Marketsurfer says short shake shack

[marketsurfer]

This dawg is going to sub 50 on this plunge over time. Next sub 25. Mark my words. surf

 

[Buy1Sell2]

Wind up or not. He is following a "system". So simulation or real, it sucks.

Surely you are aware that there is no system being delivered here on ET by the OP. I can tell you this much though---Price drivers are RSI and MACD divergences that are being read incorrectly. The OP uses charts--make no mistake. He also believes in Technical Analysis and certainly feels that Money Management is the key to trading. ---You are being WOUND UP--plain and simple.

 

[londonkid]

This dawg is going to sub 50 on this plunge over time. Next sub 25. Mark my words. surf

I agree its going sub 50 long term but your timing is off. New highs will be made to drive out the weak hands first. Will you puke at $100?

 

[romik]

I followed this thread by coincidence and it was an eye opener for me.
MS took losses between -17 and -36% on 4 positions. Horrible.
The average loss on the total investment was -24%.
So his ending capital is 76% from his initial capital. He went short (full position in my calculations) again at 86.70.

1. The prices have to drop 31% to be break even ( without commission).
2. The prices have to drop 44% to make 10% (without commission).
3. The prices have to drop 57% to make 20% (without commission).

Now I understand why he believes it is impossible to make decent returns. The way he trades it is indeed impossible. I trade futures with high leverage. My stop is on 12.5% only. So my risk per trade is 3 times smaller than his first trade (short 67.09).

Price drivers or price divers?

View attachment 153358

Yet the final -24% could equal to -1% risk to total capital.

 

[londonkid]

Thanks, Debit. Win or lose- the ne'erdowells and broke souls who haunt this board reveal themselves clearly with the h8.

Hold on. I am fine having a sensible debate but not if you are going to be delusional. You cant take a large loss averaging in 4 times then claim others are broken souls for calling you out when you go slightly onside after re-entering.

If you are claiming 'victory' after being net down large this just got very weird.

PS retail is 69% short spoos.

 

[i960]

The game is always about which side can get screwed the most. Only in pure panic selling or buying do we actually see unmolested moves without prior positioning.

 

[romik]

What is he actually selling within his subscription? Forecasts? Forecasts and trade entry calls? Any track record? I will be offering a subscription service in late Summer, I will be providing stats for potential subscribers, Surf refers to his Surf report journal, is that a joke?

 

[i am nobody]

Yet the final -24% could equal to -1% risk to total capital.

That's possible.
But what kind of a system is it if you have losses of 24% (from 17 to 36%!!!) ????? That's a system that has no clue.

On top of that adding three times to a losing position that on top of that is against the direction of the market.... from this kind of systems you can find 13 in a dozen.

 

[i am nobody]

12.5 percent stop is over 6 times too large.

To judge stops you should know the drawdown over the last X years. And also the recovery time after a DD. If there are never 3 stops in a row, the max DD is 25%. Depending of the returns that can be reasonable. The past 10 years I never had a drawdown of 30%, which is for me acceptable. And drawdowns were always recovered within 48 hours.

 

[romik]

That's possible.
But what kind of a system is it if you have losses of 24% (from 17 to 36%!!!) ????? That's a system that has no clue.

On top of that adding three times to a losing position that on top of that is against the direction of the market.... from this kind of systems you can find 13 in a dozen.

In principle I don't have anything against large stops, as long as that loss doesn't chew a huge chunk of capital. Scaling in is nonsense though, I agree.