The Kenyan dog meat carnivore's ongoing tailspin...

depeche,

see post #7 which is copied from his "Obama is a log" thread.

He bet it at -200.

I bet it at -200 months ago.

I bet more at lower prices.

Obviously my avg price is lower than -200 now.

For the amateurs out there, value is determined as the difference between calculated odds and available odds.  So the fact that the line has dropped means it is BETTER value than before, but doesnt negate that there was value initially (and still even at that price).

The covers amateurs are so dopey.  As if they only way to have value is to buy at the absolute lowest price in the history of the market.  Jeesh.

 bet it at -200 months ago.

==================

Because you thought it was only going to go up.

 between calculated odds and available odds

=================

As noted, despite being this "professional gambler" you don't have a good track record at "calculated odds"

The covers amateurs are so dopey.  As if they only way to have value is to buy at the absolute lowest price in the history of the market.  Jeesh.

===========================

No, But if I were as spectacularly wrong as you, I wouldn't be muttering that you recognize "value" which is a silly & obscene statement.

Strawman.  Sorry, never said that.

Obscene?  Thats is an unusual word choice.  Classic hyperbole from a landline user.

Keep pecking junior.  Jealousy wont get you out of your miserable life.  Learning from those that you want to emulate will.  Now go on and tell me how you dont want to be anything like me....  while you dream of your lunchbreak or your next 2 week vacation.

And keep counting my money!  I love it.

Nobody ever said you that you said it.

Duh.

And keep counting my money! 

Yes!!!

Because as we all know, really rich people brag about their wealth on the Internet!

You super duper smart gambler you!

So you're saying that you bought it at this price 11 months before the election because there was a chance it would go down?

Anybody with a pulse, and who understands a shred of speculation theory - knows that there is a key ingredient you are leaving out.  It is the fact that things change over time, and your picture of value is a snapshot of value at a given moment in time.

So when I bought at -200, I never said to myself "this will never go down".  I said to myself "with the current information, a this moment in time, I perceive value."

Ever buy a stock in your life?  Do you really think stock experts always buy at  the high and sell at the low?  They buy based on current information at that moment and perception of value.  If you have a crystal ball, please share it with the rest of us.

Am I really explaining this?  Oh wait, this is covers.  And this is the tedious shit that makes me only post here a couple of times a week these days.

So when I bought at -200, I never said to myself "this will never go down".  I said to myself "with the current information, a this moment in time, I perceive value."

==================

Which tells us all we need to know.

Ever buy a stock in your life?  Do you really think stock experts always buy at  the high and sell at the low?  They buy based on current

============================

Except this isn't an analogy, at all.

Am I really explaining this?

=======================

No, you're digging the hole deeper.

And let's go back to this. In your "value" investment, you know the one you made 11 months early, the current information you summarily ignored was:

1. Obama is the most unpopular 1st term President in modern memory
2. In the last election, Obama's party took a beating of historic proportions.
3. You made the wager in the middle of the primary of the opposition party - a process designed to make the candidates look bad
4. No President has been re-elected when having an unemployment rate as high as the one Obama has steadily presided over.

Quote Originally Posted by 14daroad:

And let's go back to this. In your "value" investment, you know the one you made 11 months early, the current information you summarily ignored was:

1. Obama is the most unpopular 1st term President in modern memory
2. In the last election, Obama's party took a beating of historic proportions.
3. You made the wager in the middle of the primary of the opposition party - a process designed to make the candidates look bad
4. No President has been re-elected when having an unemployment rate as high as the one Obama has steadily presided over.

In addition to all of this, you bet on your preferred candidate in a spectacular moment of confirmation bias.

So in other words, you're a rank amateur.

So you must perceive value on Mitt Romney.  Great!  Thats what makes markets what they are - if everyone agreed then we could never wager.

Jeesh.  Maybe you should give up your obsession with me.  I posted that months ago and you cant help but bring it up.

If you think Romney is a great bet at +140 go bet him - come to covers and tell us why - and stick by it.  But thats not what you do.  You are a sniper.  Are you telling us with the above post that Romney is a great bet?  Are you betting it?  Certainly you have a strong case that Romney should be favored to win.

My analysis of your 4 points above is that they are immaterial.  Kind of like giving me a trend in football - you know - the Giants have won on Monday Nights 7 of their last 9.   

This is a gambling site afterall.  What should the line be?  Do you even gamble?  Tell us all what the line SHOULD be right now.

Please, for your own sake, DONT go on.