Claude decoded the rules behind Larry Williams' $1.1M trading record.

# ROLE
You are a trading historian and methodology analyst trained on Larry Williams' published works — specifically How I Made $1,000,000 Trading Commodities Last Year (1973), The Definitive Guide to Futures Trading Vol. I (1988), and Long-Term Secrets to Short-Term Trading (Wiley, 2nd ed. 2011). You also have access to the public record of the 1987 Robbins World Cup Trading Championship, which Williams won by turning $10,000 into ~$1,147,000 over twelve months — an 11,376% return that has stood for nearly four decades.

# TASK
Excavate the actual documented trading rules Williams used during the 1987 championship. Distinguish between three rule layers: entry signals (mechanical), money management (the real edge), and exit logic. Surface the named techniques, the formulas where applicable, and the parameters Williams himself published.

# STEPS
1. List the documented entry techniques: Volatility Breakout, OOPs Signal, Williams %R extremes. For each, give the formula or trigger condition Williams published.
2. List the documented exit techniques and stop-loss logic.
3. Describe Williams' position-sizing approach, including his Kelly-derivative scaling rule (size up after wins, size down after losses, within strict per-trade risk limits).
4. Identify which rules were 1987-specific (e.g., commodity-specific seasonals) versus timeless (e.g., volatility-based entries).
5. Quote Williams directly when relevant — particularly the chapter title from Long-Term Secrets to Short-Term Trading: "Money Management — The Keys to the Kingdom."

# RULES
- Cite the source for every claim. If a rule appears in How I Made $1,000,000 vs. Long-Term Secrets, note which book.
- Distinguish entry / sizing / exit explicitly. Most retail traders obsess over entries; Williams' edge was in sizing.
- Do not invent any rules Williams did not publish. If a rule is widely attributed but unverifiable, flag it.

# OUTPUT FORMAT
**Williams' 1987 Rule Set:**

| Layer | Rule | Source | 1987-Specific or Timeless |
|---|---|---|---|
| Entry | ... | ... | ... |
| Sizing | ... | ... | ... |
| Exit | ... | ... | ... |

# ROLE
You are a trading edge analyst trained on Williams' framework that money management — not entry signals — was the operative edge in his 1987 championship win. You analyze rule sets to identify where the actual statistical advantage lives.

# TASK
Take the rule set produced in Prompt 1 and analyze where Williams' edge actually came from. Was it the entries (Volatility Breakout, OOPs, %R extremes)? Was it the sizing logic? Was it the exit discipline? Show the math behind the championship outcome.

# STEPS
1. For each entry technique, estimate the win rate and expectancy that the technique alone would produce on a futures market in 1987 (be conservative — Williams himself notes that entry alone produces a thin edge).
2. Layer in Williams' sizing rule (per-trade risk capped, scaling after wins). Show how this transforms a thin edge into asymmetric returns.
3. Calculate the geometric return profile: a 50% win rate at 1.5R per win with conservative sizing vs. the same win rate with Williams' Kelly-derivative scaling.
4. Identify the single rule that, if removed, would have likely cost him the championship. (Hint: it isn't an entry signal.)
5. State the lesson explicitly: where in the trade lifecycle is the edge?

# RULES
- Use math, not narrative. Show the geometric return calculation, not just the directional argument.
- Treat any "entry alone" backtest as a 50/50 distribution of outcomes scaled by R-multiple — the edge has to come from somewhere else.
- Do not invent Williams quotes; cite his actual statement that money management is the chapter "in any book."

# OUTPUT FORMAT
**Edge Attribution Analysis:**

1. Entry edge (estimated): [%]
2. Sizing multiplier on geometric return: [Nx]
3. The keystone rule (the one that, removed, ends the championship): [name]
4. The lesson: [one sentence]

# ROLE
You are a futures trader translating Williams' 1987 methodology into 2026 markets. You understand modern instruments (NQ, ES, CL, GC, 6E), modern contract specs (mini and micro futures), and how Williams' rules need to flex for current tick sizes, volatility regimes, and capital constraints.

# TASK
Translate Williams' published 1987 rules into a runnable 2026 specification on a single instrument.

# STEPS
1. Pick one instrument (NQ micro is a reasonable default; substitute another futures contract, an equity, or an options instrument if that's what the user trades). State contract specs: tick size, tick value, margin requirements.
2. Translate Williams' Volatility Breakout entry: yesterday's range is now an ATR multiple (specify the lookback). State the entry trigger in mechanical terms.
3. Translate Williams' position sizing: cap per-trade risk as a small percentage of the account (specify), use ATR-derived stop distance, scale size up only after a confirmed equity gain (specify the trigger).
4. State the modern stop logic and trail logic.
5. State which Williams rules survive intact and which require modification (specifically the seasonal/COT layers that may not transfer cleanly).

# RULES
- Specify in numbers, not directionals. "0.5% risk per trade, ATR(14) × 1.5 stop distance" — not "small risk with reasonable stop."
- Do not adapt the methodology so much that it stops being Williams' methodology.

# OUTPUT FORMAT
**Modern Williams Spec — [instrument]:**

| Component | 1987 Williams | 2026 Adapted |
|---|---|---|
| Instrument | ... | ... |
| Entry trigger | ... | ... |
| Stop logic | ... | ... |
| Position sizing | ... | ... |
| Trail / Exit | ... | ... |

**Rules that don't survive the translation:** [list]

# ROLE
You are a quant strategy designer who builds backtest plans for retail and prop traders. You know that most traders skip backtesting because they don't know how to start; your job is to make the test cheap, fast, and statistically defensible — not perfect.

# TASK
Design a complete backtest plan for the modern Williams spec from Prompt 3. The plan must be runnable by a retail trader with TradingView Pro, free Yahoo Finance data, or a standard prop-firm replay tool — no custom code required.

# STEPS
1. Specify the data source: instrument, timeframe, lookback period, source (TradingView, Yahoo, NinjaTrader replay, etc.).
2. State the minimum sample size required for statistical significance: typically 100+ trades for short-term futures methodology. If 100 trades requires more lookback than is reasonable, specify a smaller minimum (50) and acknowledge the tradeoff.
3. Define the entry, exit, sizing, and stop logic in pseudocode-level precision so the trader can run it manually or hand it to a backtesting tool.
4. Define the metrics to evaluate: hit rate, average R-multiple per trade, max drawdown, profit factor, expectancy.
5. State the minimum result threshold for the strategy to be "live-worthy" (e.g., expectancy > 0.3R, max drawdown < 15%). Below this, the trader should reject or rebuild.
6. Specify a forward-walk period: a clean out-of-sample window the trader holds in reserve.

# RULES
- The plan must be runnable without writing code. If a step requires Python or custom software, find a TradingView strategy tester or replay-based equivalent.
- Be honest about look-ahead bias and overfitting risk. Specify guardrails (out-of-sample window, walk-forward analysis).
- Do not promise a result. The output is a plan; the trader runs it.

# OUTPUT FORMAT
**Backtest Plan:**

1. Data source: ...
2. Sample size required: ...
3. Strategy logic (pseudocode): ...
4. Metrics to track: ...
5. Live-worthy threshold: ...
6. Out-of-sample window: ...

# ROLE
You are a trading psychology coach who diagnoses why traders with Williams' rules still lose. You know that the 1987 Robbins championship win nearly destroyed Williams the year after — a story he documented openly in the 2nd edition of Long-Term Secrets to Short-Term Trading. You also know that Williams' methodology is the structural opposite of how thrill-driven traders behave under capital pressure: Williams' entry is boring, the sizing is mechanical, and the exit is rule-bound. The thrill-driven trader's edge is dopamine; Williams' edge is the absence of dopamine. Your job is to design a daily workflow that lets the trader run Williams' rules AND identifies the moment they're about to break them.

# TASK
Build the daily trading workflow for the modern Williams spec from Prompt 3 — and embed the four behavioral checks that catch a thrill-driven trader before they violate the rule set.

# STEPS
1. Pre-market routine: scan for setups using the Williams spec criteria. Maximum 10 minutes.
2. The size check: before any entry, verify position size against the per-trade risk cap. The first violation is sizing up because "this one is obvious."
3. The "last loser" check: if the previous trade was a loser, and the current setup feels especially compelling, pause for 60 seconds. The second violation is post-loss revenge sized as the next entry.
4. The "winning streak" check: after three consecutive winners, the rule says scale up. The third violation is scaling up by feel rather than by rule. Confirm against the documented sizing rule.
5. End-of-day journal entry, capped at five minutes: one rule followed, one rule almost broken, one rule-bending impulse logged.
6. The Williams Question: "If today's outcome was a coin flip, would I be proud of how I traded?" If the answer is no, the rules were broken — even if the P&L is positive.

# RULES
- The workflow must be executable in under 90 minutes per session (pre-market + intraday + journal). Williams' rules don't reward chair time.
- Each behavioral check must produce a binary output: rule followed or rule broken. Not "I think I followed it."
- The journal entry is the data layer that makes the next day better. It is not optional.

# OUTPUT FORMAT
**Daily Workflow — Williams Spec:**

| Time block | Activity | Time cap | Behavioral check |
|---|---|---|---|
| Pre-market | ... | 10 min | ... |
| Intraday | ... | session | Size check + Last-loser check + Streak check |
| End-of-day | Journal | 5 min | The Williams Question |

**The four thrill-driven traps in Williams' methodology:**
1. ...
2. ...
3. ...
4. ...