Search results

Sure, man. And, actually, I made a real-time call that you were wrong two weeks ago about this being a crash and so far, I'm right. Here's another real-time call. In 2013, your user name will be "blowingup2013", not "madeatonfromtheslowmotioncrash2013". I'd say "good luck", but I doubt...

Ugh, man, you can't debate with someone who's just tuned reality out, but I will mention again that when you started this thread, we were LOWER than we are NOW. Not to mention that we are still only 3-4% off the ES highs after a month of correcting. That is not a "crash", that's simply a dip...

Still think you're "right"? If so, I'd hate to see what happens to your positions when you're wrong.

No, if the title of the thread was "We are about to make a bottom of a trading range that will last at least two weeks", you would have been right. Since that wasn't the title, you were wrong. I still say this whole thread has become an obvious troll and should be closed.

Updated Gordon Gekko: "You want a friendly algo? Get a robot dog." :)

In yet another example of your impeccable timing, you posted this at 3:50 ET and we have yet to have a print below the low of that minute since, but, instead have moved up 11 points in the ES.

For those who worry about this, think of it this way. If your strategy had a positive expectancy before the age of robot algos, it was because your strategy took money away from another set of traders who had a strategy with a negative expectancy. OK, now just picture that same set of traders...

You are delusional. Here is the timestamp from the first post in this disaster of a thread: 04-10-12 10:59 AM The low during the hour between 10AM ET and 11AM ET that day was 1369 and the low for that day was 1352.5. In case you haven't noticed, we are, at this very minute, higher than...

Here you go. What's interesting in the first study is that they say that short-term traders succeed with more masculine ratios, but that longer-term traders may succeed more with more feminine ratios. So, orient your trading time horizon around what your biology is best suited for. It's science...

I remember some studies showing that more men overestimated their ability to trade, leading them to think that it was less risky than it actually is, whereas women had a more realistic assessment of their abilities and avoided trading as a consequence. Everything in life is driven by biology...

First someone brings up bankruptcy and now you're bringing up serfs? Hey, the topic is DEADBEAT DEBTORS, OK?

Whatever the number, I agree that it isn't anywhere near 100% and that really a significant number of your trades are just breakeven, when you add together the winners and losers and the largest percentage of your gains will come from the few big winners. I've asked a couple of times for...

And here I was thinking that your first comment was substance-less. It's a veritable philosophical treatise compared to this one. Man, you are one pathetic tool.

Even so, Billy Beane didn't strike gold with every prospect he selected using the Moneyball approach. I don't know why you can't just admit that your original post, while containing some good points, paints an unrealistic picture of what can be done? Failing that, point someone out who's...

And you are? Your comment is completely substance-less. Why do you conclude that? Come on, "thrill me with your acumen". Again, as I said to the original poster, show me someone successful who's talked about his trading strategy as being aligned with what this thread is claiming.

I think we might end up having to agree to disagree here. I simply don't think the market works in such a way that anyone could identify 10 "fat pitch" opportunities and hit home runs on all 10. Simply trading less doesn't eliminate all uncertainty from trading strategy. What would help...

While I wholeheartedly agree that one needs to be selective in taking trades (in my opinion, the kinds of imbalances between the various sides of the market which lead to profitable trades on the timeframe I trade aren't formed in an instant), I have not found a correlation between the amount of...

Bankruptcy is a completely separate topic. Try to stay focused, OK?

Ah, the old "you don't know what my arguments in favor of my position are" gambit, combined with a little "conspiracy theory" twist. Boring. Sorry, I will side with Nietzsche's approach (debtors' prisons are fine because the punishment fits the crime) over yours. I think he was just a...

Yes, and you are correct that using the other filter, both subsets which rely on the second filter are negative, with the "good" part of the second filter being slightly less negative than the "bad" part. So, the "good" and "bad" are actually a second filter. The filter which discards the 170...