Please tell us why optimal f is more appropriate than Kelly. I keep hearing this but details never come out to support this claim. Thanks.
http://scholar.google.co.uk/scholar?q=position+size+Kelly+criterion&btnG=&hl=en&as_sdt=0,5 From Google Scholar
Nah, Thorp is an idiot according to the OP, one wonders how many threads he (she?) can start on the same fucking subject.
Thorp is not an idiot but he does overcomplicate the exposition of Kelly for the markets. The idiot here is you for not realizing this thread is specific to this forum and not a duplication of what I posted previously. "The same fucking subject" is crucial to successful trading and only a complete fucking fool would fail to realize that basic fact.
I tried three different wifi portals and none of them could bring up your tutorial, so my guess is a webpage glitch.
There are many different forms of commercial trading software dating back decades and it is my grim suspicion that none of them do optimal position sizing correctly. I would love to find out otherwise. If the proponents of optimal f could explain why it is superior to true Kelly sizing, I'd love to hear that as well.
This from a guy who thinks Kelly is "a pretty simple calculation" yet can't give a straightforward answer when asked for his formula, as if it was some national security secret. Keep flattering yourself, I find it amusing.