After closing below S1 if it closes above S1 next day or any day enter the same position again vice versa for R1
๐๐๐๐ง๐๐ฃ๐ ๐ข๐ฎ ๐ฌ๐๐จ๐๐ค๐ข ๐พ๐๐'๐ ๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐
๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐ ๐๐๐๐
๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐ 50๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐
Simple and effective way 2 make Money
After closing below S1 if it closes above S1 next day or any day enter the same position again vice versa for R1
Incase of R1 15337 take 15300ce
N in case of S1 14221 use 14200pe
Sell both and hold till expiry or exit if nifty closes below S1 or above R1 around closing
If the same bounces above S1 and falls below R1 re-enfer same strikes
More from Optionslearnings
Low VIX doesn't necessarily mean ideal time for option buyers. If premiums aren't falling consistently during the day in low VIX, it usually gives those small delta & IV spikes, just enough to irritate both option buyers & sellers. Same happens when VIX is ultra high.
@SarangSood Sarang bhai according to you what number of vix is ideal for option buyers and what is that for option sellers? And is there any common number which is ideal for both?
— Dhaval bhatt (@Dhavalb55011726) July 14, 2021
You May Also Like
BREAKING: @CommonsCMS @DamianCollins just released previously sealed #Six4Three @Facebook documents:
Some random interesting tidbits:
1) Zuck approves shutting down platform API access for Twitter's when Vine is released #competition
2) Facebook engineered ways to access user's call history w/o alerting users:
Team considered access to call history considered 'high PR risk' but 'growth team will charge ahead'. @Facebook created upgrade path to access data w/o subjecting users to Android permissions dialogue.
3) The above also confirms @kashhill and other's suspicion that call history was used to improve PYMK (People You May Know) suggestions and newsfeed rankings.
4) Docs also shed more light into @dseetharaman's story on @Facebook monitoring users' @Onavo VPN activity to determine what competitors to mimic or acquire in 2013.
https://t.co/PwiRIL3v9x
Some random interesting tidbits:
1) Zuck approves shutting down platform API access for Twitter's when Vine is released #competition
2) Facebook engineered ways to access user's call history w/o alerting users:
Team considered access to call history considered 'high PR risk' but 'growth team will charge ahead'. @Facebook created upgrade path to access data w/o subjecting users to Android permissions dialogue.
3) The above also confirms @kashhill and other's suspicion that call history was used to improve PYMK (People You May Know) suggestions and newsfeed rankings.
4) Docs also shed more light into @dseetharaman's story on @Facebook monitoring users' @Onavo VPN activity to determine what competitors to mimic or acquire in 2013.
https://t.co/PwiRIL3v9x
I just finished Eric Adler's The Battle of the Classics, and wanted to say something about Joel Christiansen's review linked below. I am not sure what motivates the review (I speculate a bit below), but it gives a very misleading impression of the book. 1/x
The meat of the criticism is that the history Adler gives is insufficiently critical. Adler describes a few figures who had a great influence on how the modern US university was formed. It's certainly critical: it focuses on the social Darwinism of these figures. 2/x
Other insinuations and suggestions in the review seem wildly off the mark, distorted, or inappropriate-- for example, that the book is clickbaity (it is scholarly) or conservative (hardly) or connected to the events at the Capitol (give me a break). 3/x
The core question: in what sense is classics inherently racist? Classics is old. On Adler's account, it begins in ancient Rome and is revived in the Renaissance. Slavery (Christiansen's primary concern) is also very old. Let's say classics is an education for slaveowners. 4/x
It's worth remembering that literacy itself is elite throughout most of this history. Literacy is, then, also the education of slaveowners. We can honor oral and musical traditions without denying that literacy is, generally, good. 5/x
As someone\u2019s who\u2019s read the book, this review strikes me as tremendously unfair. It mostly faults Adler for not writing the book the reviewer wishes he had! https://t.co/pqpt5Ziivj
— Teresa M. Bejan (@tmbejan) January 12, 2021
The meat of the criticism is that the history Adler gives is insufficiently critical. Adler describes a few figures who had a great influence on how the modern US university was formed. It's certainly critical: it focuses on the social Darwinism of these figures. 2/x
Other insinuations and suggestions in the review seem wildly off the mark, distorted, or inappropriate-- for example, that the book is clickbaity (it is scholarly) or conservative (hardly) or connected to the events at the Capitol (give me a break). 3/x
The core question: in what sense is classics inherently racist? Classics is old. On Adler's account, it begins in ancient Rome and is revived in the Renaissance. Slavery (Christiansen's primary concern) is also very old. Let's say classics is an education for slaveowners. 4/x
It's worth remembering that literacy itself is elite throughout most of this history. Literacy is, then, also the education of slaveowners. We can honor oral and musical traditions without denying that literacy is, generally, good. 5/x
