I think you and Pekelo should get together to discuss materiality. And how much did you earn from your last post?
I took a look at the so called evidence. There is nothing in there concerning the competition. Here is the relevant part: THE WESTERN REGIONAL BUSINESS CONDUCT COMMITTEE ("WESTERN COMMITTEE") ISSUED A COMPLAINT AGAINST LARRY R. WILLIAMS ("WILLIAMS"). THE COMPLAINT ALLEGED THAT WILLIAMS VIOLATED NFA COMPLIANCE RULE 2-13 BY USING DECEPTIVE DISCLOSURE DOCUMENTS AND BY FAILING TO MAINTAIN COPIES OF DISCLOSURE DOCUMENTS. THE COMPLAINT ALSO ALLEGED THAT WILLIAMS VIOLATED NFA COMPLIANCE RULES 2-29(B)(1), 2-29(B)(2) AND 2-29(B)(3) BY USING DECEPTIVE AND UNBALANCED PROMOTIONAL MATERIAL. FINALLY, THE COMPLAINT ALLEGED THAT WILLIAMS VIOLATED NFA COMPLIANCE RULE 2-9 BY FAILING TO SUPERVISE HIS AGENTS' USE OF PROMOTIONAL MATERIAL AND NFA COMPLIANCE RULE 2-29(E) BY FAILING TO MAINTAIN COPIES OF PROMOTIONAL MATERIAL. OK I will spell it out again, the complaint was about: --- deceptive disclosure documents --- failure to maintain copies of them --- deceptive and unbalanced promotional material --- failure to supervise his agent's usage of the promo What these all have to do with the competition? Nothing, thus evidence thrown out... Next please.... (you guys make it too easy for me, not even a challenge) Oh, and a homework for the weekend, since I haven't got an answer yet: How can we compare if he was making 100 times by trading ES futures based on technicals and lost 10% by let's say trading pork bellies based on fundamentals??? (I don't know if his loss was 10%, but so far nobody gave me a % on that lost 6 mill) I want the homework to be returned by Monday!!! Class dismissed...
With due respect, volente, I don't think you are in a position to comment on "logical fallacy" aside from living by example. One of us is embarrassing himself and I will leave it to your imagination as to who I think that is. No doubt, your opinion may differ. On a positive note, you and Pekelo seem to be cut from the same cloth, so I think that ET should be commended from bringing like minded people together to share their ideas. It must be very gratifying for the both of you. Your collaborative effort should not be limited to vacuous exchanges on forums such as these. I can only hope that one day the two of you will somehow join forces in the trading arena. Going forward, please be advised that I am placing both of you fine gentlemen on "ignore" as a courtesy to you. In so doing, I will not inadvertently impede the fine contribution that you both make on a regular basis, particularly in the areas of logic and reasoning. In this way, your natural talents will be unfettered by my silly antics and nonsensical remarks. I can only ask that you kindly afford me the same courtesy for your own sake. I could hardly forgive myself if either of you noted thinkers found yourselves unnecessarily mired in yet another one of my frivolous exchanges. And on that note, let us try to limit our contact to being on the other side of each other's trades. The real ones.
I used to think your were better at arguing than at trading. Now I know that you struggle with both. My feelings are really hurt that I am now being ignored by an angry atheist. Hopefully one day you will see the light and it will radiate from within and your anger will reside. . Peace be with you dog.
Thank you and thank you. I was thinking of the same, but I have been waiting desperatelly that you might find a logical argument or evidence that you could put forward. It seems so that you couldn't and will not... You probably not going to see this, but I have a final analogy for you and those whom presented the "evidence": Thunderdog has a speedingticket in NYC, thus he is the Boston strangler. How come? Well, NYC is close to Boston and speeding is almost a crime, just like strangling someone. For the less smart I will spell it out: Williams was fined for deceptive disclosure documents, thus he must have cheated in the trading competition. Of course the 2 have nothing to do with each other, and most fortunate people recognize a non-sequitur... So, adios Thunderdog, I am not going to miss you, although it is sad that you ran away from a debate...
I have no doubt that Williams won the Robbins Cup contest. Based on his performance in that contest, I am impressed. Nevertheless, he has had other problems, discussed in the Gallagher book and here. Bottom line: he has had much less success managing opm than he has managing his own. The outlandish risk that won him the contest also helped him lose opm. Excessive leverage works wonders when you are on a hot streak; when you are on a losing streak, you are not on it for long, because with high leverage you are out of the game pretty quickly. Like the mythological Icarus, you come crashing to earth. I am not saying Williams is a bad guy (I don't know him), and that his books are not worth reading (I own four myself). I'd just take what he (or any self-proclaimed guru) says with a grain of salt.
Just for curiosity I post here the records. Please note the winner in 1997. I have found it interesting, that in some year a measly 50 or 80% was sufficient to win the championship... Williams' performance was good for overall winner in 22 years. His daughter is the 3rd best in 22 years. I guess trading can be taught... World Cup Championship of Futures Trading® Top Overall Performances - All Divisions 2005: Ed Twardus 278% (pending audit) 2004: Kurt Sakaeda 929% 2003: Int'l. Capital Mngt. 88% 2002: John Holsinger 608% 2001: David Cash 53% 2000: Kurt Sakaeda 595% 1999: Chuck Hughes 315% 1998: Jason Park 99% 1997: Michelle Williams 1,000% (a familiar name) 1996: Reinhart Rentsch 95% 1995: Dennis Minogue 219% 1994: Frank Suler 85% 1993: Richard Hedreen 173% 1992: Mike Lundgren 212% 1991: Thomas Kobara 200% 1990: Mike Lundgren 244% 1989: Mike Lundgren 176% 1988: David Kline 148% 1987: Larry Williams 11,376% (here is our guy) 1986: Henry Thayer 231% 1985: Ralph Casazzone 1,283% 1984: Ralph Casazzone 264%