Plain Vanilla Options Trades.

[ducati998]

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.

Incorrect.

jog on peanut
d998

 

[PKFFW]

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.

Isn't this thread about the buying of options and not about anything else. So why such a long off topic post? No one asked the difference between theory and practice and it has nothing to do with your stated aim of this thread. So please do stay on topic.

Seems like a lot more waffle to cover up CYOF's inadvertant and telling slip of the fingers. You can phrase it however you like and throw up all the misdirection you want. The simple fact is that the edge you seem to be displaying is not an edge inherent and specific to the writing of options. It is an edge you seem to have in accurately determining market direction. Good for you on that but it still doesn't prove your hypothesis. You know it, CYOF knows it too. So you both continue to you yammer on about things entirely off topic whilst at the same time admonishing all others to stay on topic.

Very sad that someone who claims to have no ego can not admit a simple fault in his own reasoning when it is pointed out to him. Perhaps your non existant ego will be hurt too much if you do.

Cheers,
PKFFW

 

[Splitlink]

The only way to prove that call buyers have an edge over writers is to post their calls, in the same way that Socrates is posting his writes. Socrates is not going to do it and it is obvious why. Because it would act against his argument.

I would accept his statement that writers have the edge, except for the Black Knight. Dismiss it as ridiculous. if he likes. No one knows when the knight will appear and. when it does, thousands of writers will lose their shirts. He, no? Why not, is what I want to know and what he does not tell us. Getting out, or not being in, when that occurs, is the edge that he thinks he has. Maybe it is inside information, I don't know, but those following in his footsteps without that edge are looking for serious trouble because, no matter how attractive his profits on current trades seem, they are nothing to the fortune that can be lost on the final trade.

Split

 

[SOCRATES]

Announcement:~

Trade number 15. ...switched from the Mar expiriy to the Apr expiry

Written 6 FTSE 100 INDEX puts Apr 6175 @ 84....Just filled a couple of minutes ago . Thank you.

 

[SOCRATES]

The only way to prove that call buyers have an edge over writers is to post their calls, in the same way that Socrates is posting his writes. Socrates is not going to do it and it is obvious why. Because it would act against his argument.

I would accept his statement that writers have the edge, except for the Black Knight. Dismiss it as ridiculous. if he likes. No one knows when the knight will appear and. when it does, thousands of writers will lose their shirts. He, no? Why not, is what I want to know and what he does not tell us.

Split

If you want to take note of the price of the call when I write , you do it, not me,..... I am 2 bizzi already as this is not all I do....so you cannot expect me to burden myself with triivia

And so far as the Black Swan is concerned...you need not worry Spitlink. He is nowhere near.
Please don't frighten people and alarm them with these ideas, Spitlink please.

 

[CYOF]

If you want to take note of the price of the call when I write , you do it, not me,..... I am 2 bizzi already as this is not all I do....so you cannot expect me to burden myself with triivia

And so far as the Black Swan is concerned...you need not worry Spitlink. He is nowhere near.
Please don't frighten people and alarm them with these ideas, Spitlink please.

Yes, and maybe when they are at it, they might also write down the prices for Mr Post#411 and the rest of the so called Traders

 

[SOCRATES]

Isn't this thread about the buying of options and not about anything else. So why such a long off topic post? No one asked the difference between theory and practice and it has nothing to do with your stated aim of this thread. So please do stay on topic.

Seems like a lot more waffle to cover up CYOF's inadvertant and telling slip of the fingers. You can phrase it however you like and throw up all the misdirection you want. The simple fact is that the edge you seem to be displaying is not an edge inherent and specific to the writing of options. It is an edge you seem to have in accurately determining market direction. Good for you on that but it still doesn't prove your hypothesis. You know it, CYOF knows it too. So you both continue to you yammer on about things entirely off topic whilst at the same time admonishing all others to stay on topic.

Very sad that someone who claims to have no ego can not admit a simple fault in his own reasoning when it is pointed out to him. Perhaps your non existant ego will be hurt too much if you do.

Cheers,
PKFFW

Because........


It needs to be told.........It needs to be made clear............ It needs to be brought to the notice of the theorists.......... to wake them up from their torpor......and give them a rude awakening......and a good prod.....and wake them up from their intellectual hibernation.......and wake them up with a jolt......and to make them realise......the irrelevance that exists in the relationship between theorising and practicality......and because it is my thread ....I am telling it.....because I am the one member on this site most fit to tell what is needed ....and not because of any ego.....but for the simple reason that the reason iself is the reason.....and to whom....that is why....so put up or shut up....so there !

There is no waffle here.If you want waffle then engage the Great Neanderthal in discussion and you will quickly see what you get..Here you get the facts. The writer has the edge over the buyer....because skilful writing is :~

professional...systematic....relentless...persistent....repetitive....replicatory...repeatable

instead of

unprofessional...unsistematic..wobbly...whimsical...unreliable...wishful....erratic.

Now what would you expect me to do, abandon professionalism in favour of amateurism and practicality in favour of theory.....wot for ?......

 

[SOCRATES]

Incorrect.

jog on peanut
d998

And you ducatti had better take proper notice otherwise you wll contnue in the fog you are in for the rest of your life ducatti, because you are really fogbound....permanently fogbound, ducatti. I will do my best to dissipate the fog....but you yourself also have to make an effort to extricate yourself from the bank of dense fog that seems to permeate your thinking on a permanent basis. you have to make some effort yourself ducatti please, if you are to become independent and free and capable of clear thought.....ooops......and now your chum profitaker has appeared and is looking at this.......funny you ae the pair of you. ....all we need now is for db to appear and we have a trinity of density..

 

[CYOF]

Good morning Jon,

I thank you for the notice before deleting my post, but please be kind enough to put the post back in another section that you think appropriate, and the link here so that the readers may decide for themselves as to the validity of the content.

As it may well be "off topic" as you say, it was in response to an accusation of letting something slip, which implies that we are trying to hide something, which implies that we are lying, and we do not lie, ever.

So, please put the post back where you see fit and place link here.

Also, I will take notice of your other comments.

Thank You.

 

[Splitlink]

If you want to take note of the price of the call when I write , you do it, not me,..... I am 2 bizzi already as this is not all I do....so you cannot expect me to burden myself with triivia

And so far as the Black Swan is concerned...you need not worry Spitlink. He is nowhere near.
Please don't frighten people and alarm them with these ideas, Spitlink please.

Ah! It's a swan, is it. He may not be near but if he is, all we'll get from you guys is "We're sorry"!, so I prefer not to take your word for it. :cheesy:

 

[SOCRATES]

Ah! It's a swan, is it. He may not be near but if he is, all we'll get from you guys is "We're sorry"!, so I prefer not to take your word for it. :cheesy:

No you won't get "I'm sorry"...as that is what amateurs say when they make a blunder.
The Black Swan will be dealt with, guaranteed/
If you are lucky enough to experience such an event you may be allowed to see.
In the meantime it is not prudent to discuss such things in detail or in public or with strangers not members of the Elite 34S, so I cannot discuss, sorry.

 

[PKFFW]

Good morning Jon,

I thank you for the notice before deleting my post, but please be kind enough to put the post back in another section that you think appropriate, and the link here so that the readers may decide for themselves as to the validity of the content.

As it may well be "off topic" as you say, it was in response to an accusation of letting something slip, which implies that we are trying to hide something, which implies that we are lying, and we do not lie, ever.

So, please put the post back where you see fit and place link here.

Also, I will take notice of your other comments.

Thank You.

What you infer from what I write is entirely up to you. However, I do not imply, I say(or rather I write as the case may be). A case of a guilty conscience maybe?

I never said(or wrote) that you were lying. If I thought you were lying I would simply write that. I only wrote that you did not wish to admit the fault in you own logic. Unfortunately for you, your true thoughts came out and you admitted the edge Soc is demonstrating is not intrinsic nor specific to the writing of options.

Cheers,
PKFFW

 

[PKFFW]

Because........


It needs to be told.........It needs to be made clear............ It needs to be brought to the notice of the theorists.......... to wake them up from their torpor......and give them a rude awakening......and a good prod.....and wake them up from their intellectual hibernation.......and wake them up with a jolt......and to make them realise......the irrelevance that exists in the relationship between theorising and practicality......and because it is my thread ....I am telling it.....because I am the one member on this site most fit to tell what is needed ....and not because of any ego.....but for the simple reason that the reason iself is the reason.....and to whom....that is why....so put up or shut up....so there !

There is no waffle here.If you want waffle then engage the Great Neanderthal in discussion and you will quickly see what you get..Here you get the facts. The writer has the edge over the buyer....because skilful writing is :~

professional...systematic....relentless...persistent....repetitive....replicatory...repeatable

instead of

unprofessional...unsistematic..wobbly...whimsical...unreliable...wishful....erratic.

Now what would you expect me to do, abandon professionalism in favour of amateurism and practicality in favour of theory.....wot for ?......

Lets see now. CYOF regurgitates what you spoonfeed him. He lets slip the edge you seem to be displaying is not intrinsic to nor specific to the writing of options. This completely contradicts what you say. So instead of addressing the issue you go on about the difference between practicallity and theory.

You then go on about the "need to waken the theorist up" to "prod him out of his tupor". This completely contradicts what you yourself have said on so many occassions that it is not up to you to teach others, to show them the way etc etc. So where does this great need to wake the theorists up come from? More ego maybe?

Yep, if it looks like waffle, sounds like waffle then it's a good bet it is waffle.

Cheers,
PKFFW

 

[SOCRATES]

What you infer from what I write is entirely up to you. However, I do not imply, I say(or rather I write as the case may be). A case of a guilty conscience maybe?

I never said(or wrote) that you were lying. If I thought you were lying I would simply write that. I only wrote that you did not wish to admit the fault in you own logic. Unfortunately for you, your true thoughts came out and you admitted the edge Soc is demonstrating is not intrinsic nor specific to the writing of options.

Cheers,
PKFFW

It is about having the correct tools to do the job and the ability to use them.

Read post 641 for a simplified explanation of the methods and tools used.

 

[SOCRATES]

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

It is not wise to contradict me on market matters, because, infuriatingly for many people, it is obvious I am consistently right. Therefore, a word of advice....do not try to force the market for it to do what you want. The FTSE Future is on ascending node and not descending. Therefore your short will not be satisfactory.... you will experience a bear squeeze....not pleasant..

 

[PKFFW]

It is about having the correct tools to do the job and the ability to use them.

Read post 641 for a simplified explanation of the methods and tools used.

So now you are admitting the edge is about the correct tools and the ability to use them. This holds true for any edge and is in no way intrinsic or specific to the writing of options

Thanks for clearing that up.

Cheers,
PKFFW

 

[SOCRATES]

So now you are admitting the edge is about the correct tools and the ability to use them. This holds true for any edge and is in no way intrinsic or specific to the writing of options

Thanks for clearing that up.

Cheers,
PKFFW

Well....as Pod G says " If you do not understand this.....you ought not to be trading.....you ought not to be trading at all....until you do understand it...it's obvious isn't it ? ....I mean to say...it is SCREAMING at you, it is......( )....and everyone in the room nodding...nodding.

And so, if you do not understand what you are letting yourself in for, you should not participate.

Simple innit ?

 

[Jack o'Clubs]

It is not wise to contradict me on market matters, because, infuriatingly for many people, it is obvious I am consistently right. Therefore, a word of advice....do not try to force the market for it to do what you want. The FTSE Future is on ascending node and not descending. Therefore your short will not be satisfactory.... you will experience a bear squeeze....not pleasant..

It is also obvious for those who read the weekly forex thread that DC is consistently right, so this is set up for an interesting battle of wits.... Nothing that helps prove that writers have the edge of course, but interesting nonetheless...

 

[CYOF]

Lets see now. CYOF regurgitates what you spoonfeed him. He lets slip the edge you seem to be displaying is not intrinsic to nor specific to the writing of options. This completely contradicts what you say. So instead of addressing the issue you go on about the difference between practicallity and theory.

You then go on about the "need to waken the theorist up" to "prod him out of his tupor". This completely contradicts what you yourself have said on so many occassions that it is not up to you to teach others, to show them the way etc etc. So where does this great need to wake the theorists up come from? More ego maybe?

Yep, if it looks like waffle, sounds like waffle then it's a good bet it is waffle.

Cheers,
PKFFW

As my reply covered the TRUTH in relation to your "comments", as you call them, Jon will have to re-post them for all to see.

As this is very important, and it is a repeat of some posts been left and others been deleted, again on T2W, for what ever reasons just goes beyond me, I am going to consult with the Elite 34S to see if this warrants a 5 day self imposed ban from T2W - with nothing been posted at all, on any T2W thread.

Before we make the decision, if Jon re-instates my post, which was in every way connected with your "comments", then we will continue as normal.

In the event that Jon does not reply by 14:00, for I will now PM him as well to say that I have posted here, and that his immediate reply will be appreciated, I will return after 14:00 with the decision from the Elite 34S.

 

[SOCRATES]

It is also obvious for those who read the weekly forex thread that DC is consistently right, so this is set up for an interesting battle of wits.... Nothing that helps prove that writers have the edge of course, but interesting nonetheless...

It is not a battle of wits at all just common sense.

You don't short into a phase in ascending node. You don't . You face a bear squeeze.

This is not something I am inventing. This is the experience of all who have gone before us, whose recorded wisdom is foolish for us to ignore.