Larry, I have a tread you may be able to help with. I'm sure thunder will get a kick out of some posts. http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=174098 I would like this site to be re-named to "eliteGuru". signed, guru
wow...very same legend himself ? i'd say some info regarding the IRS issue would clear many suspiciousness about his authority as only himself would know for certain. I've seen it's been first question to come right after but no answer whatsoever. I could say i'm Obama and point ppl to white house's email If u are, my respect, honestly. I'd have zillion questions to chat about, RSI...optimals and Ralph Vince...anecdotes...jee...what a surprise! regards!
You know what PT Barnum said about suckers. Here's a gem from Larry Williams' website: << Larry is many things, but he is not a CTA (commodity trading advisor). >> That's about sums it up right there. I wish good luck to those out there who believe in technical indicators & oscillators, and gurus like LW. You're gonna need it.
Allen Ko just might disagree with you. http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=118258&perpage=6&pagenumber=19
i have offered to show my actual trading positions. not a single one of you has replied and sought to find the truth. you guys would rather carp away with loser laments--like Tdog who refuses to offer anything constructive. Then again, from the tone and tenor of all this I should not be amazed... lw
Seems to me that Larry Williams has offered several time to "prove" that he trades by showing his positions. I'd be happy to review and report back if that is of interest. FWIW, I don't think there's any disagreement on the facts that LW has made money both trading and publishing. I see nothing wrong with either. I too, have multiple streams of income. Personally, I'd rather see Larry Williams contribute than spending his time responding to all sorts of old allegations.
Thunderdog: C'mon Thunderdog. Of course you are attempting to suggest "outrageous conduct" on the part of Williams. That's exactly what you are doing with the above post. This is where you go too far. And frankly, you don't actually know what you're talking about. You and I have been down this road before. See this link: http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showt...ghlight=oldtrader larry williams&pagenumber=3 Note your apology for some inaccuracies that you posted. Let's talk again about timestamps. Back in those days any broker who received an order from a client timestamped it. I was a broker back in the old days. I had a timestamp sitting on my desk right next to my direct line to the floor. Orders in those days came in over the telephone, was timestamped, then passed on to the floor, and timestamped by whomever received it there. Later on, as I started trading on my own, at one point I used a direct line to the floor from an office. When the phone was picked up they timestamped it and shouted and/or handsignaled the order to the crowd. Real simple. As a broker I handled some accounts who placed simultaneous orders. So for instance, let's say we had 10 accounts, each of whom wanted 5 contracts. When the order came in, we placed an order for 50, which were to be split in accordance with a preplanned agreement. Same timestamping as above. Now let's take Larry Williams. Let's say he's going to trade both his account and a pool account of some type. Let's say he wants 100 contracts, 5 of which go to him, and 95 of which go to his pool. What you are intimating is that he places the 100 contract order, which is timestamped on receipt, then relayed to the floor, where it is timestamped again, at which point the order is executed. Williams then does what? Observe what it is doing for the next minute or so maybe to see what direction is going, and when he finds out it's going in his favor, he tells the broker to put 95 in his account this time? C'mon TDog. At that, watching for a minute or so doesn't tell you where it's going to be in an hour, or tomorrow necessarily. The bottomline...brokers don't put in these types of bulk orders from an individual, and then him change around the instructions on what to do with it. Go a little farther. His trading contest lasted a year. You're suggesting not only did he do it, but he did successfully for a year? Absolute horseshit once again. Now, maybe what you're suggesting is that he would enter the bulk order, and then wait for a LONG period of time to see which way it went before telling the broker how to allocate it....allocating it to his account when it was successful. You don't think the timestamps would show this??? You don't think the authorities couldn't pick this up on an investigation of the accounts? Of course they could. That's why what you are suggesting here is absolutely false. And anyone with any experience from those days knows it. So that you don't continue to attempt to smear someone with these continuing assinuations, let me inform you what the problem was back in those days: order comes in to sell 10 at .80. Broker sells 10 at .80 for his own account, not filling your order. If it moves down, he's got a profit, you don't have a fill. If it moves up, he covers his position with your by buying your 10, and you are now filled with an order that initially is going against you. Now, that's not the Williams situation. Williams was not on the floor. Williams if anything, could have been a victim of this type of trade, as I was, and as many were in the Chicago based markets. So once again Thunderdog, Williams did not advertise correctly, and therefore received a small fine. That's it. You don't need to allow your imaginings to wonder any further than that. To do so would be entirely dishonest on your part. Williams has a public record for many years. He has many innovative techniques that he has created. And, he has offered to show his current positions. That's considerable transparency. All I see from you is accusations, intimations, some of them complete figments of your imagination. You want to criticize the guy criticize him for what he has done, or what he has been charged with, not what you imagine he "could" have done (even though you don't have the experience to know better). I'm not surprised that you are unwilling to enter a contest against him. To use YOUR tactics that you have used against Williams, my guess is you don't have the $100K, that you don't trade at all, unless it is strictly paper trading. But if you're sure that Williams is so bogus, step up my man. Here's your chance to make some easy money. Either that, or STFU. OldTrader
OldT, thats not the whole story. While your version is correct, at the time there was another way of selectively allocating trades, because the floor broker did not have to clear his order book until the end of the day. For example, 2 trades of say 100 contracts each of T-bonds, one order short, the other long, were executed in the morning. The floor broker who handled these trades and both accounts did not have to throw these trades into the actual accounts until after the close, therefore having discretion as to who got the winning and the losing side. At that time, 1980s, there was alot of such fraud going on (greetings from Hillary??)
This would require collusion between the floor clerk, the floor broker, and Williams. And frankly would be the easiest to detect. That's why I didn't mention it. All it takes is to look back in the trades to see Williams always in a winning trade opposing a losing trade in the pool, trades allocated late in the day. Now, I don't know what they investigated...but from some of my past reading the investigation seemed to be fairly extensive, especially in light of some of the false charges. Such that I would think these possibiities were ruled out early on. OldTrader
Clearly, collusion by the floor broker was required. However, it was also possible to have your account directly with him. By giving him discretion he would have been able (easily) to mix trades to give the appearance of "normal" trading, eventually building up one account whereas the other was losing - over a longer period of time. Now, dont get me wrong, I am not saying LW did this. I am just stating that this sort of thing was possible and, in fact, was going on.