Value Microcaps Pick Six Lotto 05 (PSL5)

[Kahn]

lentinman re: RACK; I posted it in reference to SMCI because it was one of the "server group" that i was eluding to that also gapped up, sorry for the mix up.
Note: i am only replying publicly since I can't do a private reply to your message.

[littlefish]

Sorry there len not getting pix in on time. I will be in for the next round. I've been tied down with school and was sacrificing grades at the expense of looking over companies this year (my 4.0 is now 3.8 something, no biggie for me but my wife likes the 4.0s). To boot, I put some of my wife's CD money (after it matured) into AYSI shortly before the May 15th mess. Ugh. Won't do that again. She put me under tight timeframes to be on computer last week but has freed me up just a little now that midterms passed and AYSI mess is behind. I got my midterms and quarterly paper done for my RN classes last week. Just finals to go and clinicals this week. Things should relax next week and I can get back to more normal. I'll probably sit this one (PSL6) out and start watching it closely to see how things operate with it. Good luck and I'll hope to help contribute with the regular VMC board. Lots o' investment talent/brain power around there and the PSL6 (far exceeding my own but I'm learning:)...).

[lentinman]

LF:

I sent you several PM's that should be in your mailbox to participate in PSL6. I was very surprised that you didn't give it a shot.

The contest is closed as of yesterday's market close. If you want to submit 6 picks, we will enter them in the IBOX with the others as a "Late Entry". We have done that before. But, your results will not be part of the daily, weekly or end of contest statistics.

We look forward to having you participate in PSL7.

Len

[littlefish]

I think you've done a masterful job considering all the snaffoos and tricks that could possibly crop up under such a contest. Hey, it is for fun anyways:) If I could pick and start in late, what rules apply len? If I submit 6 entries before close, would I get closing prices to start the contest for that day? TIA!

[lentinman]

LF: NSOM:

The 15% rule is not relevant except for TRADES. It has nothing to do with intial picks. If someone picked CKGT Friday afternoon, then they were smart and shouldn't be penalized.

Also, the whole ASK thing is unworkable IMO.

What MIGHT be a possibility - and it is something I'm willing to bat around during PSL6 - would be to consider a two week moritorium for trades or freezes - the same as is presently true for double downs. That would seriously help prevent capitalizing on a quick bump and then freezing one's pick(s).

Other than that, I think the 300K number is a reasonable number. I have looked at several hundred stocks now based on their dollar volume over the past 3 months. A stock that has 300K+ is definitely in a different category (even though it is still small) than stocks that are well below it.

Len

[nsomniyak]

read through the iBox on the PSL6 board...

Those rules have evolved over the course of the several contests, in part because of comments like the ones you made.

I always temper my ideas with a question regarding ease of operation. Len and SSK do a huge amount of work to run these things, and we need to be careful not to suggest things that add marginal value but at the cost of significant additional effort on their part.

[littlefish]

Good point nsomniyak, I was thinking that after I posted (impossible to get closing ask prices). Didn't realize the 15% spread rule. Thanx. I'll have to read up/familiarize myself on the contest:)... It's tough to have a fool-proof system and len (and SSK?) has/have done a masterful job getting it to where it is... I like your idea with the initial picks, interesting thought. I'll get my pix in late if that's OK. I have a busy week of school ahead and my wife is just starting to relax over the AYSI flap LOL. Maybe I can enter late? I'll look to see what rules are if late entries are allowed. Good luck...

[nsomniyak]

During the contest the 15% addresses trades on stocks with wacky spreads, and the new dollar volume rule for eligible stocks further limits how often this might occur, especially in initial picks.

Mechanically, I think it would be almost impossible for Len to capture accurate ask prices AT THE CLOSE for the several hundred stocks in the contest. Over the weekend the bids and asks shown are the "walk away" numbers MMs set to snag stray market orders that come in--they are not meaningful.

It might make sense to have a rule that says something to the effect of "initial picks will be valued at the first trade price, if higher than the Friday close, for stocks that trade less than $5,000 worth of shares on the first day of the contest". That would focus the changes on the stocks with outlandish spreads, as opposed to stocks that happen to make a legitimate big move on day 1, and would be easy to find and isolate over a relatively small population of stocks. This would also align with the intent of the dollar volume rule.

btw--the contest can still be a lot of fun even if you would personally change the rules in some way or another. Play the game!

[littlefish]

KiK, len - PSL6 rule: I personally think it is too lenient still on picking tiny thin-traded companies for someone to manipulate with huge bid ask spreads. Example: CKGT.OB traded at the bid to close Friday at 54 cents (down a whopping 30%+ on only 250 shares!). If it closes Monday at the ask there'd be about a 40-50% gain from what I saw (if ask doesn't change)! Same kind of thing with WSHE.OB, TELT.OB if it trades at bid. I have a better idea. Require the price to be not the closing price, but the ask price since that's what an MM is willing to sell their shares at. If I were playing PL6, I'd DD CKGT at $0.54 to start (seeing it had barely traded and looked to close at the bid of $0.54 I could send my pix to Len just before close and get away with it), and then buy 100 shares near the close Monday at $0.78 for a one day 50% gain on my DD. I'd have WSHE.OB in there too. If you required the ask price and someone picked CKGT they'd be getting it at $0.79 in their port, not $0.54. Huge difference. It is interesting to see some figure this out and manage big % returns in the game but it is also one reason why I'm not in it (plus I'm more dry and boring longer term). I'm not at all trying to slam PSL or KiK. He's playing within the rules so more power to him. I'm just saying that's one fair-sized reason why I'm not in it. People will probably catch on to what KiK is doing and start doing it themselves I would guess. Just use a screen tool to find bid-ask spreads of 40%+, profitable company, and over 20 cents. There you go. If you require the ask price on all transactions then you get rid of that loophole KiK was smart enough to figure out fairly early on. BTW, KiK, I think you are an excellent source of info and I'm not at all tyring to slam you. You're playing within the rules and your info/posts are well informed and often beneficial to all:) Gotta go! Good luck to you in PSL6...

[lentinman]

FINAL RESULTS ARE NOW IN IBOX:

Len

[stanu78]

I think what Len is trying to say is that, those low entry price of those very illiquid stock might not be feasible to get in the real world even with only $1000 buy-in, hence those stocks (and the gains booked) doesn't portray real world return. moreover it will just skew the result of the true PSL performance (mainly overestimating), even though we know PSL isn't true performance (since buy and sell transaction isn't really sent to the market on the bid and ask) but we want/try to get it cloase as real world world as possible (vs fantasy world).

On the other hand, it is also true for the stock that is priced very high due to the large bid and ask spread or due to the fact it is illiquid adn someone just happen to do a "stupid" buy.. but this won't be an issue since we VMCers are bagain hunter and will not pick this type of stock for their PSL (I hope they don't pick these kind of stocks).

JMHO

Stan

[stanu78]

I like fun times.. and VMC PSL is surely fun..

Stan

[lentinman]

The rule has been set for PSL6. The three of us spent dozens of hours going over every conceivable angle on it and we are done with it. We will see how it goes in PSL6. If we think it needs to be modified, we will do so - just like we have in the past.

"Len, you wrote in post #1298 that "It is our intention to mimic, with as much accuracy as possible, the real world trading during any 15 week period for the average VMC'er." In post #1301, SSK wrote "VMC PSL Contests were never attended [sic] to mirror a person's portfolio..." Are you guys on the same page?"

You are confusing two different issues.

His comments (as were those of the post he was responding to) were predicated upon a single person - a person who might have been restricted by only 4 transactions. But, there were only 16 people out of 86 that used up all their transactions. 70 people had more transactions to use if they wanted to - yet they chose not to. That means that 81% of the PSL contestants did NOT use all the transactions available to them! And, PSL6 will allow the 16 who did even MORE flexibility.

My comments are (and have always been) predicated upon 86 people with 6 stocks each. That is 516 picks over a 3.5 month period of time. In 100% of the cases of those 516 picks a VMC'er made an honest attempt to determine what stock would outperform for that period - during which they had ample opportunities to trade, freeze, double down, etc. A sample size of 516 is OVERWHELMINGLY large enough to be an extremely good indicator of the group as a whole. The only way anyone could argue that it wasn't a valid representation would be to make the case that huge numbers of picks were made randomly or with no care. In lieu of proof of that (which of course, cannot be done - and would defy all common sense anyway), then I stand by my 30 years as a statistician, that average return in the PSL contests do a very good job of reflecting the AVERAGE VMC'er for any 3.5 month period of time.

Len

[JustForFun7]

5,000 avergae trading rule

When DANLC / KIK came flying out of the gate in PSL5, I think I made some snide remark about buying your own shell company and entering it in the contest. However, KIK's last couple of posts ring true to me.

As a compromise, could we consider having the wild card entry not have to comply with the 5,000 average trading rule (like it is exempt from the no pinkees rule and the must have earnings rule?). At least then you could have an avenue for people to get these low volume unkown stocks in the the game and getting some exposure.

JFF7

[Knowledge is King]

cont.

This was supposed to be the third-to-last paragraph in my post...


Being a statistician, Len, I was surprised that you didn't consider that these underfollowed, rarely-traded, obscure stocks that I specialize in are underpriced precisely because they don't trade enough. Until the value investor flashlight shines in their direction, of course they'll remain in the dark and rarely traded. So what...those that buy the lowest will be rewarded the most. That doesn't seem like something that should be legislated out of PSLs.

[Knowledge is King]

With regard to the #3 "rule modification"...

I guess I can sort of understand the urge to KIK-proof future PSL contests, however I can't understand why rational thought wouldn't quickly suppress that urge in the interest of getting new ideas out to the VMC gang.

Let's looks at some past PSL stats:

Len, you say you're in search of realistic results and that DanLC and my PSL5 numbers are not. In PSL 2, no fewer than 3 contestants had returns over 100% --- it seems the over/under for realism is 150%?!

Further, I've eye-balled the top performing stocks for the first 4 PSLs and found what I believe are at least eight examples of stocks that returned over 120% each, but would have failed the new $5000 or bust rule. Consequently those symbols would not been allowed in initial portfolios and PSL contestants would not have been able to DD them on their own and made some serious $$$$. How is the contest improved when less ideas will be allowed to be put forth?

Len, you wrote in post #1298 that "It is our intention to mimic, with as much accuracy as possible, the real world trading during any 15 week period for the average VMC'er." In post #1301, SSK wrote "VMC PSL Contests were never attended [sic] to mirror a person's portfolio..." Are you guys on the same page?

Also in #1301, SSK succinctly captures what I thought the PSLs were all about, namely to "(1) Give us (VMC) a fun time. (2) Give us a place to look for investing ideas..." PSL will definitely be less fun for me than prior PSLs, and there will indisputebly be less investing ideas in the initial portfolios.

[SSKILLZ1]

Wade here goes

I would like to point out that although the contest is fun, it likely won't mimick very closely ones real net porfolio results if you trade a lot.

That is understood. It is just a contest. And yes it would resemble less of a person who trades a lot such as me for example. Then again how many people put their entire portfolio in 6 stocks, not too many, and probably that answer was generous, as most of us like more diversification then 6 stocks. As much as I love trades, it would be potentially impossible for me to do all the work of unlimited trades would cause. I have thought about it before, but it would simply just eat up too much of my time.

But then again we have made improvements in this contest.

We first started with no trades. And eventually worked our way up to 4 trades. Now we have 4 trades and unlimited freezes, which means you will never have an excuse to be stuck in a stock that you don't like anymore. So although it doesn't resemble the real world we have tried to improve the contest to bring it as close as possible within reason of course. We have also added that you can freeze a stock, essentially sell a stock and not costing a trade, and now you can wait until you find something you like. We have worked on increasing the options for each contestant, I'm not saying it is perfect, and I'm sure we will make some small improvements along the way in future VMC PSL Contests, but it certainly is a lot closer to reality then it was when we started the original VMC PSL Contest.

We have also answered the volume issue to a certain extent in VMC PSL 6, no one will be able to have stock that have less the $5,000 dollar/Volume, some may argue that is too low, and it should be more then that, other will argue, you shouldn't haven't dollar/volume restrictions, but we believe this will not limit many picks, and get the real problem stocks out of the equation for the most part.

Conclusion: VMC PSL Contests were never attended to mirror a person's portfolio, if they were the VMC PSL Lotto would first of all hold more then 6 stocks in the portfolio. What they were intended for (1) Give us (VMC) a fun time. (2) Give us a place to look for investing ideas (Found VII in the $3.50's off the last contest). I really think that was all they intended to be, plus another statistical reference to see how we are doing as a whole (Group). I hope this helps. All is just my opinion, and I could always be wrong though.

[wadegarret]

PSL contests commentary-


I would like to point out that although the contest is fun, it likely won't mimick very closely ones real net porfolio results if you trade a lot. For example, I'm up 41% for the year on my net at present, but my PSL results would make you think I'm breaking even at best for the year. I think the main problem is you can't possibly mimick your net portfolio resluts when you do 100+ trades in 14 weeks(that's been about my average),with a pick six contest. For example, I bought NGA last week at $9.40, and the stock is now $12.60. I also bought INRB last week at $6.50, and the stock is $9.50. I also bought CNRD less than 2 weeks ago at $7, and the stock is $11.35. These kinds of quick scores would almost never be recognized in a PSL contest because of the quickness, and volumes of such trades. Also, liquidity issues weigh heavy for me. For example I bought over twice as much NGA as INRB. So in reality, assuming equal % gains, NGA would be weighted much heavier in reflecting gains on my net porfolio than INRB. I in fact will rarely touch stocks with super low liquidity no matter how good they look. Anyway, just thought I'd throw in my two cents. Wade

[lentinman]

PSL6 IBOX is up to date:

http://www.investorshub.com/boards/board.asp?board_id=9121

Len

[lentinman]

PSL6 RULE MODIFICATIONS:

There will be three modifications to the existing rules for PSL6. I would like to think we have them down pat now, but if the NBA and NFL can still be making changes after 60 years, I suppose we don't have to feel too bad if it isn't perfect yet.

1) Two units can be short. As in the past, a short position must be one of the indexes in the Ibox.

-- The reason for this is because many of us consider the markets to be (up to) very overbought. By having two short positions - both of which are double beta, you could conceivably have 3 longs, 1 cash and 2 (equivalent to 4 units) shorts. Or, for all intents and purposes, 4 short units versus 3 long units. This means you could (for the first time in a PSL contest) be short the market.

2) Maximum of four transactions. A transaction is a trade or unfreeze. We are no longer considering a freeze as a transaction. There is no limit on freezes.

-- The reason for this is because we have come to the conclusion that offensive maneuvers should be treated differently than defensive maneuvers. Trades or unfreezes are offensive because you are gaining a new stock. Freezes are defensive because you are merely protecting gains. In theory, you could freeze all six of your stocks, unfreeze 4 of them (4 transactions) and then re-freeze them. Thus, it is possible to have as many as ten freezes. This will give a lot more flexibility to everyone who wants it.

3) Minimum daily dollar volume of $5,000 traded for the previous three months on any original or new stock. I WILL BE HAPPY TO GIVE YOU THE DOLLAR VOLUME PICKS OF ANY STOCK YOU ARE UNSURE ABOUT.

The reason for this will be made clear. This explanation is not in any way designed as a criticism of anyone. However, it is important to make a link in order to make the point.

The two highest percentage returns that we have had yet in any PSL were in PSL5. DanLC and KIK both had returns of about 155%. It is our intention to mimic, with as much accuracy as possible, the real world trading during any 15 week period for the average VMC'er. 155% is not realistic, even if it is possible.

In both cases, the extreme returns can be chalked up to a single stock. In DanLC's case, it was PASW - which he froze at +460% 11 days into the contest. In KIK's case, it was WSHE - which he froze at +327% 7 days into the contest.

There is certainly nothing wrong with that. However, in order to mimic the group, we simply can't allow stocks that don't trade at least $5,000 per day average in the three months prior to the deadline. I WILL BE HAPPY TO GIVE YOU THE DOLLAR VOLUME PICKS OF ANY STOCK YOU ARE UNSURE ABOUT.

Below is a list of the top-25 stocks by return in PSL5 and the average dollar volume for each during the three months from October 12 to January 12 (deadline for PSL5 picks).

PASW had only $1,000 traded per day on average and WSHE had only $175 traded per day on average before PSL5. Two other stocks, IRAE and TELT would also not have qualified.

 1. PASW  480% $ 1,000 
  2. ABAT  354%  39,000 
  3. UTVG  208%  33,750 
  4. VII   197%  31,500 
  5. TSSW  171%   5,000 
  6. GSHO  158%  11,500 
  7. IRAE  150%   4,400 
  8. WSHE  142%     175 
  9. DY.TO 116%  11 Million 
 10. OFI   109% 150,000 
 11. FSIN  104%  99,000 
 12. TELT  103%   2,000 
 13. DPDW  100%  80,000 
 14. ARSD   98% 105,000 
 15. TWOC   94%  21,000 
 16. IAGX   92%   6,000 
 17. IBIN   90%  30,000 
 18. AMLJ   87%   5,000 
 19. URRE   87% 1.4 Million 
 20. URZ    86% 750,000 
 21. HOKU   84% 510,000 
 22. JADE   81% 920,000 
 23. RNO    79% 1.1 Million 
 24. HQSB   79%  77,000 
 25. SLP    79% 194,000

The vast majority of stocks would qualify on the volume requirement, but the two that had the most affect on the outcome of the contest were the two lowest dollar volume stocks - thus, a clear and unmistakeable correlation between extremely low volume stocks and potentially unattainable results by the average VMC'er. Because of this, we are instituting a minimum $5,000 average dollar volume per day requirement in the 3 months prior to May 18th. And, even then, $5,000 is an extremely low number, but one that should eliminate much of the concern.

You can find the average number of shares traded per day for a 3 month period by going to the main stock page on Yahoo for any symbol. Here is the page I'm referring to on MKRS (for example) http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=mkrs.ob. I WILL BE HAPPY TO GIVE YOU THE DOLLAR VOLUME PICKS OF ANY STOCK YOU ARE UNSURE ABOUT.

One last thing. Once a stock is approved by SSK or myself, it will not be unapproved if the dollar volume were to drop below $5,000 per day before the May 18th deadline. Once approved, always approved.

Len

[lentinman]

Congratulations ....

.... to DanLC who, thanks to Matt's generosity, is now a full-fledged premium member of IHUB.

Len

[lentinman]

Fructose:

Based on rank, here are the leaders. SSK is the Most Improved.

SSKillz       +78 
 HWeb          +67 
 StevenRisk    +60 
 Arnie70       +54 
 JoeInIowa     +47 
 Snakeman      +46 
 Rrufff        +46 
 Steeledge     +45 
 OldPro        +43 
 MSGI          +41 
 2MorrowsGains +36 
 DanLC         +36 
 Fructose      +32 
 NilesCrane    +29 
 Valuemind     +29 
 RogueDolphin  +28 
 Yieldude      +28 
 TMCal         +27 
 ZenLunatic    +21 
 StockPeeker   +21

Len

[fructose]

sskillz or len, have you done a most improved type stat? From psl4 I mean, whether final position or percentage. Not a big deal, just curious.

[JustForFun7]

Rookie of the Content (ROTC)

"I don't see how rookies (with all the support required) can end in the top-10, but they do."

That's easy, we get all the support we need right here from VMC members.

I think it should be pointed out that just because a person has not entered the contest before doesn't mean they are new to the board. For example, although I have not posted much, I came over from Raging Bull like many others.

This was the first time I considered entering. I did so because I thought it might help me learn to focus on maximizing a return over a limited period of time. In the past I have bought and held on to stocks for much too long because they never realized my perception of their potential. I knew from watching guys like HWEB who are quick to take a profit that this was something I have to get better at.

My goal for the contest was to try and finish in the top 25. Since I did not have much time to research a lot of new stocks, I stuck with the mining sector for most of my picks. I thought in order to finish in the top 25 I could not afford to have any losers. The base metals seemed a natural. I also thought I needed the help of a couple of flyers to maximize the overall return.

I relied on the input of the board to narrow the flyers I would look at. I picked two I thought had potential. As it turned out, one of them turned out to be a loser, so early on in the contest, I traded for a moving flyer.

Since entering the contest, I have been much more willing to trade out of a stock to take on new holdings that show more promise after the original holding has moved up some but not to it's full potential. I like one of the VMC poster's thought process about when to sell. Something like... if you didn't own the stock now, would you buy it? If not, it's time to sell.

The board has so much to offer in terms of experience and knowledge. I am so glad that people are so willing to share.

Anyways, now that I have been so long winded, I'll just wrap it up by saying I'm looking forward to PSL6. I doubt I will finish in the top 5 again but it will be fun to try.

Have fun!

JFF7

[MSGI]

Just the opposite here. If the contest would have ended one day sooner, I would have ended up 4th instead of 9th due to the drop in OPBL which dropped even more today. Fortunately no position in the real port.

[nutsaboutgolf2001]

Nuts - my portfolio is kicking into high gear and the contest is over!

[lentinman]

ROOKIE OF THE CONTEST:

One thing of interest is to look at (and give credit to) the person (whose first contest it was) who did the best in each PSL contest. Since, I can't say that in a sentence that sounds intelligible....

In other words, Networm was #1 in PSL2, but was not in PSL1. So, obviously, he was Rookie Of The Contest (ROTC).

Here are the ROTC's for each of the contests after PSL1.

PSL2: Networm        #1 +111.44% 
 PSL3: StyleCounciler #5 + 21.23% 
 PSL4: Bluebear       #4 + 44.23% 
 PSL5: Just4Fun       #4 + 61.20%

What I find quite fascinating is that every contest has had a Rookie in the top 5. That would have seemed highly improbable, but there it is. It's kind of like Nascar. I don't see how rookies (with all the support required) can end in the top-10, but they do.

In any event, anyone considering PSL who has not participated in PSL1-5 need not be intimidated. Simply apply the fundamental values that we adhere to and you should have a good shot a doing quite well.

Len

[lentinman]

PSL6 Board exists.

http://www.investorshub.com/boards/board.asp?board_id=9121

Len

[lentinman]

KIK:

You think THAT'S highly arbitrary, you aint seen nothing yet!

Len

[steeledge]

Congrats Dan/KiK...you guys sure set the bar high.

And thanks to SSK/Len for all the effort.

looking forward to PSL6

steel

[Knowledge is King]

Not painful at all, Dan.

I think your strategy is right on and I do the same exact thing with at least one of my picks....

Imagine if we didn't have that highly arbitrary $.25 minimum limit...?

[Knowledge is King]

Lots of thanks to SSK and Len for another great contest chock full of actionable ideas and statistical minutiae. Give yourselves each another free year of IHub on me...:)

[lentinman]

CHAMPION'S BOARD IBOX IS UPDATED:

http://www.investorshub.com/boards/board.asp?board_id=4067

Len

[DanLC]

It is rather embarrassing, but I wanted one true gamble stock. I did a stock screener on MSN Money for profitable stocks selling between .25 and .50 with positive growth rates.
PSTC, LSGP and PASW were three of the resulting stocks. PASW seemed the best bet because it was not a pinkie and it was beginning to show improved activity. In other words it was an incredibly lucky shot in the twilight (not quite dark.) As I told Len last week, it almost seems unfair to permit doubling down, because one fluke such as this can result in an almost insurmountable advantage. I hope my admitting this is not too painful for you, because your picks were all incredible. Dan

[Knowledge is King]

Congratulations, Dan! Great job...


Perhaps in your "Winners' Manifesto" you'll reveal what you saw in PASW way back at the beginning...


Looking forward to your PSL6 picks as you have put together an impressive track record.

[lentinman]

MSGI:

--- Only stocks that meet the earnings rule and the .25 rule can be double downed into.

Len

[MSGI]

One way to allow more than 1/6 short position would be to allow a double down on wild cards as the short etf's are treated as a wild card.

[shmolton]

Len: Shorting

Yes, I'm aware of that, but I was wondering if there may perhaps be a way to take more than a 1/6th short position in the new contest.

[lentinman]

Shmolt: Shorting:

Although there is a possibility of a change for PSL6 in this respect, even if not, this post is a good way to utilize a short position to maximize a person's concern about the market.

http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=13152850

Len

[shmolton]

len/skillz PSL 6...

...with the market at record highs, do you think it might be possible to allow more than one short position in PSL 6, or perhaps let all the Ultra Short Funds i.e. QID, DXD etc. be counted as regular picks and not wildcards. Just a suggestion, as in real life, I will be moving out of long positions over the next month and taking some shorts and more defensive plays.

[bbotcs]

Congratulations to DANLC and KIK! A million thanks to Lentinman and SSKILLZ1 for running another first-class contest.

Everyone who participated and followed the stocks in the contest is a winner.

I have to admit that I got bored during the middle, but the market during the past 2 weeks made PSL5 the most-exciting one yet.

I am looking forward to winning PSL6!

Be there or be square.

bbotcs

[snakeman84]

WHOSE SNAKEMAN8437% IS 37% my average return. hahaha




snakeman

[SSKILLZ1]

Move Up/Down Using Consistency Standings (In % Terms)

Now this shows who was Positively/Negatively affected in % Terms by using consistency standing. Obviously the majority of people were negatively affected by % terms. Simply because A top Gainer most of the Times will gain much more then your top loser will lose. So most people will be adversely affected in this statistic. In fact only 27/87 people were positively affected. Anyways Congrats to PATTYDADY0 he was the most positively affected in % Terms by consistency standings. Hope This Helps.

Stock Pickers Alias---Movement In %
1 PATTYDADY0 13.24%
2 2MORROWSGAINS 9.82%
3 MANDJB 7.02%
4 JIM_WI 5.89%
5 TR8DERVIC 5.80%
6 JSIM 5.18%
7 OTCBARGAINS 4.12%
8 MIKE056 3.98%
9 CURLEWS 3.73%
10 MASTERPICKER1 3.51%
11 HOGFAN2 3.44%
12 RRAINMAN9999 3.21%
13 EREHWONTIM 3.13%
14 CLEVERROX 2.92%
15 YIELDDUDE 2.91%
16 ESTIMATED PROPHET 2.50%
17 YINSER 2.38%
18 KRISRYDEN 1.84%
19 CWS9 1.53%
20 NUTSABOUTGOLF2001 1.43%
21 FOOTWEDGE 1.33%
22 LARRYBAZ 0.93%
23 SWANLINBAR 0.71%
24 WADEGARRET 0.68%
25 LINUSPOP 0.55%
26 SWB173 0.47%
27 DIGITECH 0.31%
28 MIKES97707 -0.03%
29 CLIFFVB -0.10%
30 MR. SHEEP -0.14%
31 LENTINMAN -0.22%
32 NILES CRANE3 -0.33%
33 SHMOLTON -0.36%
34 ABH3VT -0.41%
35 CRKRANZ -0.42%
36 STOCKPEEKER -0.43%
37 THEALICEMAY -0.49%
38 MRDMRD -0.60%
39 10BAGGER -0.85%
40 SWAMPBOOTS -1.32%
41 BERLIET -1.34%
42 ECOBLOT -1.52%
43 BOBWINS -1.59%
44 NSOMNIYAK -1.71%
45 WILL LYONS -1.75%
46 ECHOS -1.78%
47 FRUCTOSE -2.15%
48 ROGUEDOLPHIN -2.25%
49 BEIGLEDOG -2.39%
50 ZEN LUNATIC420 -2.45%
51 GUY -2.54%
52 BLEUTIGREDANICING -2.59%
53 RUN168 -2.66%
54 BLUEBEAR -2.82%
55 JOEINIOWA -3.05%
56 RRUFFF -3.09%
57 BBOTCS -3.19%
58 RMIWA -3.19%
59 RSADEY -3.52%
60 TBONE58X -3.55%
61 SOUTHACRESDAVE -4.27%
62 CL001 -4.62%
63 STANU78 -5.28%
64 BUCFAN33617 -6.18%
65 RESEARCHER59 -7.06%
66 AVANDALAY05 -7.45%
67 NETWORM -7.50%
68 ARNIE70 -9.10%
69 DEATHTOTAXES -9.12%
70 MSGI -10.53%
71 HWEB2 -12.15%
72 FINANCIAL ADVISOR -15.51%
73 KIPP440 -16.74%
74 VALUEMIND -17.45%
75 WYOBUFORD -18.36%
76 OLDPRO -19.79%
77 NELSON1234 -20.74%
78 SSKILLZ1 -21.41%
79 JUSTFORFUN7 -21.70%
80 GILEAD23 -23.37%
81 SNAKEMAN84 -24.70%
82 MICHAEL T -24.99%
83 TMCAL6 -25.28%
84 STEVENRISK -26.66%
85 STEELEDGE -45.01%
86 KNOWLEDGEISKING -81.14%
87 DANLC -125.09%

[SSKILLZ1]

Move Up/Down Using Consistency Standings (In Position Terms)

Obviously you Knew I just couldn't of left it there. My next question is in terms of Position who benefitted the most by using consistency standings compared to the regular way we look at things. Also who was hurt the most. Did you Move Up/Down (in position terms) from where you placed in the regular standings. Well it's Time to find out. I just want to say congrats to the person who benefitted the most from this statistic (Moving up the most places) PATTYDADY0 move up 30 spots looking at it from this perspective. Anyways without further ado here is the info.

Note: - means you were negatively affected by consistency standings. Hope This Helps.

Stock Pickers Alias---Movement In Placement
1 PATTYDADY0 30
2 MIKE056 18
3 CURLEWS 17
4 2MORROWSGAINS 15
5 EREHWONTIM 14
6 YIELDDUDE 13
7 JSIM 12
8 JIM_WI 12
9 CLEVERROX 11
10 SWB173 11
11 YINSER 11
12 MANDJB 11
13 OTCBARGAINS 10
14 TR8DERVIC 10
15 NUTSABOUTGOLF2001 9
16 CRKRANZ 9
17 DIGITECH 9
18 NILES CRANE3 8
19 KRISRYDEN 8
20 CLIFFVB 7
21 ZEN LUNATIC420 7
22 ABH3VT 7
23 LINUSPOP 7
24 MSGI 6
25 NSOMNIYAK 6
26 GUY 6
27 BOBWINS 6
28 MASTERPICKER1 6
29 ECHOS 5
30 LENTINMAN 5
31 SWANLINBAR 5
32 FOOTWEDGE 5
33 RRAINMAN9999 5
34 SOUTHACRESDAVE 4
35 WILL LYONS 4
36 RMIWA 4
37 10BAGGER 4
38 HWEB2 3
39 ROGUEDOLPHIN 3
40 JOEINIOWA 3
41 TBONE58X 3
42 ARNIE70 2
43 MR. SHEEP 2
44 WADEGARRET 2
45 HOGFAN2 2
46 KNOWLEDGEISKING 1
47 KIPP440 1
48 RRUFFF 1
49 STANU78 1
50 FRUCTOSE 1
51 STOCKPEEKER 1
52 MIKES97707 1
53 SHMOLTON 1
54 CL001 0
55 BEIGLEDOG 0
56 THEALICEMAY 0
57 LARRYBAZ 0
58 ESTIMATED PROPHET 0
59 CWS9 0
60 VALUEMIND -1
61 SWAMPBOOTS -2
62 MRDMRD -3
63 ECOBLOT -3
64 BLUEBEAR -4
65 JUSTFORFUN7 -5
66 SSKILLZ1 -5
67 NELSON1234 -5
68 RSADEY -5
69 BBOTCS -5
70 BERLIET -5
71 RUN168 -6
72 BLEUTIGREDANICING -7
73 WYOBUFORD -8
74 DEATHTOTAXES -8
75 BUCFAN33617 -10
76 NETWORM -11
77 RESEARCHER59 -13
78 FINANCIAL ADVISOR -14
79 AVANDALAY05 -14
80 DANLC -18
81 TMCAL6 -19
82 GILEAD23 -27
83 STEVENRISK -29
84 SNAKEMAN84 -30
85 OLDPRO -30
86 STEELEDGE -34
87 MICHAEL T -44

[SSKILLZ1]

Mr. Consistency Standings

The Methodology: I provided a Mr. Consistency stat in VMC PSL 1, but couldn't do it in contest 2 + 3 due to trades. Anyway I found a new way to handle the situation in VMC PSL 4, 5 and beyond. Yes it it a different calculation then the one used in VMC PSL 1, but I still believe it shows a consistent stock picker, hence I'm going to call it Mr. Consistency standings.

Now first it is important to recognize that we start out with 6 position and end with 6 position. We may not have 6 different stocks in the portfolio, or the same 6 stocks we started with, but we still have 6 different positions.

From A calculation standpoint, we Take out the top performing and Worst Performing position of each person's PSL. We then Average the other 4 and we get an answer. I'm not going to bore anyone with the math behind it as it is very boring. But I believe this should give you a good idea of what I've done.

As you can see from a consistency standpoint. KIK was up 73.47% using the consistency standings. So congrats to KIK he is Mr. Consistency. There are 72/87 portfolios in positive territory using this stat instead of 75/86 the way we look at it to get a VMC PSL Champion. Well anyways I hope everyone enjoys this, I put a lot a work into this one, but I feel it is worth it.

Stock Pickers Alias---% Gain/Loss
1 KNOWLEDGEISKING 73.47%
2 KIPP440 60.11%
3 MSGI 47.26%
4 CLIFFVB 46.87%
5 HWEB2 46.59%
6 ZEN LUNATIC420 43.50%
7 VALUEMIND 42.82%
8 SOUTHACRESDAVE 42.30%
9 JUSTFORFUN7 39.50%
10 SSKILLZ1 39.50%
11 NSOMNIYAK 38.32%
12 ARNIE70 36.77%
13 2MORROWSGAINS 35.25%
14 NILES CRANE3 33.47%
15 NELSON1234 33.08%
16 CLEVERROX 32.18%
17 ABH3VT 31.38%
18 ECHOS 31.27%
19 DANLC 31.14%
20 RRUFFF 30.98%
21 LENTINMAN 30.07%
22 OTCBARGAINS 28.25%
23 WYOBUFORD 25.29%
24 EREHWONTIM 23.51%
25 MIKE056 23.17%
26 ROGUEDOLPHIN 23.16%
27 NUTSABOUTGOLF2001 23.11%
28 CURLEWS 22.56%
29 SWB173 20.64%
30 CL001 20.56%
31 WILL LYONS 20.24%
32 STANU78 18.82%
33 CRKRANZ 18.81%
34 JOEINIOWA 17.69%
35 TMCAL6 17.62%
36 TBONE58X 16.78%
37 DIGITECH 16.59%
38 GUY 16.54%
39 FINANCIAL ADVISOR 16.05%
40 PATTYDADY0 14.48%
41 STEELEDGE 14.38%
42 BOBWINS 13.22%
43 RMIWA 12.40%
44 YIELDDUDE 12.06%
45 SWANLINBAR 12.00%
46 GILEAD23 11.76%
47 STEVENRISK 11.64%
48 LINUSPOP 10.18%
49 DEATHTOTAXES 10.13%
50 SNAKEMAN84 9.67%
51 BEIGLEDOG 8.76%
52 YINSER 8.13%
53 FRUCTOSE 7.93%
54 KRISRYDEN 7.92%
55 10BAGGER 7.69%
56 JSIM 7.18%
57 RSADEY 7.09%
58 BBOTCS 6.95%
59 JIM_WI 6.92%
60 STOCKPEEKER 5.90%
61 OLDPRO 5.23%
62 MR. SHEEP 5.00%
63 AVANDALAY05 4.68%
64 BLUEBEAR 4.30%
65 MIKES97707 4.28%
66 SHMOLTON 3.28%
67 SWAMPBOOTS 3.26%
68 BUCFAN33617 2.54%
69 RESEARCHER59 2.31%
70 FOOTWEDGE 1.48%
71 MANDJB 1.43%
72 MASTERPICKER1 0.93%
73 TR8DERVIC -0.08%
74 WADEGARRET -0.55%
75 RRAINMAN9999 -0.60%
76 BLEUTIGREDANICING -0.75%
77 BERLIET -0.98%
78 MICHAEL T -2.06%
79 RUN168 -2.33%
80 MRDMRD -3.05%
81 THEALICEMAY -4.42%
82 ECOBLOT -4.59%
83 HOGFAN2 -6.02%
84 LARRYBAZ -6.74%
85 NETWORM -7.20%
86 ESTIMATED PROPHET -10.83%
87 CWS9 -26.46%

[lentinman]

ALL 6 POSITIVE: PSL1-PSL5:

10 Bagger and Kipp440 have been pretty amazing in this respect.

Number of PSL's (1-5) that the person has had positive (or not negative) results for all 6 units.

10Bagger   1, 4, 5 
 Kipp440    2, 4, 5 
 Cliffvb    4, 5, 
 Skeptical  1, 
 Lentinman  2, 
 Linuspop   2, 
 Pattydady  2, 
 Pnnymn     2, 
 Researcher 2, 
 RRainman   2, 
 Cl001      3, 
 Mike056    3, 
 Bluebear   4, 
 Arnie70    5, 
 Crkranz    5, 
 JustForFun 5, 
 Nelson1234 5, 
 Rogue      5, 
 Rsadey     5, 
 Southacres 5, 
 SWB173     5, 
 WillLyons  5,

[lentinman]

FINAL PSL5 VS WILSHIRE 5000:

PSL DIFF% is the difference between each PSL's average portfolio return and the W5K.

                          PLS5    PSL4    PSL3    PSL2    PSL1 
 Week  #   PSL5%   W5K%    DIFF%   DIFF%   DIFF%   DIFF%   DIFF% 
 Week  1  + 1.89 - 0.04   + 1.93  + 0.16  + 1.84  + 5.35  - 0.92 
 Week  2  + 5.76 - 0.56   + 6.32  + 0.18  + 3.63  + 7.84  + 3.65 
 Week  3  + 8.06 + 1.60   + 6.46  - 0.24  + 1.98  +15.12  + 3.06 
 Week  4  +11.97 + 1.00   +10.97  + 1.92  - 0.81  +11.34  + 5.68 
 Week  5  +14.37 + 2.23   +12.14  + 3.44  + 1.90  +12.77  +13.48 
 Week  6  +17.53 + 2.21   +15.32  + 4.72  + 1.90  +15.88  +21.25 
 Week  7  +10.44 - 2.44   +12.88  + 4.87  + 2.42  +15.27  +20.53 
 Week  8  +11.29 - 1.38   +12.67  + 5.72  + 2.06  +12.45  +16.31 
 Week  9  +11.30 - 2.48   +13.78  + 1.61  - 0.37  +12.41  +21.27 
 Week 10  +14.19 + 0.98   +13.21  + 4.36  - 0.75  +14.37  +32.43 
 Week 11  +13.90 - 0.12   +14.02  + 5.60  + 0.49  +17.73  +36.89 
 Week 12  +14.92 + 1.58   +13.34  + 5.11  - 2.46  +19.70  +35.43 
 Week 13  +17.44 + 2.25   +15.19  + 5.88  - 5.83  +21.16  +40.91 
 Week 14  +20.29 + 4.15   +16.14  ------  - 4.99  +23.82  +36.49 
 Week 15  +22.70 + 4.73   +17.97  ------  - 6.59  +24.35  +35.78* 
 --------------------------------------------------------------- 
 *Final DIFF% for PSL1 was +23.40% (27 weeks)

The W5K began on January 12th at 14,412.

Len

[lentinman]

Mr. Sheep:

I'll do more shearing later, but for now I just wanted to make a note that Mr. Sheep isn't baaaaaing as well as he used to. His rank has consistently dropped.

PSL1 # 6 
 PSL2 # 8 
 PSL3 #22 
 PSL4 #47 
 PSL5 #64 
 PSL6 ???

Len

[lentinman]

AVERAGE RETURN vs AVERAGE RANK:

I posted this at the end of PSL4 also.

Average return is a better measurement than average rank in most cases. For example, let's say Person A had +200% in the first PSL contest and the next closest was Person B at +50%. Now, let's say the next two contests were shown below:

            Person A       Person B 
            Return Rank    Return Rank 
 Contest 1   200%    1       50%    2 
 Contest 2    45%    3       50%    2 
 Contest 3    45%    3       50%    2

If you use total return, Person A had an average return of 96.7%, while Person B had an average return of 50%. However, if you use rankings, Person A had an average rank of 2.33 compared to Person B's average rank of 2.00.

Clearly, IMO, average return is superior to average rank based on this example.

However, there is also a weakness in average return. Say, for example, that the Person C played only in Contest 1 and Contest 2, while Person D played in all three. Let's also say that the average return by all contestants in Contest 1 was 50%, the average return by all contestants in Contest 2 was 50%, but the average return by all contestants in Contest 3 was only 10% because the market had a major correction.

So, consider this possibility:

            Person C       Person D 
            Return Rank    Return Rank 
 Contest 1    70%    8       75%    6 
 Contest 2    70%    8       75%    6 
 Contest 3     -     -       30%    6

Using this example, Person C would have the higher return average (70% versus 60%), but a lower rank average of 8 versus 6.

Who is better? Well, IMO, clearly Person D is better. It wasn't because C was better that they missed Contest 3 and therefore, Person D should not be penalized.

So, there you have two perfect examples of why one is better than the other. Because of that, you can choose either one as your favorite method. I listed the top-40 in both.

Len

[nsomniyak]

wtg Dan!