Discussion in 'Politics' started by Trend Fader, Feb 18, 2004.

  1. Assuming full capacity is $200k. 100% short is $200k. %50 Short means $100k.

    So I was short $200k mid yesterdays. Covered $100k into Close. And was short $160k (80% of 200k) at the open.

    Waggie u will constantly twist evrything I say to make me look like a liar. But what I just posted makes sense and is the truth.

    #51     Feb 19, 2004
  2. How are those short positions working out today?
    #52     Feb 19, 2004

  3. Very well... because i managed to get more size in the upper 118's.. and I already locked in some profits. Do u even understand what I am doing?
    #53     Feb 19, 2004
  4. Our boy Trend Fader already covered most of his 100% shorts from yesterday with PROFITS on the opening . . .even though he indicated to all of us that he was looking for the 50 Day MA to be sliced thru down at 113.65

    He's amazing, isn't he?
    Best trader I ever saw.
    Makes Stevie Cohen look like a total Rookie!

    #54     Feb 19, 2004
  5. Keep on twising what I say.. and make this a pissing match... that is my last post to you.
    #55     Feb 19, 2004
  6. And when you IM'ed me via Yahoo Instant Messenger last month wanting to know how to use Pivots and telling me that your account for shorting the IWM was $30,000, that was a lie too?

    Or did I once again "twist" your words on that one too?

    #56     Feb 19, 2004
  7. For the long term, the trend is always your friend.

    But even so, how do you swing traders keep profits within this long-term trend? Don't you need to "lighten up" as the market ramps higher, so that you can reload when it pulls back? So when you are selling out your long, shorts (smarter ones at least) are doing the exact same thing -- except they are shorting instead of selling: same exact trade. So unless one has bought and held since March 03, who has the right to complain about someone else's selling?

    In any case, go back to your pissing match :D
    #57     Feb 19, 2004
  8. It is not the same thing, and in fact, I would argue that there is a distinct difference.

    Because the market is in a sustained uptrend, one has reference points to buy dips on . . . yet, unless the market has gone into an established trading range the shorts really have no reference point to get short at because they are merely getting into shorts at new highs ( which is obviously very dangerous and analogous to buying into new lows during a Bear trend ). The people that "top-pick" and short into new highs do so without any reference point whatsoever for a stop-loss because the market is moving into new high ground. With a market making new highs on a daily basis, how can a short find a "reference" point to define where to put in their stop-loss?

    The longs in an uptrend do not have this problem.
    Their stop-losses are defined by a previous low.
    #58     Feb 19, 2004


    You're wasting your time replying to people like Waggie. If you don't trade with the (longer term) trend and/or his way then you're apparently wrong. I guess he doesn't understand how traders made money on the short side today. One thing about Waggie is that he does have a big ego and seems to want everyone to know how much he knows as evidenced by how often he posts. To me that spells insecurity. Why certain posters seem to have to attack others who trade some alternative style is beyond me.
    #59     Feb 19, 2004
  10. DHOHHI


    I agree. Traders do buy and sell (short and cover) to lock in profits as the market moves up (down) .. at least traders who trade for a living. All the people who bash shorts don't seem to comprehend that the market moves intra-day .. up AND down and there's money to be made playing the intra-day moves. Geez, the COMPX opened at about 2092 today and sits at 2079 now ... plenty of opportunity to make $$$.
    #60     Feb 19, 2004