d1david (30.66)

d1david's CAPS Blog

Easy to do simple suggestion to encourage "stock pickers" aspect of caps

Recs

8

Report

September 04, 2009 – Comments (6) | RELATED TICKERS: CAP , S , BEST

The Caps management has already implemented an idea suggested by its members- to have a stat of just the points from out perferms and one of just the underperforms. Thank you management. Now I have one simple addition to the the stats.

Lets have a catagory that just totals the total points from both green and red thumbs... --- but elimnate ALL etfs.... alll etfs----

Benefit of this suggestion:

1) will be an easy way to see who are good at stock picking

2) will encourage those that just stock pick alone to have a way to compete against each other

----------

Since I am on the suggestion roll.... one more suggestion:

To limit the total number of picks to 50. Why not less? If you have too few picks available- dog pilers will be able to score too easily. What not more? If the max amount of picks is 50, players will be forced to narrow their "top" picks. If picks are narrowed, the number of qualify picks will remain and will help improve the overall caps rating of individual stocks.

Another benefit of this suggestion is that most people don't have the time to make 200 picks and would allow them to be on a more even playing field.

-----

One more note- lets say the caps management wanted to "experiment" with some of the alternative ways to do caps, they could do a beta caps2.fool.com /// if it becomes a success, they can phase out the original caps, or better yet, if both remain a success- they can get that much more in ad revenue dollars from having a wider audience.

Have a great Labor day weekend everyone, and try not think this weekend about anything market related.

-David

6 Comments – Post Your Own

#1) On September 04, 2009 at 9:01 PM, portefeuille (99.75) wrote:

I like the first idea and find it strange that there is no easy way to produce a list that shows that number1cramerfan is #4 in the "caps" game as to "score points".

I strongly oppose the second idea. I think I usually have far more than 50 "good ideas" and I do not magically know when I make a call whether that call will turn out to be a great one. If you are an insider you should have a concentrated portfolio (1 or 2 positions should do). If you are not you might want to stay diversified especially when you invest in areas like "biotech stocks". Please have a look at the "performance" of some of the stocks I made the objects of the "outperform" calls on my list of calls (This 200 "active" calls limit is one of the reasons I started that list. It is also one of the reasons for my "proliferation" into 12 players.). I would have missed making some decent calls had I let this rule impede my "stock picking liberties".

(from here)

Report this comment

#2) On September 04, 2009 at 9:09 PM, portefeuille (99.75) wrote:

I know that there has to be some limit unless the scoring system is altered. It would be nice if this problem could be taken care of by using something like the "risk adjusted" return ("annualised") of a portfolio that corresponds to the calls made by the player in the calculation of the "caps" game rank (not as its sole "ingredient" of course).

Report this comment

#3) On September 04, 2009 at 9:39 PM, TSIF (99.95) wrote:

Limiting picks has some merit as players must close picks more often at a loss, but once you define a number, whether it's 50 or 200, you still have a level playing field. Players having 200 picks with 170 in negative points are limited in the quantity and quality of the picks they can open and hold the losers to try to get back the accuracy. 50 vs 200 wouldn't really be much different. I do agree that cutting losers from players scores would improve the quality of the CAPs rating score. Maybe just force a pick to close if it hits a certain number of negative points, such say for discussion, negative 75. Most upcalls don't pile up negative points too fast. Downcalls certainly can.

The other issue is why do players play....if they are after the top spots then pony up, game it, play it. If they are using caps, (as I suspect 95% plus are doing), for learning, watching some stocks, playing sectors, and seeing how they can do, then they deserve the full range of 200 picks.

As far as showing the score without the ETF's, that might be an interesting way to view a players abilities, but only as a side metric. Those who timed the March 9th bottom will struggle eventually in a more natural mostly sideways market.(some day!). Ultra's will swing in a narrower range and players who can pick stocks that will outperform / underperform the S&P will surface. Ultra players who accumulated points with upcalls will probably have an accuracy advantage for some time. Decay and dividends may erode that.

Ditching the Ultras on the score would certainly help some players look better.....ummm, right David....?

Report this comment

#4) On September 04, 2009 at 10:24 PM, Tastylunch (30.00) wrote:

Hmmm I agree with Porte David. But I see your point re: dogpilers

Tell you what... the new "Top Pick" sub game TMFJake is proposing I think would meet your idea mostly though.

If you checked it out you might want read his last two blogs. I think you may find it interesting.

Report this comment

#5) On September 05, 2009 at 7:28 PM, d1david (30.66) wrote:

port, i don't know where you find the time to have 12 players with each close to 200 picks... wow.. pretty amazing

i only made the 2nd suggestion since at some times, i spend too much time with all the tracking, but the main reason for post was the 1st suggestion...

---

so maybe we can get the 1st suggestion some traction? it wouldn't be hard to do i think

---

will go check out tmfjake's new blog entries, thanks

Report this comment

#6) On September 05, 2009 at 7:39 PM, portefeuille (99.75) wrote: