The Motley Fool Discussion Boards
CAPS / CAPS Feedback
|Subject: Re: CAPS is not meant to be a mirror of performa||Date: 2/14/2007 1:44 PM|
|Author: TMFEldrehad||Number: 4902 of 9208|
In September we were all marvelling at the leaders' 70% accuracies. Now they have over 75%. They'll soon have over 80%.
We've been around this mulberry bush a few times before, and again I agree that you make excellent points here, and your analogy regarding the Martingale is a good one.
I would add that in a pure Monte Carlo sense, banking accuracy won't help one on the score front at all, and a score of around zero, no matter how good one's accuracy is, won't propel one to success in CAPS. There is, however, no question in my mind that for the good stock picker, banking accuracy can definately help and I know that the CAPS team is looking at ways of changing/improving this measure.
Is that what CAPS should be about? Is that what TMF should be about?
Just one Fool's opinion here, but in my view TMF should be about discussing issues openly and transparently, giving all sides a fair hearing, and be not just willing, but eager to change should a better method present itself. On this front, I think the discussion on this board, from all participants, TMFers and non-TMFers alike, is a perfect example of what TMF is, indeed, all about. Not everyone will agree with the methodology chosen, no matter what methodology that winds up being, but I have every confidence that the process by which we all get there together will be a very Foolish one indeed.
|Copyright 1996-2017 trademark and the "Fool" logo is a trademark of The Motley Fool, Inc. Contact Us|