Gent(i)le readers, do you ever wonder why immoderation tolerates , nay, ENCOURAGED, the creation of this thread?
To give the lonely wretched pathetic loser B-Team its own home? Nah!!!!
To see if we could improve SCT through pee(r) review? Unlikely.
To see if we would make utter fools of our selves and make the A-Team look brilliant by comparison? Most likely.
None-the-less, I feel obliged to present a pseudo-technical argument de temps en temps.
So today I take on the central tenet of SCT: that it is the polar opposite of the conventional wisdom.
Sorry I am using the one-line Jack format here, I am getting into it.
Now
before that lamentable day
when first I came under Jack's sway
(a nice rhyming suggestion for 666)
I had no idea that I was the epitome of the CW.
Jack says the CW is edge-oriented, probabilistic, backtests, stops, uses profit targets, and expects/tolerates drawdowns.
In truth I think that the CW is any method that isn't SCT, but no matter.
In my next post, I will atempt to prove that SCT IS IN FACT TOTALLY CW!
But first, Neoxx, I must take a few hits of oxygen. When you get to be my age, the last fucking thing you'll want is 3M micropore inhibiting your breating.
Wheeze ,cough! Hack, spit! Gasp, cry!