Plain Vanilla Options Trades.

[SOCRATES]

That is a good post because I could read it, it is short.

No CYOF, I was talking about your educating all and sundry. Frankly, I don't give a toss whether you can trade or not, as I didn't care whether the lawyers in my office where I used to work were good lawyers or not. What is funny about you is your rather touching idea that a good trader is able to educate anybody about anything. Trading is a job. If you are good at it, good for you. What makes the plumber down the pub a bore is his insistence to know about all sorts of stuff on which he clearly isn't qualified to have anything other than an opinion. He may be a good plumber but when he starts to philosophise, it is time to go home.

"Trading is a job"..... ....... ........

 

[zupcon]

"Trading is a job"..... ....... ........

He is partially correct in the sense that trading fulfils any role you wish it to fulfil

 

[SOCRATES]

He is partially correct in the sense that trading fulfils any role you wish it to fulfil

Yes, quite.......no doubt about it...........it can prove to be one hell of a job for some people.....

 

[Crap Buddist]

Well Dc, it is like this:


Words are but empty vessels - thought precedes all action :idea:

Not always, people can and do often act before thought and I'm sure the market exploits this aspect of humans.

I think if people evolve to actually think before they act then that may result in taking less fake breakouts, or running with (and holding) the fodder wave for example.

Emotion will often pre-empt thinking ,hence why people do things that afterwards upon conscious reflection may be tagged as Bonkers

Any views on this ?

 

[CYOF]

Not always, people can and do often act before thought and I'm sure the market exploits this aspect of humans.

I think if people evolve to actually think before they act then that may result in taking less fake breakouts, or running with (and holding) the fodder wave for example.

Emotion will often pre-empt thinking ,hence why people do things that afterwards upon conscious reflection may be tagged as Bonkers

Any views on this ?

Quite a lot actually, but I believe that I know nothing about anything, really :idea:

 

[SOCRATES]

Not always, people can and do often act before thought and I'm sure the market exploits this aspect of humans.

I think if people evolve to actually think before they act then that may result in taking less fake breakouts, or running with (and holding) the fodder wave for example.

Emotion will often pre-empt thinking ,hence why people do things that afterwards upon conscious reflection may be tagged as Bonkers

Any views on this ?

Yes, read my thread "Journey from the Basement" ....it is all in there....enjoy !

 

[ammo]

That is a good post because I could read it, it is short.
"The society which scorns excellence in plumbing because plumbing is a humble activity,and tolerates shoddiness in philosophy,because philosophy is an exalted activity,will have neither good plumbing nor good philosophy. Neither its pipes nor its theories will hold water. John William Gardner President ,Carnegie Foundation

 

[dc2000]

Charlton has a very good slogan - "Just Do It".

Hmmm seem to remember its NIKE's slogan

If I was allowed to, I would be glad to show you the details of my brokerage account statement

Please don't Im not sure I could take the immense laughter

 

[zupcon]

Your opinion is worth piddly, and if you think I will waste my time searching for academic non sensical rubbish, for you and your mates, then you are a bigger dreamer than I thought you were

I will, however, give you the following, as it took me exactly 5 seconds to find it for you, and your mates, so do read it carefully, as the title is well suited to you and your mates

http://img242.imageshack.us/img242/1060/idiotsguideud4.gif

Its responses such as this that illustrate your complete inability to grasp the most basic of concepts. You made the assertion that the majority of trading books are written by academics. I dont believe that to be correct, so I requested that you back your assertion with facts (you do know what a fact is dont you ?)

In response, you cite the complete idiots guide to options and futures.

Unfortunately its not a book that Ive read, nor indeed a book that I am ever likely to read, so I cant really give you an appraisal of the value of the materials contained within. I will however point out that it isn't a book written by an academic, is it ?. The author isn't a professor, is he ?

Your assertion is that all trading books are written by academics, my assertion is that most books are likely to be written by failed traders, or other vendors with a vested interest. The book, that you supplied as evidence of trading books being written by academics, supports my argument, it dosnt support yours.

For your information, Scott Barrie (the author) owns Commodity, Futures and Equity Analytics and is the former head of research and operations for Great Pacific Trading Company in Oregon, an educational brokerage specializing in introducing newcomers to speculating in the futures and options markets. He has 12 years experience in the financial derivatives industry, including time as a trader and hedge specialist. He is a regular contributor to Stocks and Commodities magazine and Stock Traders Almanac and has been quoted in the Wall Street Journal, Investors Business Daily, and Barron's Weekly.

Now what bit dont you get ?, perhaps I can assist ye, for ye are indeed truly in need of help.

regards
zu

 

[SOCRATES]

Its responses such as this that illustrate your complete inability to grasp the most basic of concepts. You made the assertion that the majority of trading books are written by academics. I dont believe that to be correct, so I requested that you back your assertion with facts (you do know what a fact is dont you ?)

In response, you cite the complete idiots guide to options and futures.

Unfortunately its not a book that Ive read, nor indeed a book that I am ever likely to read, so I cant really give you an appraisal of the value of the materials contained within. I will however point out that it isn't a book written by an academic, is it ?. The author isn't a professor, is he ?

Your assertion is that all trading books are written by academics, my assertion is that most books are likely to be written by failed traders, or other vendors with a vested interest. The book, that you supplied as evidence of trading books being written by academics, supports my argument, it dosnt support yours.

For your information, Scott Barrie (the author) owns Commodity, Futures and Equity Analytics and is the former head of research and operations for Great Pacific Trading Company in Oregon, an educational brokerage specializing in introducing newcomers to speculating in the futures and options markets. He has 12 years experience in the financial derivatives industry, including time as a trader and hedge specialist. He is a regular contributor to Stocks and Commodities magazine and Stock Traders Almanac and has been quoted in the Wall Street Journal, Investors Business Daily, and Barron's Weekly.

Now what bit dont you get ?, perhaps I can assist ye, for ye are indeed truly in need of help.

regards
zu

AAAHHH ! ...I know what it is.....I have a minute and I will be brief....I think he means it is written from an academic viewpoint versus a practical viewpoint is the drift I get....but there again aren't the vast majority of books on trading written from a purely academic viewpoint with a little blotch of practicality here and there ?....and not the other way round ?

 

[ian]

Tonight on CHANNEL 4 at 23:05 - Mania

Egomania
A healthy, strong ego is the basis of a successful, driven individual. But what happens when an ego goes too far?

 

[SOCRATES]

Yes Socrates, exactly, but why spell it out, for the joy is in the discovery, not in the showing.

We must remember that some people here may be actually interested in learning something of value, but we must let the usual rubbish come out, for we do not censor anyone, it is not democratic :idea:

You know my views in relation to Montaigne, they will never change, for each and every day I am convinced more and more just how right he really was back in 1580 - and it is now 2007

So, I will not interrupt the game any further, I have some seriesss bizziness to attend to.

Till tomorrow, have an enjoyable evening, all.

I will post this for you to read when you return.

It is precisely this gulf that separates what is academic from what is practical that serves to cause so much confusion, and escalated by envy to aggression, rudeness and disrespect.

This chasm of misunderstanding runs parallel to the belief structures on which institutional life is built against the hard realities of practical trading.

This is why there are so many detractors, and that is why in large measure I do not consider them worthy of responses and getting involved in tit for tat argument in closed loop tedium.

That is why I am not interested in creatures like profitaker for example with his persistent irrelevant views and repeated nonsenses.

Now here is tomorrow's news today:~

At the opening of the market tomorrow, I will write another 6 lots of FTSE 100 INDEX puts Mar 6175 according to best price available.

This one will be trade number 15.

You cannot complain I do not tell you everything and you cannot complain I do not tell you also in advance of the event. All else is irrelevant.

 

[the blades]

I This is why there are so many detractors, and that is why in large measure I do not consider them worthy of responses and getting involved in tit for tat argument in closed loop tedium

.

good grief - I nearly spat my cornflakes out at that one! In the words of John McEnroe;

"You cannot be serious"



UTB

 

[dc2000]

Now here is tomorrow's news today:~

At the opening of the market tomorrow, I will write another 6 lots of FTSE 100 INDEX puts Mar 6175 according to best price available.

This one will be trade number 15.

I will be watching with interest as I will be looking for a short in FTSE futures and reckon on getting my price 10 mins ish into trading

 

[grantx]

Mr Moderator,

Did you delete my last post?

Grant.

 

[zupcon]

What kind of limited minds have you got, really, for I am now beginning to think that some of you are even worse than monkeys, if such a thing is possible.

I will ask Bulldozer, for he knows only too well how to handle monkeys, and I must say, I commend him on his keen eyesight, for he can indeed spot a monkey a mile away.

CYOF

You have made some good points, that deserve a response, I'll deal with these in reverse order, and as time permits. Firstly Bulldozers treatment of our tea drinking furry friends.

I dont believe that he knows how to handle monkeys at all, he may have constructed a cage, and popped the odd monkey into that cage from time to time, but he has a history of losing control of his emotions in the presence of monkeys.

Ive devoted tens of thousands of hours learning how to manipulate people like the Maltese Bull, both for my amusement and profit. I suspect that I could probably reduce him to a fit of rage within seconds. The problem is that he believes himself to be in control of the monkeys, and you believe he's in control, but your both wrong, In reality, the monkeys are in control of him, and at the very least, the presence of monkeys causes him to lose control of himself. Imagine the chaos if such a thing where to happen at a zoo

Loss of control is not an acceptable trait for anyone occupying a position of responsibility. I wont even begin to open up the can of worms regarding loss of control in relation to trading.

 

[PKFFW]

Now, to educate some readers some more, without spending too much time, as I am also veri bizzi trading Options this week.

Socrates is showing the following:

1. He is taking cash from the Put buyers :idea:

2. He is showing that the strikes will expire worthless to the buyer :idea:

3. This ts Not based on luck :idea:

4. The winning trades are consistent and he will make it 13 Wins from 13 Trades.

5. The FTSE goes Up>>>> he wins :idea:

6. The FTSE goes sideways>>>> he wins :idea:

7. The FTSE goes down, but not lower than the strike >>>> He Wins Again :idea:

8. The Put buyer is on a HIDING to Nothing :idea:

Put all the above together, and what does it spell out?


My good old faithful, the thoroughbred, has just barked four, yes, that is 4 times:

Wof...E Wof...D Wof...G Wof...E

And guess what, even my 8 year old daughter has started singing in a little rhyme and hopping around the floor at the same time:

Buyer Beware.........Buyer Beware.........Buyer Beware

Now that warms my heart, and Linda Bradford Raschke better beware, for in the future the LRB group will be overrun by the SPTMM group.

"What my dear, OK, I will tell them for you, but you must be patient, for it takes a long time for monkeys to understand logical reasoning, and the majority of them will just never get it"

SPTMM = Sell Puts To Make Money - not buy them :idea:

"What my dear, tell them about the other Options strategies".

"Wait, you must not be foolish, my Dear, do you not now see that if the monkeys can not understand the basics like you do, how in Gods name are they going to understand anything that is a little more complicated. We do not want to get them into a frenzie, for when monkeys get into a frenzie, they are liable to do silly things, and we do not want anyone to do silly things, now, do we"

"Thank you, my Dear, I knew you would understand, now, back to the data feed and watch those little numbers changing, thats right, the ones that are jumping right out at you, so high that you can nearly catch them".

Waffle on all you like CYOF. The fact remains you yourself posted that it is about the "spiritual ability" to know when to sell options rather than the selling of them in and of itself that provides the edge. Your words, not mine. This goes to the very heart of the matter. Now you are trying to simply repeat over and over that Soc is a genius and your 8 year old daughter is so great and your dog woofed out 4 times all in an effort to cover the fact that you let slip that you were wrong in your original position/hypothesis. You bleated on so long in an effort to wind everyone up that you accidentally let slip that you know I and others, that have pointed out the edge is not inherent in the writing of options but rather in the knowing of when to write them, are correct. All the rest of your blatherings are simply a smoke screen to now try to cover that slip up.

Soc may very well be a trading master. He may very well complete 100, 1000 or any other number of profitable trades in a row. This is not in debate. In fact it is of no interest to anyone except you and Soc. All this is not even Soc's stated aim of this thread is it? His stated aim is to prove that writers have the edge over buyers. By your own admission and own words, this is not so. The edge comes from having the ability to know when to sell rather than buy, not in the selling itself.

So now that you have admitted this, I thankyou. I have my answer and I will leave you to your ranting in this thread.

Cheers,
PKFFW

 

[SOCRATES]

I have read all this. This is where theoreticians and practitioners collide.

It is very safe and comforting to be a theoretician.

A theotetician need only quote in theory and can take refuge in quoting from books and from textbooks.

But theoreticians lack the practical experience of dealing with real markets in real situations in real time, and often in advance of the expectation of an event, or the event itself.

To be a practitioner, and I mean an effective practitioner, is a very different proposition to being a theoretician or a theorist. A practitioner can not afford the luxury of theory or dogma or hindsight.

Additionlally the practitioner has to have a complete raft of deep knowledge that can be regurgitated in an instant without referring to anythng except the mindmap he carries in his head all the time.

Also the practitioner has to know wnen and if to apply the correct template to the situation presented, out of a huge variety of combinations that can lead to a variety of outcomes.

Additionally the practitioner has to be master of impartiality and not to be sucked into having opinions but only emotionally disconnected views.

The practitioner has to engage reason and to act in accordance with that reason, and to apply correct judgement in accordance with his store of knowledge and the extent of his experience.

The pracatitioner has to be in posession of the correct mindset, which is very different to the artificiality of theoretical understanding.

So I have just mentioned a few of the faculties in the cluster of abilities the practitioner is expected to have, and must have.

The posession of this cluster of abilities is a forgone conclusion necessary for the pracatitioner to be a true practitioner in contradistinction to being a theorist.

I would take it for granted that I would be surrounded by practitioners ~ instead I find myself surrounded by theorists.

I do not have the time or the patience to convert theorists to practitioners.

Therefore I present my hypothesis from a practitioner's point of view, and not that of a theorist.

But the theorists....., at all costs, .....and by any means possible to them.... insist on trying to drag me to the theoretical side.

The strains this causes througout this thread illumintaes how many theorists there really are here, and how real practitioners, really effective battle hardened experienced knwoledgeable practiioners are very thin on the ground by comparison is one of my preliminary conclusions.

May this please the deep thinkers and infuriate the detractors.

 

[grantx]

Is intellectual superiority demonstrated by engagement with retards?

Grant.

 

[SOCRATES]

Is intellectual superiority demonstrated by engagement with retards?

Grant.

No, not at all, read my post above in order to be properly made aware of the gap that exists between theory and practice, and how this gap is the root cause of much of the irrelevant and inappropriate comment posted so far on this thread. Goodnight.