Search results

If everybody "knows" this, why can't YOU document it?? And by the way, when did Hollywood become a monolith? Last time I checked, it was a bunch of different studios all competing against each other. Who decided that they all got together to promote the same agendas?

Just can't help yourself, can you? Like most righties you are an habitual liar. Gacy was never a "leading Democrat" and millions of people of all political persuasions have had their pictures taken with First Ladies. Nice try at keeping politics in your spew while pretending to be above it...

'Mythbusters' cannonball hits Dublin home, minivan Demian Bulwa,Henry K. Lee, Chronicle Staff Writers San Francisco Chronicle December 7, 2011 04:00 AM Copyright San Francisco Chronicle. All rights reserved. Wednesday, December 7, 2011 One of the zany experiments staged by the...

Not a documented one, evidently. And the unsupported opinion of a rabid rightie does not qualify as evidence.

Again: YOU ARE FULL OF SHIT. Prove that Hollywood is "overwhelmingly liberal" or STFU. The vast majority of Hollywood movies have nothing to do with exclusively liberal or conservative values. Wanting to see the bad guys punished for their evil deeds is not something conservatives can claim...

As usual, 74, you're full of shit. Pedophilia is deplorable no matter who does it; it should be excoriated and punished everywhere. But to say this is LIBERAL is just some typical reighturd horseshit that frankly I'm not the least bit surprised to hear from a mental defect like YOU. PROVE...

The US Navy has the world's second biggest air force. That tells you all you need to know about their wasteful spending.

Do assmonkeys like that waste of protein even know that Christmas is celebrated in the Harry Potter books? JK Rowling is no more a Satanist than that know-nothing "exorcist" is. And did we really have to be told his favorite movie is "The Exorcist"? LOL! A real Christian would have chosen...

It doesn't mean anything to me. Why would you want to do that? :confused: To repeat: RoR = ((1-edge)/(1+edge))^((C-X)/U) where edge = (pW - q|L|)/U and U = (pW² + qL²)^½ RoR < 1 if edge > 0 and C > X

It's possible. But this thread isn't about blackboxes or any other trading system in particular, it's about risk of ruin. Which is why I don't get your initial post. If threads touching on math offend you, just hit the back button and move on.

As opposed to something utterly meaningless like Sharpe ratio? You're right, it would never be accepted.

Or ... Assuming the first three posts in this thread actually had a point (:eek: ), I'll use risk of ruin as a measure of performance. Logically we can expect the better system to have a lower RoR for a given starting bankroll. RoR = ((1 - z)/z)^((B0-X)/U) (B0-X) = U*log[RoR]/log[(1 -...

Yep. It should be hard to believe a Republiturd wants to bring up vacation days when we can still remember the last guy (a Repub) set the world's record for Presidential vacation time off but they really are that stupid. The OP should look at the vacation time off set up by Speaker Boner.

Hell of a troll post. You drunk or naturally this stupid? "Is there some point to this jibberish and math formula crap." Yes, as usual there's some point to "math formula crap." You are offered a choice between two blackbox systems. The first has a winrate of 60%, an average trade...

Untrue. The probability of randomly selecting a particular (i.e., predetermined) number is zero. But the probability of selecting any number between 0 and 1 is one by virtue of the fact that the act of selecting a number between 0 and 1 is performed. Randomly selecting an unpredetermined...

You could say T = C + W = X + |L| + W In that case the RoR is just q. You're welcome. :)

edge > 0

You want a positive-expectation trading system. So get away from the Gambler's Ruin formula and use the Trader's Ruin formula: RoR = ((1-edge)/(1+edge))^((C-X)/U) where edge = (pW - q|L|)/U and U = (pW² + qL²)^½ RoR < 1 if edge > 0 and C > X

Naturally the most interesting formula is R{infinity|X|C} = (q/p)^(C-X) if q < p Mathematics professor Peter A. Griffin wanted to use this formula to calculate the risk of ruin for his expert blackjack systems but his real-world payoffs were not all equal (just like for trading...

Unsurprisingly this result is fully consistent with the RoR (risk of ruin) formulae derived elsewhere via the Gambler's Ruin Theorem and summarized below: Let W = |L| = one (1) betting unit. Let R{T|X|C} be the probability of failure (aka risk of ruin) for a gambler with current...