Search results

The theory goes that one should pick numbers over 31; not because they have a better chance of being drawn, but because if they do get selected, your chance of sharing the prize with others goes down. Why 31? I'll leave that for others to explain.

<IMG SRC=http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/attachment.php?s=&postid=50848>

In a bid to increase my longevity, I continue to write but with brevity, In an attempt to transpose, Existing rhyme into prose, Good Lord! This is no time for levity.

The buzz in the trading arena, Was that Candle'd been ravaged by Katrina, When the former came to, He was missing a shoe, While the latter was eating Purina.

In addition to the entertainment value, I am also impressed by how you manage to remember so many passwords.

Hey Platypus! Great hearing from you - it's been too long :D

Even closer? You seem to imply that your solution is the correct one. It is elegant, but still an approximation. Why not go the whole way? Not quite. That means you will see 1 real case and 499*0.05, or 24.95, false positives in each hypothetical group of 500 tested. Or better still, dividing 1...

Aphie, you should remember this! The old Bayes' Theorem : P(A|B) = (P(B|A)*P(A))/P(B) Let A = the event of having the disease Let B = the event of testing positive P(A|B) = (1*(1/500))/((1/500)+(499/500)*(0.05)) = 20/519 Notes (1) P(A|B) is the probability that A occurs, given...

Is that before or after her nervous breakdown? Sorry ART, but you're way off base.

Never mind.

I have been divested of all my assets late in life save for a 3K account I use for trading. Afternoon breaks are often spent riding in the back seat of a fast car between two burly men with a hood over my head. I'm glad if I make it back in time for the next morning's open.

Your response is far from confrontational and one that is both welcome and expected. When I work with tick data, I use simulations which assume a "fill probability". For systems similar to yours, if I find that my system will be profitable for a fill probability of 20%, but not for a fill...

It doesn't work on paper.

I work with tick data, but I think I understood what you meant. The FIFO nature of Globex orders invalidates your assumptions which, even after using best possible case fills, yield a marginal result. Sorry, but I would look elsewhere. However, get a second opinion.

In your backtesting, what assumptions did you make for getting a fill with a limit order? This is crucial and could easily swing your already precarious results into loss territory. I could think of worse things than trading a system like yours, but I would need to believe in it 100% beforehand...

I see the shit's starting to float to the surface. vegasoul, I'll be in Chicago next week. There's a few things I can clear up for you if you'd like to meet for dinner. Must be some good Chinese restaurants in North Point?

A 1% advantage over the house means that for each $55,000 wagered, over the long run you will make $550. Or in other words, if you're trading the minis, you're making an average of 11 ES points per contract, for each and every contract traded. You have grossly underestimated what a 1%...

This is what your sane electron said about the Holocaust in another post : I would not hesitate to put a bullet through that scumbag's head. Supposedly, of course.

If that's all you did say, then it wouldn't have evoked much of a response. What in fact you wrote was You can spit in my face and I'll dismiss it as rain. You can call my mother a whore and I'll treat you to dinner. But if you tell me that my mother should thank the Nazis for killing her...

Use Conditional Formatting in Format.