Considering a front month at rollover, do you notice something happening vis a vis the number of contracts?
I was chatting with you vis a vis the zero sum game stuff. Any strategy can be used to play anytime and lots of different ones are at play. The new front month at rollover is a time when the number of contracts in the new front month changes; the pairs of buyer/sellers is increasing quite a bit. The contracts number contracts (shrinks) in the old front month. The span of the front month (three months usually) is something that is ever changing in the number of outstanding contracts
Regaurdless of these games. Thier is allways a buyer and seller of a futures contract, nothing else. Sounds like you are way to smart for me.
don't worry about the zero sum game thing, there have been entire threads on that subject to no avail. The truth is it doesn't matter in regards to how I trade. I take the attitude that the market is a natural resource like the ocean and i am going out fishing. Some choose to make it into some kind of a battle, I don't see how that helps.
The span of the front month is something that is ever changing in the number of outstanding contracts. Talk about non sequitur. The span of the front contract doesn't change. The number of contracts doesn't change the span of the contracts. It expires on the date of expiration, each and every time. Time is fixed. That is the point of a dated contract, isn't it? To have a date at which it matures? Contracts are created when a buyer or seller agree agree to make a sale/purchase against another party, but the nature of the contract is fixed. The nature of the contract, and the expiration date is determined by the exchanges. The buyers don't determine the nature, or span of the contract. They can terminate their positions, and cancel out a contract, but they did not create the concept, expiration date, or rules of the contract. They just agreed to manufacture a contract on the basis of the rules of the exchanges. You could say, that each day, the length of the contract is reduced by one day. That would make sense. You could say that amount of time remaining on a contract will influence people in their decision to hold a contract, but they cannot change its span. The number of contracts is irrelevant to the length of a contract. Or you could say that the number of contracts changes as people open and close them. But what you said is total insanity, a non sequitur. Even Ronald Reagan in his most deranged state couldn't say anything quite as incorrect. Don't you people see that this guy is a total fruitcake?