yes, good points. in addition, how would one "place good trades in one account" ? this would involve collusion with the broker, no? I believe LW was up many multi millions, prior to losing the 6 million they mention, still winning the contest with all time top returns after the loss....... i may be wrong here, not 100% sure of the exact turn of events. surf
You are correct. My appologies to LW. I went back and reread Gallacher (been about 10 years). Still, there are some facts about LW that won't go away. He has had serious and criminal tax problems. Why can't he just pay his taxes? Doesn't he make lots of money? Also he has had spectacular failures in his funds. His LW Financial Strategy and World Cup failed quickly. Sure, we all have our failures. But we don't all sell advice based on our "success". Good trading to all.
Yes, you are. You have chosen to suspend your critical thinking a long time ago. Suspension of critical thinking generally costs money.
<i>"an event for which both Williams and Robbins Trading Company were taken to court and convicted by the NFA."</i> Totally false... as most expose` books are. Robbins Trading backed LW and prevailed on all counts. They are above reproach. As for William's trading performance, it was all based on money management tactics. His overall method for trade entry was at that time based on volatility breakout systems. In 1987, vol was favorable to that approach. Using levered account management tactics was the driving force behind outsized gains... it had absolutely nothing to do with superior tactical entry technique or reading price action in general. Said another way, he sat down at the craps table and bet his bankroll aggressively while enjoying a favorable run of dice. LW made the mistake of thinking that money management was the core secret to trading success and entries are ancillary to the process. Wrong. Trade entry decisions are critical over the long-term. From personal experience of attending several LW live workshops around 1999 ~ 2001, imo he simply does not have a complete understanding of how price action works overall. imo he place(d)s far too much emphasis on mechanical system data without understanding the behavior behind that. There are reasons why he was never able to run managed funds successfully thru all market conditions over a long period of time. Curve-fitted systems will outperform in brief periods, but fail miserably overall. Not denigrating your guy here, Surf. Just my analysis of a trader from an experienced trader's objective perspective. Take it or leave it at that. Whatever else is said of Larry outside of trading is, well, outside of trading prowess.
According to Gallacher: LW Financial Strategy Fund lost more 50% and was closed in less than a year (1989). World Cup Championship Fund also lost more than 50% of original equity and was closed in 1990. Are these just flukes, or is LW just a gambler who has winning and losing streaks and is only consistent as a salesman? I don't know. I am sure, though, traders should develop their own methods and avoid paying someone lots of money for "secrets".
no offense taken, AP. I find his ideas on the COT report quite interesting and profitable. Does he risk too much and take huge chances--sure. I never knew anyone who made it big in the markets without huge risk taking. I talked to LW, 2 years ago, he told me if he had it to do it over again, he would go into the entertainment business and stay out of the markets. The guy freely admits his losses and short comings, which, in my mind, make him head and shoulders above the typical seminar pitch man. www.ireallytrade.com surf
<i>"I don't know. I am sure, though, traders should develop their own methods and avoid paying someone lots of money for "secrets""</i> That'll work... but the price is usually several years and many $1,000s and $1,000s lost before developments from school of hard knocks cease knocking you silly. As for LW: he falls into the category of most failed system writers with the same crucial error. They think that writing = testing system data will uncover secrets about market action. In other words, endless backtests and tinkering with data is the road to creating a defined edge. In reality, a successful systems trader knows their edge exists and is solid to begin with. From there they program that into a language computers can execute what they already know is solid. Understand the difference? Just like the guys in here who take some random idea, code it up in software and backtest out thinking a random discovery = valid system parameters going forward. They are merely wasting time while fooling themselves. Same goes for what LW used to do, imo
yeah, at times, i can't argue with you! however, here, I am not wrong with the premise, pehaps only with the chronological and dollar details. I have interviewed LW at length about this situation--it's published in several languages ( if english isn't your first). In addition, I know him personally therefore my data may just be a little more relevant than a monday morning quarterback such as yourself. surf