Now then , Quant I am a simple person that simply asks simple questions for the simple reason I need simple answers. You may be aware that this the third thread you have running and I am getting exhausted trying to follow through on what is happening in this little saga. At the moment , I am giving you the benefit of the doubt, but you are pushing me because you seem to be antagonizing those that have expressed doubts, wherein you really don't need to do that...believe me. You are obviously intelligent ,but not smart doing that. So...NOW...to the point. How about a simple answer to my previous question...What were your targets for your 1/12 15 pointer buy 869//885 in the 771 thread? Were there any targets? What do you anticipate, if you have not already done it, to be the necessary capital requirements to put this in effect? My thought is that you could assume you would use day margin and close/reopen exposures to commence "new day margin" which will lessen the required capital base. A slightly more complex question...you indicated that you had profitable trades off specific lows (targets)....were they as a result of a new wave or were they "discretionary " trades...? Which begs the question, if you had targets for the 869/885 buy, did you have reverse trades from those "targets"...in other words, did the same set of rules apply to your buy side as they did to your successful sell side trade? If there is something that is not clear , please ask and I will oblige. NiN
Absolutely not. This quote sums up why... You aren't making calls at all - you're setting up vague situations where you get to declare yourself "right" regardless of what happens. And that's ignoring the "simulated" issue, which is just enormous in and of itself. This fails the Popper test and is therefore useless, and quite possibly damaging.
This is where the noise generators have confused you and many others too. I HAVE NEVER EVER SAID OR CLAIMED that I Trade my Predictions but I HAVE emphasized many times that they serve and help me with my MM and have only recommended the same to the others to use them as Trend Indicators. Whereby if I have a Short Prediction issued then Iâd take small profits of 2 to 4 points or less on the Longs and let the Shorts run for say 10 points. I have also exactly recommended the same. The fact that a tally is kept on the success of the Predictions is to demonstrate itâs ability to serve as a valid Trend indicator. Having said that I am thinking and seriously considering to actually start Trading them Directly too since my trades average about 100 per day in real accounts contrary to what the cu~t here is trying to falsely have you believe and trading the predictions will tremendously reduce the trade numbers and maybe help me switch from scalping to swings. I have and use 4 FOUR brokerage accounts and the cu~t knows that and a couple of them have publicly already been named which are IB and AMP also I have posted blotters and trade list that included even Order ID numbers including timestamp to the second as taken off of NT that itâs trades could have been confirmed in the T&S if anyone had one! So like I said every statement and claim by this cu~t is false and a lie and Iâll be more than happy to substantiate every single one to the contrary so just keep asking.
Idiot show us where I said I made 77 points off of the Predictions and if you Cunt then STFU and stop making an ass of yourself by lying. Idiot, a blotter can easily be photo shopped as you are used to but the trade list I provided included Order numbers and timestamps to the second that could have been confirmed off of your T&S if you had one which your not having a RT tick feed of course makes you blind to the real market activity idiot. Now Moron Dishwasher, continue with your lies and I'll continue to make an ass of you. So there go fetch where I said I made 77 points or remember STFU!!
Quote from ML_QUANT: Since Markets move in waves, if you notice you have probably never placed a losing trade that would not have been a winner had you tolerated the DD and waited long enough?!... LOL Lucrum, You saw that too huh? I wonder what Societe Generale would have to say about that statement (this couldn't be an alias for Jerome Kerviel could it? ). I hope everyone sees where I'm coming from now ... I mean when you have completely different people with diametrically opposed politics saying the same thing about the latest troll to hit the scene, something must be wrong! :eek: Take note Ivanovich, I'm not the one doing the name calling here (see when you want to call on the mods, you'd better make damn sure your own shit is right, otherwise that's gonna backfire) ...