Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Players Club Summaries -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Arik T.G. who wrote (413)	6/15/2000 7:50:00 AM
From: Chip McVickar	Respond to of 1002

Arik, This contest has changed somewhat...from a trying to win a sea side condo, to who can punch through the greatest number of big trades, to who can stay above $250,000, to who can get and keep $600,000, to how many can get and keep $1,000,000. This suggests the present players are creating systems that will make consistent winners and consistent keepers of their winnings. So changing the rules at this point might confuse the players, but your point on Maybe the money management requirements should be tightened? is a valid idea. Chip

To: Arik T.G. who wrote (413)	6/16/2000 2:33:00 AM
From: Compadre	Respond to of 1002

Arik, I would agree with you except for the method you are suggesting would make the game not as realistic. Perhaps having mandatory stops would be more closed to reality. Regards, Jaime "Maybe the money management requirements should be tightened? Here's a suggestion: Any player losing half from their top equity will get the boot. This will insert a penalizing mechanism to the reboot, as a player could get rebooted from 400k equity to the starting line 250k. In the current reboot system, the reboot only rewards the player."

To: Arik T.G. who wrote (413)	6/16/2000 7:00:00 AM
From: F Robert Simms	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1002

<Maybe the money management requirements should be tightened? Here's a suggestion: Any player losing half from their top equity will get the boot. This will insert a penalizing mechanism to the reboot, as a player could get rebooted from 400k equity to the starting line 250k> This recommendation seems to apply to me. I have been using larger trading sizes then would seem prudent for my account size. I have been doing that on purpose. I do that because I am trying to simulate having a less than $10k account and trading one EMINI. You can't trade less than one and it forces you to have a improper trade size. I need this information as I am very near opening up a real account and want to simulate my real risk.

To: Arik T.G. who wrote (413)	6/16/2000 8:53:00 AM
From: Gersh Avery	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1002

When the contest first started up, the reboot concept was put in place with the thought that someone trading for someplace (not themselves) would be shut down for a time if they hit a 30% loss in one day. Perhaps we might set in place something like if a player hit such a loss they would have trading shut down for two days but leave their account unchanged (except for closing open contracts). This would let the player set back and rest up for the reopen yet at the same time assist in keeping up the groups efforts. The five day reboot would still apply for the $150k line with reboot. I'll put in a extra collumn in the sheet to show gain/loss for the day. Would this work for everyone?