lol. nope C2 ID. Those days windows just acquired GUI from Apple and signing in was not that perfect. This “new” state is five years old. Thanks.
Don’t let noise derail a constructive discussion. There is a lot of good info and progress in this thread.
Glad to see ZeroT (the subject of this thread) back in trading instead of abandoning it at all like some other victims before AND Zip4x and STS (who were the subjects of the unsolicited emails I received) back up the Grid. Keep on keeping on despite the attacks on you - your obligation is to C2 and your subscribers, not to others!
Exactly. And my subscribers won’t be around for me to serve them if they get blown up by the martingale systems you mention. So I am serving my subscribers. I’m also serving the larger C2 community–when scam martingale systems blow up novice users those users drop off C2 and tell other people to stay away. It’s in everyone’s best interests if the systems on C2 are REAL systems that have reasonable strategies and are actually traded by their creators.
I invite the creators of any of the systems mentioned here to post here openly and defend what they are doing. They hardly need you to defend them–you don’t even have any association with them… do you?
5 Likes
Now everybody knows who was sending those CLANDESTINE emails. Your last sentence shows hoW aggravated you feel NOW.
I will express my happiness if the systems I like perform, I will defend them if they are attacked. Instead of trying to silence me better stop sending UNSOLICITED EMAILS TO OTHER MEMBERS attacking other system.
Lets revisit this thread later with an update about all these risky martingale systems mentioned earlier here !
Yes, I sent you ONE message privately so as to give you the evidence you requested rather than publicly slam certain systems and their creators. It was in reply to your specific request for more evidence. You stated: “The data provided here does not implicate the system provider in any way, unless there are more incriminating evidence.” So I sent you more direct evidence of how certain systems will have blow up your account if you had followed them. Rather than thanking me or otherwise addressing the evidence I sent, you go off about people sending you messages like it was some conspiracy. It’s no conspiracy. The only conspiracy is why you are here trying to stop discussion of an important topic. This discussion has already uncovered at least one bug in C2 that is now being addressed. What are you contributing here?
1 Like
(Matt, just delete my reply if it doesn’t fit in.) Dave, I didn’t ask anybody anything - if at all I replied the only reply I made was to bauvil. Just ignore my postings if it didn’t fit in with your posts. As far as contributions let C2 management be the judge, it is their business website and they can delete whichever they don’t deem fit.
I’m sure you can understand why I thought you were asking for more evidence. Sorry if I misunderstood you.
Let’s not further derail this discussion into irrelevancies. As I said before, there is a lot of good info and progress in this thread. Let’s keep it positive and constructive.
May be you are mistaking Andrey’s request for evidence as if I made it. And rememberMatt chipped in to say Andrey was right.
Renda,
You are personalizing your attacks and your rambling is all over the map.
Perhaps you should narrow down the scope of your arguments and tone down the attacks. That might help everyone to follow your line of thinking. Otherwise you leave us no choice. Everyone else will just ignore you.
Criticizing a strategy, performance measure or risk metrics are all fair game and they are certainly welcome. If your observations are relevant, they might even help others.
Regards
Francisco.
2 Likes
That two strategies, which were down immediately after this discussion are back up in the rankings shows TRUE SYSTEMS ARE NOT GOING TO BE AFFECTED just because we game the analytics to our own liking. As for criticism, you were bringing “abuse” into your own posting.
A system developer has every right to use even Martingale that too on a test bed like C2. If it is a crappy system it will definitely and eventually fail, no need to ask C2 to change Analytics to suit anybody.
If after crying hoarse against Martingale and such systems are still gaining popularity, nothing is going to stop the subscribers even if we raise alarms “Sky is falling down.”
.
That is not exactly true. Since C2 doesn’t cover all aspects of real trading, even crappy system can stay on top for a long time. Recently it was a system that traded zero volume stocks in huge amounts with huge profits. That system was in the Top systems and was only removed after forum discussion.
5 Likes
All I see in this forum thread are multiple C2 users asking for C2 to correct some numbers that were not calculating correctly. Fixing math calculation errors is not asking for any change to the “Analytics”.
Demanding [accountability] that C2’s calculated numbers more closely reflect what would happen in real life trading is a good thing for everyone in the C2 community. The only people who might wish to rail against such changes is someone who only cares how much subscription dollars are taken [read: fleeced] from the “investing public”. A very skillful trader [with any legitimate “street cred”] will make most of his/her money through trading and not by selling subscriptions.
5 Likes
How many systems have survived since 2001 on C2? The only long-standing survivor I can remember is Pedro Pannon’s system. (If anybodyelse out there did, please excuse, C2 archives is too vast a system for quick search) Only that the time it takes fail may not be to our liking…I agree with the second statement as recently a biotech system was doing that. But even there what I found wrong was his not informing C2 about the wrong quotes…
If removing systems at the behest of forum members is practiced, then better C2 CHANGE THE TERMS AS ALREADY THERE ARE OUTSIDE DISCUSSIONS IN SOME FORUMS where somebody asked about posting strategies on C2. The gist of the consensus answer is that C2 ANALYTICS IS THE BEST OUT THERE but avoid the forums.
Also, better to clarify whether C2 is a strategy test bed / signal provider / investment advisory or a mix of these as regulatory laws are different for each. Just my suggestions, but it is Matt’s business, his decisions. Because, removing a paid a strategy provider at the behest of a non-subscriber can have legal consequences.
Hi Tariq:
Here is something for you. Sort the forum topics by most viewed.
The following old thread is the second most viewed on the list of topics. So Martingales artists are a steady stream on C2.
Some of the strategies listed in this thread are now dead. A few have negative equity. That is a risk with futures accounts. When losses exceed the account balance, the broker will come after you for whatever else you may have including house, car and everything including garnishing wages.
I am aware of this …
There are plenty of strategies (that are constantly under “Popular Strategies”) that let trades go over 30 and 40% drawdown. There’s one there right now that i just pulled up that had a trade go over 40% drawdown… more than one time.
Not sure what the point is of this thread. Buyer beware. Strategies with high drawdown % should signal a red flag. It’s not rocket science folks.
If you are subscribing to a strategy only based on “Cumulative Return” then that’s your choice.
Let people trade how they choose to. If you average down, that’s fine. It would be nice for these developers to let potential subscribers know under description. Same as with developers who dont use stops and let trades go down 20, 30, 40%. They should disclose this in their description.
But at the end of the day, you cant tell people how to trade. If you dont like how they trade, then dont subscribe to their strategy.
So it seems you are from Zip4x team. Is that right, Mr. Kurian aka Renda aka whatever else? You should cover your tracks little more carefully.
3 Likes
For the record I’m in favor of allowing people to make whatever strategies they want and that people should be allowed to subscribe to whatever strategies they want. I don’t think anyone wants to limit system creators or subscribers. What we want is correct reporting of system results and easier recognition of dangerous systems that are likely to blow up accounts. What we have right now is not an optimal situation: no easy way to identify martingale systems and a proprietary C2 ranking system that tends to rank certain dangerous systems highly which unfortunately is damaging to the novices which depend on expert rankings the most.
I think something like a “Leverage Warning” indicator similar to the “C2 Heart Attack Index” might be helpful. Something to identify systems that occasionally leverage up massively/dangerously as martingale strategies do. Right now there is no easy way to get that info.
7 Likes
