Larry Williams

[Frederick Foresight]

I believe that he was trying to be safe with OPM while using maximum leverage and big risks with his contest account. Look at large funds today, they have several different programs running and some win big and some lose big in the same time period.

That's one way of looking at it But apparently the NFA chose to interpret it differently given its warning in its findings.

If you are at all familiar with the way trading was conducted in those days and the fact that time stamps (and their delays) were a topic of discussion back in the day, then you would consider another possible scenario, perhaps one not quite as benign. And that's not even mentioning the issue of account segregation or absence thereof, which, if I am not mistaken, is what led to to the nominal fines. Give it some thought.

And just how "safe" was he being if the safe money lost multiples of the amount that the "maximum leverage" money earned? Come on.

The coin toss...

And speaking of coins, my interpretation of the NFA's warning in its findings is that the loss in managed money and the profit in his personal account are two sides of the same coin.

 

[long]

That's one way of looking at it But apparently the NFA chose to interpret it differently given its warning in its findings.

If you are at all familiar with the way trading was conducted in those days and the fact that time stamps were a topic of discussion back in the day, then you would consider another possible scenario, perhaps one not as benign.

Several years ago I ran across a rant from a Gann enthusiast from Australia that offered an explanation that wasn’t benign. His theory was something like that LW was placing all sorts of trades on several accounts and then manipulating the ledger at the clearinghouse level to put winners in the contest account. I’ve thought about it several times over the years and I’ve decided that it’s highly unlikely that happened. It would take too many people cooperating and risking way more in fines, damages, and jail time to justify future earnings from selling seminars. It’s just a conspiracy theory. Maybe he just got lucky, but he did it legitimately. That said, like other people have mentioned I would like to see his returns since then.

 

[Frederick Foresight]

Several years ago I ran across a rant from a Gann enthusiast from Australia that offered an explanation that wasn’t benign. His theory was something like that LW was placing all sorts of trades on several accounts and then manipulating the ledger at the clearinghouse level to put winners in the contest account.

That may well be the most astute thing a Gann enthusiast ever concluded. Just my opinion, of course. And arguably that of the NFA.

If you were to read Gallacher's Winner Take All, wherein he exposes a lot of charlatan vendors, you would learn that Robbins and a few vendors had special relationships that one might otherwise find troubling. The book is still available today. If false, then you would think that Williams et al would have sued the bejesus out of the author. But not a peep.

 

[long]

That may well be the most astute thing a Gann enthusiast ever concluded. Just my opinion, of course. And arguably that of the NFA.

If you were to read Gallacher's Winner Take All, wherein he exposes a lot of charlatan vendors, you would learn that Robbins and a few vendors had special relationships that one might otherwise find troubling. The book is still available today. If false, then you would think that Williams et al would have sued the bejesus out of the author. But not a peep.

The write up from the Australian was actually a picture of the PAPER he typed it on. I think it was written during the time period when LW was hiding from the irs in Australia. Apparently the rant was provoked by Larry doing a lot of preaching against the writers religion…..

 

[SunTrader]

Several years ago I ran across a rant from a Gann enthusiast from Australia that offered an explanation that wasn’t benign. His theory was something like that LW was placing all sorts of trades on several accounts and then manipulating the ledger at the clearinghouse level to put winners in the contest account. I’ve thought about it several times over the years and I’ve decided that it’s highly unlikely that happened. It would take too many people cooperating and risking way more in fines, damages, and jail time to justify future earnings from selling seminars. It’s just a conspiracy theory. Maybe he just got lucky, but he did it legitimately. That said, like other people have mentioned I would like to see his returns since then.

People who get "lucky" (personally don't believe in such a thing as luck) or bet it all on a sure thing don't last almost 60 years in this business.

 

[long]

People who get "lucky" (personally don't believe in such a thing as luck) or bet it all on a sure thing don't last almost 60 years in this business.

I agree. I think Larry is the real deal. I’d still like to see his returns since then though.

 

[Frederick Foresight]

The write up from the Australian was actually a picture of the PAPER he typed it on. I think it was written during the time period when LW was hiding from the irs in Australia. Apparently the rant was provoked by Larry doing a lot of preaching against the writers religion…..

Huh? The IRS sought to extradite Williams in the 2000s for alleged tax evasion between 1999 and 2001. The edition of the book available on Amazon was published in 1997. My own copy is of the 1994 edition. So, no.

The book doesn't focus exclusively on Williams, although he figures prominently and for more reasons than what we are discussing here.

 

[Frederick Foresight]

People who get "lucky" (personally don't believe in such a thing as luck) or bet it all on a sure thing don't last almost 60 years in this business.

I agree. I think Larry is the real deal. I’d still like to see his returns since then though.

*Sigh*

You can lead a horse to water...

 

[long]

Huh? The IRS sought to extradite Williams in the 2000s for alleged tax evasion between 1999 and 2001. The edition of the book available on Amazon was published in 1997. My own copy is of the 1994 edition. So, no.

The book doesn't focus exclusively on Williams, although he figures prominently and for more reasons than what we are discussing here.

I wasn’t referring to the book. I was referencing a rant I found on the web several years ago.

 

[Frederick Foresight]

I wasn’t referring to the book. I was referencing a rant I found on the web several years ago.

Sorry, then I don't know what you are referring to. My mistake.