Search results

trucking Medjool Palms from California is pretty lucrative to some.

you could do worse things.

"Can't we all just get a long?" Rodney King

didn't someone once say, "can't we all just get real long?"

i didnt say everything was relative. I said 'good' is a relative term. what might be good for you might unacceptable for someone else. Clearly, blowing up is not good for anyone. But swinging for the fences is good for some, and they know they will sometimes strike out trying.

love to see how you'd react under similar conditions. better? relative term. safer? maybe. last chapter not written.

I think it's dangerous to fool ourselves into thinking we know what's in the other guy's head...and that we are somehow better.

Thanks.

It makes sense. I just didn't bother to expound on it. Too many threads, too many debates, and much real work to be done. Trust me, I'm OK with it. It is possible to manage risk non-optimally. Maybe if I've had time to think about it more I can answer better. I'm glad you know so much...

hey, it works.

I want to maximize my upside, consistent with my risk parameters. anything short of that is a waste of time.

I don't have to watch cnbc anymore (being remote has it's advantages). When I did though, there was the one with the guy that says, 'Do I <i>look</i> like a guy that needs lower rates?....Hey, I asked you a question!' That one was a hoot. what, isn't the html working anymore?

I basically said this elsewhere but it was in more esoteric terms. I agree with you completely. Intelligence can deal with randomness.

beautifully put.

if it is random, people still make money doing it. hedge yourself for the long term.

the fine print?

see above -- that is, my previous response. and have a great weekend.

I'm saying that you can control whether or not you exceed your previous largest loss. I don't know what you mean by 'optimal f being a quantification of risk.' That's ambiguous. Optimal f is the optimal fixed fraction of your account that you should reivest as derived from a statistical...

Well, that IS the downside of optimal F -- that you're always pushing the envelope on size. SO, when the bad day -- that many here seem to think will never come to them -- comes, you feel it. Big. The idea of f was that if your largest loser wasn't exceeded, you couldn't blow up. And...