It’s mathematically sound because you do guarantee a net positive with enough of a bankroll. As I have mentioned in other comments here this is not a strategy that can be used in the real world.
You even admit it would work with absurd amounts of money… The math works.
It’s actually the strategy with the best return of any strategy, including card counting. In any blackjack strategy you need a large bankroll to take advantage of the law of large numbers.
Seriously, this works so well and is the reason for table limits.
Because you will never find a no limit blackjack table you cannot actually apply this strategy in the real world. But it is mathematically sound.
Try not to die for your country or beliefs. Make the other guy die for theirs.
You misunderstood. A person doubles the bet on the next hand after a losing hand. This is different than doubling down on a 9, 10, or 11 during play.
Not on topic but that is actually a valid strategy for blackjack. It is the reason that table limits exist. Otherwise doubling down every loss will eventually net you a positive.
For global politics is still next level stupid.
I’m not offended. I was a bit of an asshole though and I apologize for that but I wasn’t offended. Your point about timing the market was valid.
I know it wasn’t personal but you did ‘attack’ my comment. Not the right word but I hope you get my meaning.
Advising people to try to time the market is terrible advice.
This is why I replied the way I did. I was not giving advice, but we know that already.
As for you advising new investors, good on you. I was not trying to do that. I was trying to answer a hypothetical question with knowledge from personal experience.
I actually considered writing “This is not financial advice” in the original comment but thought my preface was enough.
I agree with you about not timing the market.
I did not give advice. I answered a hypothetical question. I even prefaced my response to show I wasn’t knowledgeable. Did you miss that part? It was right there at the beginning of the text that you have a problem with.
Okay. Now I understand. Thanks for taking the time to clear that up for me.
It’s down another 7% this morning pre market open. 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
To be clear, I didn’t want it to sink and agree that it didn’t have to. That’s beside the point.
I don’t understand how the money would have grown just as fast. I suspect I’m not understanding your point properly.
In this example, the math shows ~$3000 gains from holding if the market never went down. That is less than the potential of ~$10,800 from selling high and rebuying.
I’m not an expert but this is my understanding and it has made me money during this time.
Imagine Bob sells 100 shares of SPY at $600. He now has $60,000. If Bob did nothing else and waited 2 months he would now be able to buy 118 shares of SPY.
Alice held the 100 shares of SPY the entire time.
For Alice her ownership remained the same but her value decreased. Bob, on the other hand, keeps the same value and increased his total ownership.
If SPY increases in value back to $600 then Alice is a wash and Bob has an increase equal to the value of the additional shares purchased while the price was low. So 18 extra shares would net a profit of $10,800.
A 7-10% annual return can be expected during normal market conditions. It has been 4 months since normal markets. So the value of SPY should have trended upwards a bit less than 1% per month. Let’s give it a generous estimate that it would have gone up 5% since Trump 2. In this case Bob would have lost money and Alice would have increased her value $3000.
So Bob made more money in the same amount of time by selling.
Yes there is a gain from 5 years.
Currently we are very near 1 year lows. This is the issue at hand. Not whatever straw man y’all decide to attack next.
Maybe you should go look yourself.
The context is not about retirement. This thread is about the recovery from the current downtrend.
So why did you skip mentioning the other time scales? You only mentioned from one that was contradictory, not the ones that support the topic. I suspect you are commenting in bad faith.
You’re looking at the wrong time frame. Try looking at the past year or year to date. Both are very bad.
Why would you look back 5 years?
I bet adversaries have begun courting those that were fired. I would even bet on some of them are taking the offers. Brain drain.
I don’t believe them. If they had good intentions they would have done this last week when it was most needed.
Maybe, maybe not. Either way Europe should be well prepared in case it is.
Thank you for this. I knew how the strategy plays but not the name.