That is absolutely not correct. I would have lost a lot of money. Otherwise where did I get the money I got? You may say that both me and my opposite side made money (which is true in certain cases), but I made money faster than my opponent and my probs are higher. So, I can compound faster than him, not to mention that I have lower risk because I enter at or close to a short term top/bottom. Therefore my mark-to-market equity curve is smoother than my opponent, and I can therefore use more leverage if I choose to.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
9:35AM, May 05, Who Is Shorting NDX
- Thread starter riskfreetrading
- Start date
That is absolutely not correct. I would have lost a lot of money. Otherwise where did I get the money I got? You may say that both me and my opposite side made money (which is true in certain cases), but I made money faster than my opponent and my probs are higher. So, I can compound faster than him, not to mention that I have lower risk because I enter at or close to a short term top/bottom. Therefore my mark-to-market equity curve is smoother than my opponent, and I can therefore use more leverage if I choose to.
Quote from balda:
Do you realize that if you would buy and add to your position each time you called a top you would have made more money with much less effort.
Quote from xflat2186:
His ego prevents him from learning anything
Best most accurate 'call' of this entire thread made by xflat2186.
Quote from riskfreetrading:
That is absolutely not correct. I would have lost a lot of money.
Quote from riskfreetrading:
That is absolutely not correct. I would have lost a lot of money. Otherwise where did I get the money I got? You may say that both me and my opposite side made money (which is true in certain cases), but I made money faster than my opponent and my probs are higher. So, I can compound faster than him, not to mention that I have lower risk because I enter at or close to a short term top/bottom. Therefore my mark-to-market equity curve is smoother than my opponent, and I can therefore use more leverage if I choose to.
Lower risk? Like where you close down your trades on the profit side for 5 points and let your losers run over a dozen against you?
Quote from riskfreetrading:
That is absolutely not correct. I would have lost a lot of money. Otherwise where did I get the money I got? You may say that both me and my opposite side made money (which is true in certain cases), but I made money faster than my opponent and my probs are higher. So, I can compound faster than him, not to mention that I have lower risk because I enter at or close to a short term top/bottom. Therefore my mark-to-market equity curve is smoother than my opponent, and I can therefore use more leverage if I choose to.
You have bee calling tops from 4/28/08
lets take QQQQ for example. since I do not want to search your useless posts I will use highs of the day as a buy signal (I will buy high of the day from 4/28/08 on QQQQ)
4/28 47.62
4/29 47.76
4/30 48.06
5/1 48.72
5/2 49.19
Today not closed yet high as of now 49.03
47.62+47.76+48.06+48.72+49.19+49.03=290.38/6=48.39 average cost QQQQ trades now at 48.59
Edit: Do you realize if I used your calls dollar cost average on QQQQ would have been even better?
Quote from MAESTRO:
Ok, I could have missed the point. But isn't it true that the longer the time frame the less chances one has to be right?
If I understand your question correctly, the answer is not true and I think there are multiple interepretation to your point.
Let me give an example. Suppose that ABC stock is at 100. Someone predicts that the price will be higher than say 120 at time T. Another predicted that it will be above same price during [0,T]. Intuitively the prob of the latter is greater than the prob of the former. What you may not find intuitive is that, the ratio of the two probs is EXACTLY equal to 2 (or 0.5 depending on which one is in the numerator).
If you increase T, both probs rise.
balda,
You're missing the point on some of his carefully worded posts. In general heâll start a thread with a question. âwho is shorting...â something to that effect. Then if in fact the market does fall he later claims he did get short when he posed the question. If the market rallies he then claims to have shorted from a higher price or he lets the thread die and hopes others do as well.
Heâs been asked many times what point heâs trying to make when he implies he made trades or calls long after the markets have moved that way.
I particularly like the posts about 40 million readers who he claims are loyal to him and move the markets on his calls.
You're missing the point on some of his carefully worded posts. In general heâll start a thread with a question. âwho is shorting...â something to that effect. Then if in fact the market does fall he later claims he did get short when he posed the question. If the market rallies he then claims to have shorted from a higher price or he lets the thread die and hopes others do as well.
Heâs been asked many times what point heâs trying to make when he implies he made trades or calls long after the markets have moved that way.
I particularly like the posts about 40 million readers who he claims are loyal to him and move the markets on his calls.
Quote from MAESTRO:
Yes, I agree. You are making a very valid point. In the world of Math it translates: A conditional probability of two independent events is always lower than the individual probability of each of those separate events.
You seem to confuse conditional probability with joint probability.
As an exercise what do you think is the probability to call, say price of NDX at 10:10AM, as the top for the session from 9:30AM to 4:00PM, in these two cases:
1. Before the sesssion starts (390 minutes).
2. During the session at 10:10AM (350 minutes remaining).
Everyone can give an answer. We will see how good ET is with probs.
PS: MA: if you were to give a name to prob of point 2, with respect to prob of point 1, what would you call it?