Why do folks reveal Profitable Strategies, are they NUTS?

[traderdragon2]

"but the most profitable strategy is solid money management."

Money management has never been a strategy and never will be a strategy.

Here is the logical proof:
1. If this were true, you could make money at roulette using good money management.
2. You cant.
3. Therefore money management is not a profitable strategy.

 

[Soon2Bgreat]

Quote from traderdragon2:

"but the most profitable strategy is solid money management."

Money management has never been a strategy and never will be a strategy.

Here is the logical proof:
1. If this were true, you could make money at roulette using good money management.
2. You cant.
3. Therefore money management is not a profitable strategy.

I disagree...that's why casinos have min/max limits at tables. If not a simple martingale system would work at the roulette table with a large enough bankroll.

You may be right that MM is not the end all, be all, but the roulette analogy is flawed.

 

[eusdaiki]

Quote from Soon2Bgreat:

I disagree...that's why casinos have min/max limits at tables. If not a simple martingale system would work at the roulette table with a large enough bankroll.

You may be right that MM is not the end all, be all, but the roulette analogy is flawed.

Money management [or risk management for that matter...] may not be a profitable strategy by itself but it is certainly a central element of all profitable strategies.

One you're able to set a sound set of rules for risk/reward tolerances on any given market you plan on trading... you're a step closer from developing a profitable system on that market.

 

[traderdragon2]

No, its perfectly valid.

It shows that money management cannot give edge against pure randomness with a house edge.

A martingale system cannot beat a negative expectancy game such as roulette in the real world because that would require an infinite bank roll and no one has that, so lets leave the fluffly theory at the doorstop and deal with reality here. Martingale will blow you out against roulette even with no max betting size. Fact.

Money management wont make you money betting on flipping coins either, because MM doesnt get you anything as far as edge and again martingale wont save you in the real world.

MM can only reduce the probability of you blowing out a system that does have an edge, because you were stupid enough to place bets that were too large, but it cannot introduce edge into a system.

No matter how you cut it, MM is not a strategy, anyone who thinks it is does not have a deep understanding of trading or statistics.

Quote from Soon2Bgreat:

I disagree...that's why casinos have min/max limits at tables. If not a simple martingale system would work at the roulette table with a large enough bankroll.

You may be right that MM is not the end all, be all, but the roulette analogy is flawed.

 

[virgin]

Traderdragon2,



COULDN'T HAVE SAID IT BETTER !


MM is a mean to control drawdowns,
you need an edge to overcome commissions and spreads, you need a positive expectancy stategy,system to overcome those costs before you can start talking about MM.
The bigger your edge, the more aggresive your MM may be

 

[T280]

Quote from Neet:

For someone who posts so much crap on how to SUPPOSEDLY do things right. I must commend you for this most "eloquent" post.

What happened this time ? I was expecting a sermon on "how to do things right" ? Instead you opted to ridicule with three letters.

Not sure which one I detest the most. They both usually mean the same crap except this time you wasted less bandwidth so that's a plus.

Don't mind Jack, one day he will stop mooching off his girlfriend and actually make some money instead of talking endlessly about it

 

[jack hershey]

It looks like the tick change caused it to be easier or harder for people to make more money or just make money as a consequence of something or other about "equilibrium".

In any case, an lol on the subject is considered ridicule.

For me, I do not notice a change in how the markets get to the limits of profit segments by changes in tick value from one value to another. I've heard about some strategies working better and others working poorer. Both are available to traders by their personal choice. I never would have chosen either since I am not in that paradigm anyways.

This ridicule thing that is a common view of my posts is also a choice anyone can make about the posts. Its cool with me for you to do that.

I am just one of the people making profitable strategies known to anyone who, again, may or may not make the choice to consider them. Its cool if a person doesn't.

If I suggest an alternative to a given practice, it is ridicule to some and not to others. Learn how to judge ridicule is various and prbably something great to perfect with respect to some stuff. I do it mostly for clouds who shapes I do not like. They are a bitch when I am doing water colors.

LOL....

 

[T280]

Blah blah blah Jack... stop living off your girlfriend

a man your age should not need a sugar mommy to survive...

didn't you save any of your profits from your youth? Or were you too busy trying to sound intellectual by delivering ludicrously long and rambling lectures?

 

[Bearbelly]

Im beginning to wonder about you mate. I dont know all the facts but I kind of think a 70+man living with a 40+ woman is not something to be ashamed of.

 

[T280]

Quote from Bearbelly:

Im beginning to wonder about you mate. I dont know all the facts but I kind of think a 70+man living with a 40+ woman is not something to be ashamed of.

Well all things in context, he no doubt uses the same verbal drivel to extract money from her to blow on the markets then proceeds to tell everyone how to make money when he can't even support her... let alone himself

He's a fraud