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 : Bob Brinker: Market Savant & Radio Host -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Math Junkie who wrote (13695)	4/12/2001 11:50:47 PM
From: Kirk ©	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 42834

I noticed, for example, that you recently posted a comparison of Brinker's 1999, 2000, and YTD results with other newsletters and indexes that made his results excluding the QQQ trade look pretty decent. An objective presentation of unbiased numerical data... Thanks. It is my money I invest so I have good reason to be as objective as possible. I make more in a market move any day than I do for a whole year of newsletter writing.. that is fun and helps pay the bills but the big bucks comes from investing correctly. Objectivity is key. Like I have said MANY times, most do worse than Following Brinker on their own and the rest could do a whole lot worse elsewhere with other newsletter market timers... but the whole issue of ranking market timers... is like having a contest to see who's farts smell the best. You are STILL comparing farts...

To: Math Junkie who wrote (13695)	4/13/2001 12:03:23 PM
From: Skeeter Bug	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42834

>>he would consider the big picture, both the pluses and minuses. He certainly wouldn't make the decision based on a single play, or even a single day<< rp, people are upset at bob b/c EVERY day he chooses to mislead and miss direct. he hides the TRUTH. this isn't "one play" as you argue. this is a lifestyle. some find this lifestyle choice insulting. players get kicked off teams for poor attitudes - even though they are great players. >>But when there is a pattern of consistently leaving out facts favorable to Brinker in a high percentage of posts, the bias becomes clear, especially when one is making sweeping statements that he shouldn't even be on the radio.<< so, you don't like a misrepresentation of facts? hmmmmmmm. i can't see how you can justify bob over geode. bob's misleading is heard by millions. geode is heard by hundreds. if you have a choice between saving a penny or saving $100, do you always go after the penny first with such vengeance? >>that made his results excluding the QQQ trade look pretty decent<< did those other funds get aa chance to take out their worst trade? doh! that would actually be unbiased - not something you'd be happy with b/c brinker would look relatively worse. you seem to define good as things that make bob look better (bias used to make bob look better is good, eg, subtract out bob's worst pick and compare it to other performance w/o also subtracting out the worst pick is good) and bad as those things that make bob look bad.