Plain Vanilla Options Trades.

[JohnG FX]

Just a quick question to the moderators.

I posted a reply to Mr Marcus earlier this morning.

I see that post has now been deleted ? would the person responsible please have the courtesy to explain to me (a pm would be fne) what was wrong with it.

I wasn't aware that on this forum that it is the norm to have a post deleted when it was only highlighting an issue in a non offensive way?

Or this forum just a club for the boys where a quiet word in the right place has the desired effect?

If that is the case I will just gracefully return to my old forum where we manage to self regulate and have done so for years.

Regards

 

[stoic]

.....please...we live in the uk and know the background between vsatrader,albert and co a lot more than anyone on here im sure....albert is no saint...i dont agree with the way he communicates a lot of the time ...i tell him this...but its his choice...he also contributed a brilliant thread in the past.....you wanna rip him when hes back....fine....maybe he deserves it.....to have a poll on his thread when hes not here to defend himself is just plain cowardice,gutless and bullsh!t.



(this post is directed solely at the poll starter and those who believe it acceptable behaviour)

Absolutely. Socrates is not here to defend himself, why stab a man in the back? His behaviour and the way he has gone about this is a little strange, and he's banned himself temporarily from his own thread. He's lost a lot of credibility now, but it doesn't really mean we should lay it into him since he has contributed stuff worthwhile in the past. In case anyone is wondering, I too am NOT on his side, but can understand that the way he has gone about things have infuriated a lot of people.

 

[Glenn]

.....please...we live in the uk and know the background between vsatrader,albert and co a lot more than anyone on here im sure....albert is no saint...i dont agree with the way he communicates a lot of the time ...i tell him this...but its his choice...he also contributed a brilliant thread in the past.....you wanna rip him when hes back....fine....maybe he deserves it.....to have a poll on his thread when hes not here to defend himself is just plain cowardice,gutless and bullsh!t.



(this post is directed solely at the poll starter and those who believe it acceptable behaviour)

Marcus
I agree that if it was anyone else it would seem objectionable to have a poll in their absence, but not in this case imho.
My motive for voting No and for suggesting that his ban should be permanent is solely intended to help Albert for what I believe are compassionate and honourable reasons, without malice.

I think that if Albert was here to 'defend' himself it would just turn into another never-ending slanging match of no value to anyone other than some kind of pantomime.

Glenn

 

[Profitaker]

March EDSP 6106 (unconfirmed)

 

[barjon]

As you would guess I had my axe honed and poised to strike this morning

However, I will leave it be for a while since I think there has been a lot of good sense talked about what is appropriate behaviour on the boards.

Cheers

jon

 

[Profitaker]

Very magnanimous of you Jon.

 

[Splitlink]

Marcus
I agree that if it was anyone else it would seem objectionable to have a poll in their absence, but not in this case imho.
My motive for voting No and for suggesting that his ban should be permanent is solely intended to help Albert for what I believe are compassionate and honourable reasons, without malice.

I think that if Albert was here to 'defend' himself it would just turn into another never-ending slanging match of no value to anyone other than some kind of pantomime.

Glenn

Why don't you, simply, put him on ignore? For those that keep posting here, apart from the odd one or two, (that puts me in the clear ) perhaps it is a question of loving to hate him?
Perhaps, by putting him out,a void would be created. Who would you select, in his stead? Even PT must have been getting great enjoyment in proving him wrong.

Split

 

[credo]

Yes, the volatility of the underlying is driven by human action, ergo psycology. Not entirely sure I follow your point, but are you saying psycology should be discussed on an options thread because it's relevant ? If so, then the same would apply to all other aspects affecting the bottom line, including Technical analysis, Fundamental analysis, Brokers, Software, and so on, no ?

yes Sir I am. In my view its paramount. Technical analysis require interpretation as does fundamental. If a movement is observed it requires interpretive analysis. Trading is complex and not complex whether it be options or shares or forex. Look what happened at Enron shares. They were collapsing, but people kept on buying. I have never been on any of Alberts courses simply because I cant afford them, however I came across his lecture notes and what he was saying was in a nutshell "we cant see the wood for the trees". No matter what you say he is one hell of a trader - and respect to that ! That makes skillful and exceptionally able. We cant leave psychology out of it. Its like say for example designing spectacles, and stuying at great depth metals that can be used to make spectacles- what about the lens ?

 

[options]

Fwiw, I would suggest waiting until Socs can explain himself (if he ever does: in simple english).
It is his thread after all.

But I think the purpose of the thread has been completed. The writer has the edge over the buyer!
That edge will be that the writer almost always wins!

And therin lies the crux.

One sudden about turn on the market and crunch. DC said he saw it 2 weeks previous, I saw it a bit before that and plenty of others on here saw it as well.

No one in their right mind would hang onto those trades when it was such a obvious correction. Who would put up that kind of margin, (even if they thought that market about to re-turn in their favour). I'd be out quicker than a black swan with a red hot poker jammed up its a**e.
There is always the very true danger that the 'correction' could be the turn for a big leg down.

"Everything is known in advance"?

Well, that is true. But not by the likes of us. And not it seems by the likes of soco.

We can only guess with the information available, as to the best course of action to take. We hope most times we are right, and wrong the odd few. We strive for 100% but we know it will never happen.
Best I get is 7 out of 10. But you know what? We need that bit that goes against us. Just to keep our feet on the floor.

That slap is a 'don't try it again'. A 'you are getting too big for your boots.' Or a 'come back when you have learnt a bit more'.

I don't like to post in the week during trading but I am a bit more laid back this week because I am showing someone the ropes, and that is all about probablities of what will happen. And that is all we can expect. First two trades were pulled, because the expectancy went the wrong way.
next was a b/e. One trade stopped out at -25,and then a long from 1.9225, currently sitting very pretty. But it's all about what may happen.

This is where I think the thread falls down. Soc is trying to be a GOD. What he says is irrefutable, and you cannot argue with it. But didn't the REAL Socrates listen to what people had to say, and then make a informed judgement?

 

[Profitaker]

We cant leave psychology out of it. Its like say for example designing spectacles, and stuying at great depth metals that can be used to make spectacles- what about the lens ?

I think we may be talking at cross purposes here. I actually agree with that you're saying. My point, is that there are specific forums for spectacles and specific forums for lenses.

This is an options forum, not a psycology forum.

 

[dbphoenix]

Marcus
I agree that if it was anyone else it would seem objectionable to have a poll in their absence, but not in this case imho.
My motive for voting No and for suggesting that his ban should be permanent is solely intended to help Albert for what I believe are compassionate and honourable reasons, without malice.

I think that if Albert was here to 'defend' himself it would just turn into another never-ending slanging match of no value to anyone other than some kind of pantomime.

Glenn

I agree. There is a context here. A long-standing context. And anyone who thinks that bertie is being ambushed just isn't aware of -- or chooses to ignore -- that context.

Bertie isn't going to be banned. It just ain't gonna happen. So Sebastian's "poll" is going to have no effect. But Sebastian has as much right to post it as bertie has to denigrate and ridicule.

As to this "five-day banning", it's what bertie would call "water off a duck's back". Anyone expecting him to admit that he made a mistake or did anything wrong, much less apologize for it, is in for a long wait.

Db

 

[grantx]

“when he’s not here to defend himself”. He’s omniscient - in one guise or another. Why the sudden burst of moral indignation? Civility and respect are alien to this thread.

Credo,

“No matter what you say he is one hell of a trader - and respect to that”.

Seems I “can’t see the wood for the trees.” Perhaps I should switch my reading glasses for the rose-tinted.

Grant.

 

[dbphoenix]

“when he’s not here to defend himself”. He’s omniscient - in one guise or another. Why the sudden burst of moral indignation? Civility and respect are alien to this thread.

Credo,

“No matter what you say he is one hell of a trader - and respect to that”.

Seems I “can’t see the wood for the trees.” Perhaps I should switch my reading glasses for the rose-tinted.

Grant.

As for the "hell of a trader" part, Sebastian's first post was unfortunately deleted, or the discussion might take on a different character. But that's the problem with deletions: those who never read what was deleted are on a different page, which serves to transform what might be a relatively brief discussion into an extended and sometimes perpetual argument.

Db

 

[stoic]

No matter what you say he is one hell of a trader - and respect to that

is a TOTALLY UNFALSIFIABLE statement, therefore in the light of logical reasoning, you have no right to entertain this judgement.

It is purely unfalsifiable because of Socrates' secretiveness, and what's happened on this thread has damaged his credibility considerably.

 

[Profitaker]

In my experience, trading success is negatively correlated to ego and arrogance. Not only did Socrates display a massive ego and arrogance towards everyone on this thread, but he argued with the market.....and lost.

I doubt Socrates has had any significant trading success.

 

[credo]

In my experience, trading success is negatively correlated to ego and arrogance. Not only did Socrates display a massive ego and arrogance towards everyone on this thread, but he argued with the market.....and lost.

I doubt Socrates has had any significant trading success.

I assure you he has. He is minted.

 

[dc2000]

“when he’s not here to defend himself”.

do as you would be done by - thats my moto - Soc has been guilty of posting malicious comments about banned posters so why is it now not cricket to return the favour

 

[credo]

“when he’s not here to defend himself”. He’s omniscient - in one guise or another. Why the sudden burst of moral indignation? Civility and respect are alien to this thread.

Credo,

“No matter what you say he is one hell of a trader - and respect to that”.

Seems I “can’t see the wood for the trees.” Perhaps I should switch my reading glasses for the rose-tinted.

Grant.

Such negativity ! - look at the flaw in your arguement. Trading is not a science, as you are treating it. Trading is a complex and not as complex PSEUDO science based on economics depending on what you make of it. The market has behaviour. A simple example is a serious professional looking at it can easily, if not instantly know where its going or a novice become entangled and confused. Socrates demonstrates ability in psychological observation of where the market is going. He may not be good at option trading but he is S*** hot at equities..

 

[dc2000]

I assure you he has. He is minted.

credo may I ask what you conection is to Soc you seem to know an awfull lot about him and since you joined the site your posts have in the main been regarding Soc?

 

[ian]

I assure you he has. He is minted.

Have you seen proof of this 'mint' or are you just assuming that he 'is minted'?