LOL
OK, give a concrete example where CK provides optimal sizing. No more bullshit from anybody, especially a poser like you. Put up or STFU.
The fallacy of "continuous Kelly"
- Thread starter kut2k2
- Start date
OK, give a concrete example where CK provides optimal sizing. No more bullshit from anybody, especially a poser like you. Put up or STFU.
Start another thread, call it "Continuous Kelly", and politely ask a question about how to use it. I'll be happy to respond.
What's keeping you from starting your own thread, some sort of mental deficit? Sheesh, dude, you got issues.
It's a pity really. My only ignorance was that I didn't know I would be attacked. Also the moderators of this group should realize that when members are willing to help and are attacked they will not be willing to repeat it unless they get rid off the abrasive characters.
Mr, you need help and not only in the area of continuous vs. discrete finance. Grow up and learn how to behave. The only one you're hurting with this behavior is yourself and all the negative energy you emit comes back to haunt you.
Mister, I don't need your help because you are clearly confused yourself.
You emphasized yourself: "I don't trust these things and don't use them.". Yet you're so concerned about the difference between discrete and continuous Kelly. Why? You don't trust any of them, so why all this concern?
Actually on one level your distrust makes sense. While the idea of geometric mean maximization is brilliant in theory, its execution in practice has been abysmal. None of the public formulae are very good, and at least a couple look to be disastrous. Including this CK dreck, which whether it is intended for trading or just for long-term investing doesn't produce a good result either way.
"I think most MBA courses cover both well.". They also teach EMH in MBA programs. I wouldn't take what is taught in MBA programs as the gold standard of what works in the real world.
Sir, I suggest you create another user and start talking to yourself. You do not need any others. Bye.
You seem to think you and I are the only two posters in this thread, so how oblivious to others are you? Bye!
Maybe its your turn to enlighten optimal position sizing including evasion of gapping down way under a stopploss
The Kelly approximation is just under 19%.