I think you are right. I also noticed he jumps from thread to thread insulting people. He never gives straight answers but his responses are always preceded by an ad hominen attack.
See? You ask for a straight answer, then you act like a mule's ass when you get it. You've proven to be nothing but a waste of time. Ignored.
You did not cite anybody, thus, exactly what it is: plagiarism. If you'd like to learn about citations, please type c-i-t-a-t-i-o-n into your google webbrowser.
There's no reason for you to be involved in this thread if you are going to ignore the OP. Seriously, why don't you quit pretending or acting like you know or understand this subject? Nobody with 2 ounces of brains would splatter a thread with a case by case proof without citation or any original discussion. You clearly do not understand anything we are doing. Also, I did not have to guess that all you did was google it and found some numbers and text to post without citation nor any explanation that would lead any average joe ET reader to come to the conclusion that you know anything about this subject. I thought both cases depend on the limit as T gets large, so if that's the answer to 2 I still don't see why it cannot also be the answer to 1.
He posted the gamblers ruin problem thinking that that was what we were talking about, so even though we probably do have a completed case-by-case proof of Gambler's Ruin, it does not in any uncertain terms answer any of the questions IntradayBill has asked. @IntradayBill Do you have any reason for asking these questions? I guess I'm not sure what reaching an answer to these questions can do for you or with any practical application in finance. Why did you ask these 2 questions?
Logically flawed question. A trading system can enter and exit at will. This also means there exists a system that may *never* see conditions for entry. Statement disproved. A trading system can have *any* parameters. This also means that there exists a system that has no parameters. Statement disproved. For systems with parameters, entries/exits, and positive expectancy, chance of ruin is directly proportional to position size versus account size. Targets and time *CHANGE* the expectancy, hence, you've made a circular argument. What a lame question. Let me give anyone reading this thread some advice: 1. Trading is not about doing well in statistics class. It's about applying common sense to statistics. This is something which has yet to occur to Bill (or Bwolinsky) since their posts focus on trite details of a fundamentally flawed concept. 2. Common sense is elusive, especially to the stubborn ones. 3. Math is financially dangerous as it can contradict common sense.
Yes, absolute correct. For a market timer like me. But likely not for an Trend follower. I dont know, i never was interestend in Trend Following. I just want to get in and out of the trade. Of course, if you have no target, you have no reason for the trade in the first place. And the odds on your side are only there for a specific time. Odds are changing all the time. Market Timing Cycle Trading, how i do it, is all about odds, its like a chess game or Poker. The mathematic here is A+B+C = D (what is enter) -> if B changes, you must be on guard and manage the risk. -> if A + B or B+C change against you = Exit all !!! There is no really math in trading. All you need is %, that you can calculate your risk and expected profit. ---------------------- But the trend followers are having, like always a totaly different approach, with trading a win rate of <40% and a risk/reward of 1 : 20 !!! What ever, i make more money and i make it quicker and without less stress. PEACE
Might have been the quickest profits on my sim trades before I go live with a 60 cent profit on GC in less than 15 seconds. And it is trend following price physics and it does get in and out all day long and there aren't any monthly losses so close drawdown is zero, win percentages trend following wise are 85-99+%, not the 40% you've seen, and I don't see any system with risk/rewards of 1:20, the profit factor is above 15 on the longs, but the return on Max Portfolio drawdown is a whopping 275 times. No, I doubt a trend following system can get much better. You should really look into it.