fictitious read designed to appear a true story.

Should probably rename it the "Adventures of thirteen Greyhounds against the bank" :)

Couple notes on your page

The double zero simulation table is blank.

In the single zero simulation table, after the probability of a win, you have two lines that just say "probability". I suspect you want it to say probability of breaking even and probability of a loss.

In principle, spending $23 on that book is even worse than buying lottery tickets. Maybe you can return it

Thank you all for your comments!

Quote: Ace2

In principle, spending $23 on that book is even worse than buying lottery tickets. Maybe you can return it

I knew what I was buying and got what I needed to out of it. The seller never represented the book was truthful.

I have finished my double-zero simulation, added it to my page, and made many edits.

Please have a new look.

Quote: Wizard

The question for the forum is would you use the Keefer System?

No. It doesn't reduce the house edge and greatly increases risk of ruin.

"As a broad standard, never quote more than a few successive paragraphs from a book or article, take more than one chart or diagram, include an illustration or other artwork in a book or newsletter without the artist's permission, or quote more than one or two lines from a poem."

Quote: Tanko

"As a broad standard, never quote more than a few successive paragraphs from a book or article, take more than one chart or diagram, include an illustration or other artwork in a book or newsletter without the artist's permission, or quote more than one or two lines from a poem."

as a broad standard never quote a rule without giving the source


source: self



note: guidelines or rules are all but useless if nobody follows them and nobody enforces them






*

Quote: lilredrooster

Quote: Tanko

"As a broad standard, never quote more than a few successive paragraphs from a book or article, take more than one chart or diagram, include an illustration or other artwork in a book or newsletter without the artist's permission, or quote more than one or two lines from a poem."

as a broad standard never quote a rule without giving the source


source: self



note: guidelines or rules are all but useless if nobody follows them and nobody enforces them






*

As a broad rule check the link the poster supplied to see if that is the source of the quote (it is)

Source: internet

Quote: darkoz

As a broad rule check the link the poster supplied to see if that is the source of the quote (it is)

Source: internet

okay, my bad - I apologize to Tanko


but this part of my post still stands:


"guidelines or rules are all but useless if nobody follows them and nobody enforces them"


but it would have been better if had instead posted "the vast majority do not follow them and they are very rarely enforced"


*

I thought the general principle was you can quote another source that it already in the public domain in moderation. However, "moderation" has never been clearly defined.

The reason I show pictures of eight pages is I don't want anyone to say that I misunderstood his system.

Maybe I'll seek a legal opinion on the matter.

So how does the Keefer System work in craps on the PL/DP?

Duplicate

Quote: Wizard

I thought the general principle was you can quote another source that it already in the public domain in moderation. However, "moderation" has never been clearly defined.

The reason I show pictures of eight pages is I don't want anyone to say that I misunderstood his system.

Maybe I'll seek a legal opinion on the matter.

If it's in public domain you can make copies and sell it yourself.

I doubt the book is in public domain.

In the opening indicia the book most likely has some wording as to what use you can do. Something like "no contents or portion of this book...." Etc.

For the book to be in public domain it has to have been published some time ago. I have to look it up but we are talking something like 96 years.

You can print and sell copies of the Wizard of Oz and of course any Shakespeare play for example, without anyone permission.

An interesting side note, you can also record and sell music in the public domain but it has to recorded by you or at your own dime. For example, you can record your own version of Mozart symphonies and offer them for sale but you can't copy the Royal Philharmonic Orchestra version and sell it. Their performance is copyrighted

Quote: Wizard

I thought the general principle was you can quote another source that it already in the public domain in moderation. However, "moderation" has never been clearly defined.

If the book was first published after 1978, the copyright lasts until the 70th anniversary of the author's death.

What you are describing is the "fair use" execption to copyrights. According to Title 17 Section 107 of the United States Code:

"(T)he fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include—
(1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
(2) the nature of the copyrighted work;
(3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work."

It may come down to, how many people would not buy the book just because of the pages you copied from it. Then again, copying from the work verbatim and describing what it says (i.e. describing how his system "works") are two different things.

Quote: Wizard

In my continued analysis of betting systems,

The question for the forum is would you use the Keefer System?

Mike, why waste your time on this? Don't you have some pat response.... like..... "No betting system will ever change a negative EV game to a positive one...." "No betting system will ever overcome the house edge...."

Quote: darkoz

If it's in public domain you can make copies and sell it yourself.

I misunderstood what "public domain" meant. I thought it meant you could go out and easily buy it.

ThatDonGuy is correct and quoted the correct law.

I didn't look at what the Wizard provided, just at the summary written of how long the excerpt was and how many pictures were lifted from the original work.
I doubt the author would sue over this sort of fair use, and in any case, it might even induce someone to buy the whole book. That would be the basic test - whether what Wizard provided here would somehow lead to someone's not buying the book itself. This WOV site is commercial, but then again if I wrote a book about gambling and quoted that Keefer System work within it, even if I sold my book, still the other factors would have the weigh heavily against me too. Going to the point of lifting entire pages and pictures might be a bit much, but still, the basic test of whether that level of "quoting" would lead to someone's not buying the work itself would be the basic test.

I don't think the Keefer System work is in the public domain. It would have to be very old.

Those are the correct four factors though to consider:

1. the purpose and character of the use, including whether it is of a commercial nature or for nonprofit educational purposes
2. the nature of the copyrighted work
3. the amount of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole, and
4. the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.

Over all, in THIS situation, IF there were even an issue - assuming this even got back to the copyright owner and IF he had a problem with it, he would contact the Wizard with some form of a Cease and Desist notice. In THIS situation it probably wouldn't even be a C&D more like a request to cut back on the level of "quoted" material. Again, IF.

By the way, the old days of people mailing something to the Library of Congress to register it are long over, for most works. You don't even need to publish to copyright. Just a notice "Copyright 2020 by MDawg Protected as an Unpublished Work" is enough. And nowadays anyway, just posting on the internet is publishing.

Thank you for your opinion.

Based on other legal advice, I removed the photographs from the book a few days ago. So the photographs should no longer be an issue.

If you care to have a look at the review itself, as opposed to discussion about it, here it is.

I clicked your hyperlink and looked at the actual review. I see no problem with the one image of the book itself.

I assume that the review is just that...a review and not an excerpt from the work. I searched and found only four quotation marks ( " ) on the entire page so I assume that you direct quoted only two sentences or phrases and the rest is your own summary of the work.

Looks fine, no copyright issue should arise.

Quote: MDawg

I searched and found only four quotation marks ( " ) on the entire page

Again, thank you for your help.

I do not challenge you to question your expertise, but to try to learn.

That said, it is actionable to reveal another's trade secret. I explained exactly how said system worked, in my own words.

This is not the same situation, but if I hacked into KFC's computers, stole the recipe for the 11 herbs and spices, and published it, they would have a legitimate legal grievance, as it might cost them money if other's offered the same chicken for less money.

It should not matter that I didn't quote the recipe exactly, perhaps changing the order of the 11 herbs and spices and maybe converting it to the metric system.

Quote: Wizard

Again, thank you for your help.

I do not challenge you to question your expertise, but to try to learn.

That said, it is actionable to reveal another's trade secret. I explained exactly how said system worked, in my own words.

This is not the same situation, but if I hacked into KFC's computers, stole the recipe for the 11 herbs and spices, and published it, they would have a legitimate legal grievance, as it might cost them money if other's offered the same chicken for less money.

It should not matter that I didn't quote the recipe exactly, perhaps changing the order of the 11 herbs and spices and maybe converting it to the metric system.

I don't think that is a perfect analogy as the KFC recipe is meant to be hidden from as many eyes as possible while the Keefer system book is meant to be read by as many paying eyeballs as possible.

Would it make a difference if you read the book and then verbally described it to people you knew? Would that not be something you felt you had a right to do.

There are fair use doctrines and I don't believe giving a description of the contents of a book is off the table

I considered the matter from a copyright infringement standpoint only, and saw none.

Now, in order for an infringement claim to be actionable, it has to infringe on the basis of protected intellectual property - for example something patented, trademarked, copyrighted. To get right down to it, I'm not aware that anything in this Keefer book is protected under any basis other than copyright.

If you're aware that there are some other protections that might apply, let me know I will analyze whether there is an issue.

You mention trade secrets.

Just to give you an analogy, the formula for Coca Cola. Long ago the inventor decided not to patent the formula, because patents must be published, and after the life of the patent expires, then whatever is disclosed under the patent becomes public domain, such that anyone may use it copy it with relative impunity. Instead, Coca Cola decided to guard the secret formula. As such, they never had any patent protection over the formula, but by simply keeping it secret, so long as they are able to retain that secrecy, the formula never gets out there at all.

Now, if someone somehow manages to steal the formula for Coca Cola, the company would have an action against the appropriator. Not on the basis of IP law per se (no patent), but simply based on a common law theft of someone of value, which is the essential basis of most trade secret protection laws anyway.

You read lately about this sort of thing at the Tesla factory, where Elon Musk is regularly accusing employees or ex employees of stealing trade secrets.

But by virtue of their nature - trade secrets must first of all, be, secret. If not secret, then there is no basis on which to accuse someone of stealing them. Trade secrets must be - to use another word, confidential.

Here, this book is published, so there aren't any trade secrets associated with it that I can see. Nothing about this book is confidential.

I could go on and on, but just consider another example - if you have an idea for a business, and you decide that you cannot somehow protect it, with say, some kind of patent, which for some time now even ideas may be patented, but for this particular idea you decide that you cannot patent it - well then, the moment you put the idea into action, the moment you start the business, it is in the public domain, with no patent protection affixed to it, and anyone may copy it.

You hear this regularly if you watch the show Shark Tank, where "Mr. Wonderful" asks the business owner if he has any kind of patent on his product or idea, and if not, tells the would-be-businessman time and again, something like, "Then what's to stop your competitors from squashing you like the cockroach that you are."

Similarly here, this Keefer guy might have come up with something unique, but absent his having prior to disclosing it obtained some kind of registered protection to his idea (i.e. patent), once he published it, he lost any kind of "trade secret" rights to sue anyone for stealing it. Once it's out there, it's no longer a secret, it's no longer confidential, and trade secret protection no longer applies.

So to summarize, in this context:

-First, you look to see if there is any copyright, trademark, patent protection. If yes - then infringement claims may derive from these.

-If not, or if none of these IP rights are violated, then perhaps you look to the trade secret issue, but only if the information is in fact secret, is in fact confidential. Published material is not subject to trade secret law.

Thank you, MDawg, for your additional legal analysis. I am just seeing it now.

In other news, I am happy to say I finally did a video on the system. Please enjoy. I welcome all comments.


Direct: https://youtu.be/Bks8WF9VBFU

....................................


the reality of copyrights is that millions of Copyrights have been violated and nothing has been done about it

internetarchive.com has more than one million books that can be read for free

they have James Patterson's 1995 best seller "Kiss the Girls" which can be read for free

one of the other huge copyright violators is Google thru YouTube

YouTube has thousands of movies and songs that can be watched or listened to for free in violation of copyright

however, both Google (YouTube) and internetarchive.com will respond to the DMCA (Digital Millennium Copyright Act) which became law in October of 2000 and has been incorporated into the Copyright Act (Title 17 of the U.S. code).

Copyright owners can request a DMCA takedown and both Google (YouTube) and internetarchive.com will respond and take the media down

the copyright owner either will not or cannot pursue it further after the media has been taken down




there is the law and then there is reality

outside of Google (YouTube) and internetarchive.com there are millions of media items out there on the web in violation of Copyright

whether and how these much smaller companies (or even private individuals) respond to a DMCA takedown request is unknown

if they don't respond they can be sued

the reality is very few Copyright owners pursue these matters

which is a very good thing for those who like to read books for free and watch movies for free and listen to songs for free - as long as they don't have any ethical qualms about it





*

Quote: lilredrooster

....................................


the reality of copyrights is that millions of Copyrights have been violated and nothing has been done about it

As far as I know a betting system
cannot be copyrighted. Just like
a recipe can't.