The way to get around the ignore thing by people with multiple aliases is to use multiple aliases. Post in a new alias and quote your other aliases, they can see your quoted work then. You may have to make a new alias every time you post with some of them....... they can be really quick with the ignore thingy. I was watching the spyder system on C2 for awhile but he blew up. Had I read the discussion thread on his system I could have seen it coming, people were warning him that he was taking on a lot of risk. The way C2 is set up, you have to go through the process of putting a system up there just to find out how things work, that may be why there are a zillion systems and about 3 worth looking at... I would be interested in hearing about experience with the autotrading feature through IB though...
Craig Bender (Phatkicker) has 19 systems on C2. Eventually, he will get one right, but for how long?!!. Most of his systems have blown up in a spectacular fashion after some time and/or after posting extraordinary profits first (with the inevitable associated extraordinary risks of course). So in my view, it is only a matter of time before these 2 systems you mentioned WILL blow up as well. The real problems with C2 are: - Most vendor's don't trade their systems with their own/real money which for me is enough a reason to be very very careful; I would therefore only consider a system if it has at least 18 months track record and all stats show good numbers; - most systems are not automated and completely discretionary which adds to the risks; - the very few automated systems on C2 are prone to "operational risks" , i.e. I would not want to autotrade any system with the current technology offerings, as there are simply too many potential areas where something can go wrong. The solution is to manually execute their tradesignals, BUT this brings me to the next problem: - I know of at least 1-2 very good algo systems (with excellent stats) on there (quantrade), but they are typically very fast high frequency models, hence you could only get the same results via autotrading (which is a problem with the technology setup, see above). On a positive note: there are good systems on C2 and a valuable set of monitored stats. The mistake people make is that they only look for extraordinary profits without considering the underlying stats. Fwiw, my own criteria for a good system are: - vendor has maximum 3 systems; - more than 18 months of verified data; - a high ADP ratio (0.40 at least); - % risk of 20 % account loss below 5 %; - a Sharpe ratio of minimum 2. - a nice steady equity curve.