anybody who thinks that rewarding people who trade in a way that puts them at a severe disadvantage in a zero sum game against the dealer isn't underhanded I do not understand. its not behaviour that should be rewarded by a firm with its clients interests at heart, even tho the winner has the "best" return.
and as someone who had to deal with a lot of angry losers, I feel more sympathy for the guy who was pissed about 500 than 50 000. not that we ever gave anyone a "do over" its just sad he was betting the rent.
anyways they could give the winner 200k if they wanted with no change to the bottom line, cause its all comin right back!
and as someone who had to deal with a lot of angry losers, I feel more sympathy for the guy who was pissed about 500 than 50 000. not that we ever gave anyone a "do over" its just sad he was betting the rent.
anyways they could give the winner 200k if they wanted with no change to the bottom line, cause its all comin right back!
