• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Merged Bitcoin - Part 3

Samson said:
The trades are not linked
Think of them as 2 different stocks or currencies.
There are 4 possibilities

win win
win loss
loss win
loss loss.

Let nature take its course, I am supposed to be beating a coin toss remember.

Disclosure: I don't trade it myself.
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter if you don't want the trades to be linked, since they trading on the same item, they are linked. If you were betting on a sports outcome you couldn't say take the over AND the under. Don't think of them as linked, they are different bets.

Again, if the TA is guidance, and BT will follow it, why would I NOT adjust by buy price or my stoploss to the new guidance?

Why aren't you trading it yourself? You said it was "easy money" Seems like you don't have any faith in your own model.


So again, I will ask -
But if it's going down to 6730, why am I covering my short at 6860?
and if it might bite me in the ass, why shouldn't I update my stop loss to 7530 from 7700?

Since, according to you, BT is going to follow your TA, why should I not adjust my trades to the new guidance?
 
Interestingly bitcoin traded 6852 then rallied 350 dollars.
That did put the 6860 trade in the can, though purists would also point out the standard trading spread is $36, so we would not have been "filled".
 
Samson said:
Interestingly bitcoin traded 6852 then rallied 350 dollars.
That did put the 6860 trade in the can, though purists would also point out the standard trading spread is $36, so we would not have been "filled".
Click to expand...

But it's still going to hit 6730, right? So executing it early is leaving money on the table.
 
Leftus said:
But it's still going to hit 6730, right? So executing it early is leaving money on the table.
Click to expand...

I don't know what it will hit, that trade is zstill live, profit taken on trade 1.
Therefore:
Winning in a non random game.
 
Samson said:
I don't know what it will hit, that trade is zstill live, profit taken on trade 1.
Therefore:
Winning in a non random game.
Click to expand...

What do you mean you don't know what it will hit? Didn't you make a prediction?

Still doesn't explain why I would leave money on the table and not updating my position based on new information.
 
It would be cool to have some kind of a global currency that's inflation-proof, that's not controlled by or subject to whims/policies of individual nations/governments, that's fairly easy to access and use, that isn't wasteful (unlike Bitcoin), that isn't volatile (unlike Bitcoin), and that's impervious to manipulation and profiteering. Of course, such a currency would by definition work only if people agreed to use it, but assuming people's willingness to use such aa currency, is such a thing even possible/feasible? Would any of of the economics experts/nerds here know if such a thing has been studied/discussed/been dreamt up?

eta: I'm not very clear on all of the technical details of cryptocurrency, but I guess this is what cryptos, and specifically bitcoin, started out as, or so people imagined, right? So, has such an ideal/utopian global currency been dreamt up -- and the details addressed, at least some details, at least in theory -- by economists past or cryptonerds present, is what I was wondering.
 
Last edited:
Leftus said:
What do you mean you don't know what it will hit? Didn't you make a prediction?

Still doesn't explain why I would leave money on the table and not updating my position based on new information.
Click to expand...

In terms of the second trade, sell at 7130 profit 400 dollars and stop 400, this trade actually went 107 dollars out of the money and 277 into the money before the big reversal. This is up to the trader to see if there is a viable strategy and of course any mathematician will affirm there is, its obvious, including trailing stops, break even stops, adding on the back foot and so on. It is the 277 to 107 ratio that is important.

I tried to explain all this on the technical analysis threads but was continually reminded of the refrain, no good deed should go unpunished.
 
Last edited:
Chanakya said:
It would be cool to have some kind of a global currency that's inflation-proof, that's not controlled by or subject to whims/policies of individual nations/governments, that's fairly easy to access and use, that isn't wasteful (unlike Bitcoin), that isn't volatile (unlike Bitcoin), and that's impervious to manipulation and profiteering. Of course, such a currency would by definition work only if people agreed to use it, but assuming people's willingness to use such aa currency, is such a thing even possible/feasible? Would any of of the economics experts/nerds here know if such a thing has been studied/discussed/been dreamt up?

eta: I'm not very clear on all of the technical details of cryptocurrency, but I guess this is what cryptos, and specifically bitcoin, started out as, or so people imagined, right? So, has such an ideal/utopian global currency been dreamt up -- and the details addressed, at least some details, at least in theory -- by economists past or cryptonerds present, is what I was wondering.
Click to expand...
Cryptocurrencies allegedly have utility for people without access to bank accounts, and this seems an important role in pursuit of social equality. But there seems no point in this becoming a pyramid scheme like bitcoin.
 
Samson said:
In terms of the second trade, sell at 7130 profit 400 dollars and stop 400, this trade actually went 107 dollars out of the money and 277 into the money before the big reversal. This is up to the trader to see if there is a viable strategy and of course any mathematician will affirm there is, its obvious, including trailing stops, break even stops, adding on the back foot and so on. It is the 277 to 107 ratio that is important.

I tried to explain all this on the technical analysis threads but was continually reminded of the refrain, no good deed should go unpunished.
Click to expand...

Sorry, this does nothing to explain why you need to have to separate trades to cover what was basically, identical predictions.

If BT is going to go down to 6730, it has to hit any 6800 number because that is how numbers work. So, again I ask, why would I need 2 trades to cover the same general analysis? Why wouldn't I just update my buy point with the new prediction? Is the new prediction less valid? Is it less likely to occur?

Why does each prediction have to be considered as it's own thing when they are made days apart? Especially when they make almost identical predictions, they both were declines after all.
 
Leftus said:
Sorry, this does nothing to explain why you need to have to separate trades to cover what was basically, identical predictions.

If BT is going to go down to 6730, it has to hit any 6800 number because that is how numbers work. So, again I ask, why would I need 2 trades to cover the same general analysis? Why wouldn't I just update my buy point with the new prediction? Is the new prediction less valid? Is it less likely to occur?

Why does each prediction have to be considered as it's own thing when they are made days apart? Especially when they make almost identical predictions, they both were declines after all.
Click to expand...
I really do not see the issue. If we forget bitcoin and think of say buying apple shares.
I might buy 100 shares on monday, with a profit target, and buy another 100 shares next monday with a different profit target.The fact I now have 200 shares for a while is just fine, especially if I sell 100 at a profit one day, and the other at a profit subsequently, which in fact was the case with these two bitcoin shorts, assuming a trailing profit stop on the second.
 
Last edited:
Samson said:
I really do not see the issue. If we forget bitcoin and think of say buying apple shares.
I might buy 100 shares on monday, with a profit target, and buy another 100 shares next monday with a different profit target.The fact I now have 200 shares for a while is just fine, especially if I sell 100 at a profit one day, and the other at a profit subsequently, which in fact was the case with these two bitcoin shorts, assuming a trailing profit stop on the second.
Click to expand...

Here is the point. You say that Apple is going to hit 100. The NEXT DAY, you figure it's going to actually hit 120. Why would you throw away that 20 dollar change?

Prediction 2, where it's going to hit 120, will require it to hit 100. Prediction 2 updates, or clarifies prediction 1. There is no way for 2 to be right that doesn't include #1 being correct as well. So why, again, would I piss away that 20 buck change because the SAME ALGORITH predicted both DAYS APART?
 
Belz... said:
I don't know why so many people are saying that. Inflation, in moderation, is actually a good thing. It stimulates the economy.
Click to expand...
Inflation is a tax on savings and acts as a disincentive to paying down debts (let inflation do that for you).

Although a currency needs to expand to accommodate population/GDP growth, it is better to use demurrage rather than inflation to stimulate spending.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom