Search results

Yes I did read the part where you said the CREDIT MARKET and of course I was being sarcastic about applying the Hershey method. But don't tell me: "I regularly run my stochastic models for Interest Rate risk (vasicek), Bond Recovery Rates, and Credit Spread Premiums (GARCH(1,1))" and then say...

You're clearly the expert on these matters, so I'll defer to you and use "Grobean" until/unless you issue further guidance on distinguishing among the inbred. Thanks!

Yikes! I've been spelling it "Grobian!" Is that incorrect, or is it an acceptable variant?

I believe if we held a poll on penis size, it would be about as accurate as this. And who's to say that you Grobians didn't pad the vote with aliases? P.S. I have no aliases and did NOT vote.

You know, I'm so used to reading their contradictions that I missed that!

How exactly are you avoiding prediction with those models? Or isn't forecasting prediction? LOL!!! And why are you using historical data, instead of only "NOW?" Maybe you should introduce your boss to the Hershey method! The reason your backtests show different results might be that...

Of course you take that garbage (the P,V Boolean relation) to the bank. :p I believe you... NOT!!!!! You've got a lot to learn about time series analysis. Good luck in candyland.

Is this your roundabout way of saying that you're participating in the contest under Jack Hershey? Are you participating under any other names as well or instead?

So are you participating or not? If so, under what name(s)? Don't pretend you can't answer. And no, they won't be asking for me because I am NOT participating. You're a ringer for CNBC? How so? The definition I found for "ringer" at dictionary.com that made the most sense to me is: "any...

Speaking of reading comprehension issues and intellect... I didn't say you were participating... I asked. That's what the question mark means. Also, you have absolutely zero knowledge of what I trade and when I trade it so you're the one with the delusional fantasies. Finally, if you...

Geez Spydie, it looks like you're the one with her undies in a bunch! Might that be because you and some of your grape kool-aid drinking buddies have multiple entries in the CNBC contest? IF you are participating, the only way you'll have any credibility is to let us know the nics NOW...

I didn't think I'd get a straight answer from you. Let me try again: are you or any of your "PhDs" participating in the CNBC trading contest? And if so, under what nic(s)? Because showing results after the contest is over proves NOTHING, as multiple entry scams are older than you.

You've exposed yourself as an ignorant poser with your own words. And please, speak for yourself. Try to get your facts straight for once. Don't say what I see or think as you've learned to do from your master, Jack, because my posts have obviously gone over your head and you haven't a clue...

OVER ONE MONTH AGO, I wrote that there's NO WAY you would participate OPENLY in the CNBC contest under your real name for the duration of the contest. http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=1359525#post1359525 IMO, if you show up it's ONLY because you have several accounts...

Blasphemy! FYI, Jack is "in the market at all times... making money all of the time..." If you don't believe me, ask him!

You certainly are a dedicated little Grobian groveler, aren't you? First, you AGAIN evaded answering why Jack's "Tommorrow's Paper Today" manifesto on the "P,V Boolean relation" (which is still central to his view of the markets) advocates prediction yet all of you now are saying the opposite...

My backtests were missing several things: lies and a need to believe.

All this does is prove even more that you have no idea what you're talking about. You admit that the execution of trades is random but then claim it doesn't randomly affect price which you then "establish" with a diagram of a temporarily unchanged bid & ask! LOL! This from the one who claims...

Wow, Jack, your claims are get more and more bizarre... here's my prediction: that one day we'll find out you're no longer posting because of advanced dementia. I truly hope I'm wrong (despite my thoughts on your methods) but from reading your recent posts, that's where I see this heading.

On the contrary Mr. Propaganda Minister: 1) The tests were done based on Jack's document (which I've posted several times already) and with Spyder's code from the Wealthlab site. After I posted the equity curve, you and Jack's other sycophants tried adding in conditions AFTER THE FACT that...