My interpretation of "Huge rally is over for now" is that the market will then go into a sizeable correction, not a sideways consolidation. No big deal though. Besides, I think some rich guy is screwing around throwing the markets.
Statistically you were bound to win, like the guy guessing your weight or birthmonth at the midway +or-.
Really? Then maybe you can explain why the S&P May 950 calls were trading @ $5 when I began this thread on May 8th at 3pm. I eagerly await your intelligent response. If I was "statistically bound to win" it seems like alot of free premium the options market was giving me when I sold May 950 calls for $5 with a week til expiration.
Here is the dictionary meaning of the phrase "for now": noun the present time "that's all for now" ========================== I started this thread on May 8th with the S&P @ 928. Over the course of the next few weeks, the S&P never went higher, and was about 50 points lower weeks later. Obviously, the rally was over "for now". People are confusing the term "for now" with "forever". If I said "the rally is over forever", well that means the S&P will "never" go above 928. The odds of this happening are maybe 1 in 1000 or .1%. So for those of you rejoicing that the S&P finally managed to punch thru 928 a month later are rejoicing at an event with a probability of 99.9%. Keep rejoicing while I continue to laugh at you. In poker, if I need an ace (and only an ace) on the river, I still have a 5% chance of winning. When I said "the rally is over for now" the odds were maybe 8 to 1 or 10 to 1 against me. It's not easy to find the precise top to an upward thrusting market. But that's exactly what this thread did. When I started this thread on May 8th, it did mark the end of the rally "for the present time". I look forward to a dialogue with anyone who understands statistical analysis and wants to discuss probabilities with respect to events "for now" and "forever".
While you are gloating over your call, allow me to burst your bubble. It was in fact a foolish call. You made this call with the S&P a mere 15 pts below the Jan '09 high, and just 22 pts below that magic 950 mark. You are lucky that the market did not consolidate near the May 8, 930 high forming a bull flag through the May 15 options expiration before going higher, or simply continue on up to the 943-950 resistance after a few down days. You said yourself that the odds were against you when you made the call, though you exaggerated the odds, as after the parabolic rise up to the May 8 high there was roughly a 2/3 chance of consolidation or a retreat to support before moving higher, and a 1/3 chance of the move, after one to three down days,continuing up to the strong resistance at 943-950. In other words, you had about a 1/3 chance of being right and about a 2/3 chance of being wrong for "now" when you made the call. Making calls like yours with the odds against you, as you admit, is a foolish exercise. You will be right some of the time depending on your definition of "now", but what is the point. One should never trade on such predictions.
I give a full credit to Rawshan. Now ask yourself a question: can you name what's going on since his call "a rally"? I can't. It's not a rally since then - it's a sideways action with drops and rallies mostly driven by shaking out some weak hands on both sides. That's it. So this call has not at all faded Rawshan at least in my eyes