Norm? - page 31

New comment
 

I see. Your poker knowledge is excellent. Probably the same about trading.

Of course not, I don't want to take 100 quid from my namesake.

If you're scared, just say so, it's not the right place for a scam.

 
TheXpert:

I see. Your poker knowledge is excellent. Probably the same about trading.

Of course not, I don't want to take 100 quid from my namesake.

If you're scared, just say so, it's not the right place for a scam.

Yeah, right... I got 100 people coming in, all betting 100 quid against me. What am I supposed to bet 10,000 bucks on the bank? That's not the point.
 
lordlev:
What am I supposed to bet 10,000 on the bank? That's not the point.
Here we go. Is it getting tight? Or you're not sure of the system? Or at 100 you're sure, but at 10,000 you're not)))
 
lordlev:
I see. If you win with him, then divide the winnings (my 100) in half. If I do, I take your 150 with him.

I continue to marvel at the wonders of the world.

how can the owner: of a profitable EA that stands and trades in an account that sells for 30k - even bet that he will lose his bet and the EA will sell out?

It's an official admission that the expert is a leaker. In fact, we have a leaker seller who has priced his own creation at $100.

PS. You don't have to reflect, it's just a thought out loud.

 

... Meanwhile, the banter with the topicstarter went on... Meanwhile, the rest of the crowd is waiting for the "Loser in Chief 2013" nomination. :)

 
sergeev:

I continue to wonder about miracles.

how can the owner: of a profitable EA that stands and trades in an account that sells for 30k - even bet that he will lose his bet and the EA will sell out?

This is the official recognition that the expert defrauds. In fact we have a seller defrauder who estimated his own creation at 100$.

PS. I do not need to reflect, it's just a thought out loud.

Don't twist it, the risk of losing is always there.
 
TheXpert:
There, it's coming. Is it a tight squeeze? Or are you unsure of the system? Or at 100 you're sure and at 10,000 you're not)))
It's a matter of risk. For example, you have a strategy that on history gives a drawdown at one lot of 25% of the initial balance. Will you increase the lot to three? After all, then the drawdown would increase up to 75% and the profit would also triple and you would get rid of the margin call. Naturally, you would not risk increasing by three times, right? This is the same situation here. There is just a reasonable risk that I am willing to take. And is it really about the money? Will my 100 do you any good? Or your 50? Of course not. It's just an argument of interest backed by a formal wager.
 
Yedelkin:
I don't care. I'm not afraid to be wrong. And it's not hard for me to apologise.
 
Contender: Don't get ahead of yourself, there is always a risk of losing.
What's there to be twisted about? There's an unwritten rule: "If you're not sure, don't make it up".
 
Yedelkin:

... Meanwhile, the banter with the topicstarter went on... Meanwhile, the rest of the crowd is waiting for the "Loser in Chief 2013" nomination. :)

No ... Waiting for the new Bookmaker service to open.
:)
(just kidding)

1...24252627282930313233
New comment
Reason: