|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Docteur:
Your "proof" is after the fact. What have you traded?
Lionel Issen
-----Original Message-----
From: Docteur <docteur@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wednesday, February 24, 1999 7:52 PM
Subject: Re: S&P 500 (was AOL, CSCO, & WMT)
>Rick,
>
>OK...you want proof? Here's proof:
>
>On Friday last you could have bought the AOL 160 February option call
>contract for 1/16 during the first hour of trading. A couple three
>hours later that same contract was trading at 1 9/16 (check it out if
>you don't believe me). One hundred contracts would have cost you
>$ 625 and returned you $ 15,000. One thousand contracts would have cost
>you $ 6,250 and returned you $ 150,000. There's your 2400% for that
>month in less than three hours.
>
>The candlesticks and chart patterns on AOL were screaming at you to buy.
>Had you known what I do and recognized those patterns, you would have
>made 2400% on your money in a couple of hours and sold those contracts
>at the absolute exact top of the pattern that gave the buy signal in the
>first place. (I had two students here with me watching the trade and it
>hit pattern measurement exactly to a 1/16 of a point).
>
>Had you bought the December 120 Amazon calls on November 16th and sold
>them on December 16th, you could have made approximately $ 1.6 Million
>on $ 2,500 invested in 100 contracts at $ .25 each. Again, the pattern
>that gave the buy signal screamed for you to jump in, IF you knew what
>to look for.
>
>Do the math Rick. It's real.
>
>There are literally dozens of trades like those two listed every month.
>You just have to know how to recognize them and how to trade them.
>
>Charlatan? Hawker? Mathmatically impossible?
>
>To all those of you like Rick who doubt me, your arrogance and utter
>distrust of people stops you from earning huge returns because your
>small mindedness keeps you, well, small.
>
>I may be cocky but you don't have to like me to learn from me. Heck,
>would you listen to me if I wasn't?
>
>According to you Rick, this isn't a nice business. The truth is this is
>a wonderful business with more opportunity than anything I have ever
>seen. I have owned dozens of successful businesses and never in my
>wildest dreams believed that something like this was possible until I
>proved it in my own experience. But I, unlike you, was willing to at
>least test it. See if maybe there was something there that could move
>me beyond mediocre trading.
>
>The difference between you and I Rick is I am open to possibilites and
>trust what I hear until I am given a reason not to. What got me started
>on this search was an article I read that talked about a trader who
>earned more than a million dollars in one day on an option trade with
>relatively little at risk. In that same month, he pocketed over five
>million dollars, again with very little ar risk.
>
>That was all I needed to start me searching for what worked. He used
>candlesticks and elementary chart patterns to give him entry and exit
>points and the power of options for leverage.
>
>I have been trading for less than a year but to me the amount of time is
>irrelevant if what you are using isn't optimum. Maybe my wetness behind
>the ears and ignornance of all the "systems" out there is exactly what
>saved me and precisely what led me to discover so quickly what was
>optimum in this business. I wasn't trapped by a belief system nor did I
>have a lot invested in years of trading.
>
>Your mind is too full of what you think you know to allow what others
>know to help you expand into a whole different level of trading. I
>trust what comes into my world because I trust myself. Even when it
>seems totally outrageous, I follow up. Because in my world, more times
>than not, it's the real deal.
>
>I applaud Claudia who has been trading for 40 years and still has the
>courage and open mindedness to test other ideas and see if maybe there
>isn't something out there that works better than what she is currently
>using. I trust her implicitly because she, unlike you, trusts herself.
>
>Contrary to what you believe, this really is a nice business full of
>hope for people seeking freedom from the drudgery of meaningless work. I
>have met lots of excellent, decent people over the last 11 months via
>e-mail and will continue to do so because I EXPECT that in my life.
>
>My objective is to share everything I know with those who want to
>listen. (As opposed to being secretive. Why would you be secretive?
>What is there to protect? The more you share with others, the more you
>get! The more I teach the more I learn.)
>
>If my style is offensive to you, push that delete button. But don't
>attack me because I want to share my good fortune with people seeking
>knowledge that is powerful enough to explode every trading myth out
>there.
>
>Heck, if someone came to me making what I considered to be outrageous
>claims but was sincere, I would check out what they were saying. They
>just might be telling the truth...
>
>Doc
>
>
>
>Rick Mortellra wrote:
>>
>> Glen,
>>
>> Nothing wrong with keeping an open mind on trading ideas. That's one of
>> reasons I've stayed on this list despite my limited use of MetaStock.
But
>> the Doc's claims are mathematically ridiculous. Just a few quick punches
on
>> calculator will make it obvious that a few more months like that and the
Doc
>> wouldn't be able to hide behind his anonymity. He'd be on the cover of
>> Forbes.
>>
>> Think about it. Every $1 he started with was worth $312 after only 2
months
>> of trading! As one who's spent his professional trading life building
>> trading and money management systems based on sound math I find his
posts
>> lacking integrity. If he wants to prove himself, then let him provide
the
>> security symbols, the number of times he traded each one, and his
gearage. I
>> can do the math from there, no broker statements required. If he is
>> truthful, we'll have all the info we need to evaluate his claim and
decide
>> for ourselves. And if he's lies, it will be easy to expose him. I
haven't
>> wasted my time visiting his web site simply because if I had something
as
>> profitable as this to sell, I couldn't bill anyone's credit card because
>> it's price would exceed their credit limit. At least it would mine :-(
>>
>> The trading biz is full of false prophets and outright charlatans. Most
of
>> their claims are based on bad math. As an example, I'm listening right
now
>> to Mr.. Manic-Depressive, aka Ralph Acampora, tout the Dow tripling in
12
>> years. Sounds fantastic and incredibly bullish, but a quick calculation
>> shows a yearly return of ONLY about 9.5%! That's less than the 11%+
>> historical average!
>>
>> Trading is not for the mathematically impaired. If high school algebra
was
>> tough, you need to find another way to make money.
>>
>> cheers,
>> Rick
>>
>> PS. Sorry for being harsh, but this is NOT a nice business.
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Glen Wallace <gcwallace@xxxxxxxx>
>> To: metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Date: Thursday, February 25, 1999 6:34 AM
>> Subject: Re: S&P 500 (was AOL, CSCO, & WMT)
>>
>> >Bravo, Lino. Let's not blast someone simply because they are proud of
>> their
>> >apparently high returns and achievements. Instead, let's see if we can
>> >learn from them and improve our own work. If they are willing to
share, I
>> >will always listen and keep an open mind.
>> >
>> >On the other hand, if I may be so bold, bravado simply for the sake of
>> >stoking one's own ego (and this is *not* directed at Doc) has no place
>> here.
>> >
>> >Challenging a person's claims is valid, but let's leave the flaming to
>> AOL's
>> >chatrooms, OK? I wouldn't want people to hold back their ideas for
fear of
>> >being roasted.
|