Bo, i have no reason to disbelieve your credentials,nor your IQ,i don't think that's the gist of the posts,and i am not personally attacking you,having a little fun maybe,as i said earlier ,if you dumbed it down,we mere mortals are unimpressed when we meet someone with limited social skills,overcompensating with big words,from the dumb guys side of the argument,your dilemna is not at all uncommon,just except that you are how you are and try to come to a happy medium,it can even be in your favor if you have to hang on to an intellectually superior attitude for another week or two,but without some middle ground, there is no connection, and as i said earlier,you might lose 97% of your prospective clients from the get go
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
This Forum overtrades options
- Thread starter bwolinsky
- Start date
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
Quote from ammo:
Bo, i have no reason to disbelieve your credentials,nor your IQ,i don't think that's the gist of the posts,and i am not personally attacking you,having a little fun maybe,as i said earlier ,if you dumbed it down,we mere mortals are unimpressed when we meet someone with limited social skills,overcompensating with big words,from the dumb guys side of the argument,your dilemna is not at all uncommon,just except that you are how you are and try to come to a happy medium,it can even be in your favor if you have to hang on to an intellectually superior attitude for another week or two,but without some middle ground, there is no connection, and as i said earlier,you might lose 97% of your prospective clients from the get go
I think I lose them by stigma, not because of what I'm saying or trying to explain, but by virtue of the fact that I have an online presence. Many investors want to get recommendations of who should manage their money from portfolio managers who usually don't recommend third parties but that's the kind of deal flow I'm shooting for by finishing in the top 5 of the WCTC, and banking a $50,000 score.
Investing cannot be explained away as gambling, and I see more examples of why than not but the attitude especially in this options forum is to trade all day every day and as far as the trades I see put on I would never approve of any of them but what I have said here.
The air of superiority is in the explanation, of which talking about cursory topics when I have to explain my own credentials and those of my compatriots irritates me because that's how it is in every thread.
It really pisses me off atticus keeps posting the same stupid irrelevant shit and will probably never stop posting those things.
He's as far out of line as it gets because he is only trying to discredit me and what I'm doing, which is his approach practically every time I start a thread and there are some on ignore here that won't ever hear my responses because they are that stuck up.
traders in general look down on brokers and money managers,difference between trading your own money and other people's,doing it yourself or not having a clue and hiring someone else,investors get screwed on a daily basis,you won't get around that,been that way since there were traders and the rest...so you may be talking apples to orange growers
Quote from ammo:
traders in general look down on brokers and money managers,difference between trading your own money and other people's,doing it yourself or not having a clue and hiring someone else,investors get screwed on a daily basis,you won't get around that,been that way since there were traders and the rest
If there's no respect paid to what I've accomplished then surely to god when it's proven that this is not BS I still don't think the same arrogance that comes with thinking your methods are just as good as anybody elses is where they should draw the line when they just need to cross over to the other side and actually listen to someone who has all of the credentials a financial advisor could ever want, CFA progress, BS Financial Econ, Minor Math, and tons of evidence of success designing trading algorithms if it is not obvious by any of the research I've posted then it definitely should be when I get out of this incubation period.
My version of Price Physics is a mere approximation, and I think what I've done is optimize for a best case scenario when it is the real thing I'm after. Virtual Bill is on its way, and I hope that Price Sentinel trades with more edge than I have because right now that is only $30 of expectancy and adding 1 or 2 ticks when I've gotten more than 8 ticks in some cases obviously doesn't work, but in terms of completely shredding what I've done with the models I have definitely not. They are a blue print I intend to follow, and so much of what I'd been nervous about centered around scalability and drawdown, so I optimized out most of the drawdown just to be left with very small 3-10 tick profits...at best.
So while I do think my models probably work, I think I'm seeing that in reality mine have way too much transactions bias in the backtest. I'm very sure that while my models as they are probably work they don't have <i>enough edge,</i> but I'm very sure what I'll be using as the real thing will absolutely crush any competitor in the WCTC before the end of this year.
don't know anything about theory,but from experience averaging against a position ,or adding shorts as you go up ,is a lot safer than adding longs as you go down,consider pulling a toboggan up a hill and then getting on it to the bottom, repeat the process for rtm strategies,this is how the market works in realityQuote from bwolinsky:
If there's no respect paid to what I've accomplished then surely to god when it's proven that this is not BS I still don't think the same arrogance that comes with thinking your methods are just as good as anybody elses is where they should draw the line when they just need to cross over to the other side and actually listen to someone who has all of the credentials a financial advisor could ever want, CFA progress, BS Financial Econ, Minor Math, and tons of evidence of success designing trading algorithms if it is not obvious by any of the research I've posted then it definitely should be when I get out of this incubation period.
My version of Price Physics is a mere approximation, and I think what I've done is optimize for a best case scenario when it is the real thing I'm after. Virtual Bill is on its way, and I hope that Price Sentinel trades with more edge than I have because right now that is only $30 of expectancy and adding 1 or 2 ticks when I've gotten more than 8 ticks in some cases obviously doesn't work, but in terms of completely shredding what I've done with the models I have definitely not. They are a blue print I intend to follow, and so much of what I'd been nervous about centered around scalability and drawdown, so I optimized out most of the drawdown just to be left with very small 3-10 tick profits...at best.
So while I do think my models probably work, I think I'm seeing that in reality mine have way too much transactions bias in the backtest. I'm very sure that while my models as they are probably work they don't have <i>enough edge,</i> but I'm very sure what I'll be using as the real thing will absolutely crush any competitor in the WCTC before the end of this year.
Quote from ammo:
don't know anything about theory,but from experience averaging against a position ,or adding shorts as you go up ,is a lot safer than adding longs as you go down,consider pulling a toboggan up a hill and then getting on it to the bottom, repeat the process for rtm strategies,this is how the market works in reality
I'm aware of those problems, but that is not the issue considering I only have 1 entry and 1 exit now. When I was pyramidding positions with my model it wasn't so much that it would scale in because it was down but that it was the most logical oscillation so I don't do that and I'm not sure if that was your impression about what I was talking about why you think that would be an issue with my research.
Quote from bwolinsky:
I think I lose them by stigma, not because of what I'm saying or trying to explain, but by virtue of the fact that I have an online presence. Many investors want to get recommendations of who should manage their money from portfolio managers who usually don't recommend third parties but that's the kind of deal flow I'm shooting for by finishing in the top 5 of the WCTC, and banking a $50,000 score.
Investing cannot be explained away as gambling, and I see more examples of why than not but the attitude especially in this options forum is to trade all day every day and as far as the trades I see put on I would never approve of any of them but what I have said here.
The air of superiority is in the explanation, of which talking about cursory topics when I have to explain my own credentials and those of my compatriots irritates me because that's how it is in every thread.
It really pisses me off atticus keeps posting the same stupid irrelevant shit and will probably never stop posting those things.
He's as far out of line as it gets because he is only trying to discredit me and what I'm doing, which is his approach practically every time I start a thread and there are some on ignore here that won't ever hear my responses because they are that stuck up.
You discredit yourself and your third rate undergrad with this projectile diarrhea of scientific ebonics. Worse than the functional illiteracy is the misapplication. I would swear this is a wind-up, but I fear you're serious and obviously seriously disturbed.
Perhaps you could end the year with a positive return as a goal, in lieu of "shooting for" some arbitrary placement in some hack contest. You must kill it at MW3.
My sincere suggestion is to take your meds.
Quote from bwolinsky:
...will absolutely crush any competitor in the WCTC before the end of this year.
What happens if you don't win? Will you admit that you were wrong?
Your track record, on C2 and CoVestor, does not inspire confidence.
Also, you lost me at the phrase "Scalar Conversion Fractal Mathematics Theoretically Derived Factors." Can you break that down for me?
- Status
- Not open for further replies.