It is worth revisiting

[maxinger]

how stupidly misinformed it is lol. I hope you guys have learned something since we last discussed the topic.

I will start this out by saying that it is just as easy for a stock to go from $5 to $10 as it was to go from $10 to $5.. mathematical percentages are not probabilities. Probability is based on the average true range or a standard deviation.

 

[wxytrader]

Stocks return what? Say 8% a year on average.
Therefore it takes the average stock about 10 years to double in value, over the long run.

No getting away from that, shout about short terms ATR and Stdev all you want.

Just like the last time you guys are oblivious to the ridiculous logic of the video...you get hunkered down by irrelevant scenarios. THE VIDEO is claiming that the price is ACTUALLY hindered by math! That's it.

Black scholes doesn't take into account the probability of price having to go back 100% when it's only dropped 50% LOL.

 

[Bad_Badness]

This is the same type of esoteric "math brain" stuff as saying I made 1000%, but started with 1 cent. Sure it is true, but irrelevant. A bit like Xeon's paradox about walking 1/2 the way to the wall you will never reach it.

Trading is about logistics, practicalities and execution. The sooner one moves on to these aspects the better.

 

[wxytrader]

Sure it is true, but irrelevant.

IT'S NOT TRUE! I'm starting to wonder that the reason I have a (2008) Lambo in my garage might have less to do with my trading prowess and more to do who I am trading against lol.

How can you guys not see the glaring absurdity in the claim this video makes???????

 

[Frederick Foresight]

I have a (2008) Lambo in my garage

For the love of gawd, please STFU.

 

[taowave]

I can only imagine what the troll is preaching

For the love of gawd, please STFU.

 

[Wide Tailz]

a stock has a harder time going from $5 to $10 than going from $10 to $5 dollars

Found in backtesting years ago that all stocks have a different optimum for long or short trend following signalz, take profit trailing stops, and general threshold to distinguish between a new trend or just daily chop.

But that was years ago. It's probably different now.

 

[wxytrader]

Found in backtesting years ago that all stocks have a different optimum for long or short trend following signalz, take profit trailing stops, and general threshold to distinguish between a new trend or just daily chop.

But that was years ago. It's probably different now.

Hey don't miss quite me. I never said that. A stock has just as easy a time going from 5 to 10 as it does going from 10 to 5. The whole point of this topic is to expose the lapse in logic from the claims in the video which tries to say that the price will be somehow hindered by basic arithmetic.

 

[Bad_Badness]

IT'S NOT TRUE! I'm starting to wonder that the reason I have a (2008) Lambo in my garage might have less to do with my trading prowess and more to do who I am trading against lol.

How can you guys not see the glaring absurdity in the claim this video makes???????

Oh yeah, as if people in retail actually trade against each other. I am looking at code, to trade in the 21st century, you are looking a YouTube like a 21st century digital serf. Go ahead and masturbate around with 1960s trading concepts and post away.
Ignore ON.

 

[wxytrader]

Oh yeah, as if people in retail actually trade against each other. I am looking at code, to trade in the 21st century, you are looking a YouTube like a 21st century digital serf. Go ahead and masturbate around with 1960s trading concepts and post away.
Ignore ON.

All the code in the world isn't going to help you if you can't pick a direction.