Search results

I am talking to him in pvt. I don't really enjoy having to post it here... my posts are sacred.

Just the nature of the markets. Markets are dumb, thus.. it is just a reflection of whats lurking behind your charts. :D

I am not sure.. maybe that effective theory about the market is true... I mean, the Efficient Market Hypothesis theory. Some PhDs from Hardvard came up with it.

1) Most are sheep.. they sign up for a $1,995 trading camp and fund their account, trade for a while, blow their account, get bored and move on to their next merry pursuit. 2) Majority loses in the long run no matter what because of the nature of the markets. The STRONGest must win out.. its...

who are more advanced along the learning curve to learn more about their methods... :)

I don't know how the great ones keep quite. It takes hard work. But, at the same time some have given into the pressure. Seykota etc come to mind, as someone with something worthwhile. While others bullshit around being a great Market forecaster.

:( It is tough being a SKILLED speculator. To know that you are better than most, also sucks. It is like you have something to guard over.... It takes efforts to hide your skills.

It takes more like 3-4 years. I don't use Market Profile. Don't dismiss E-Waves. Randomness of the Market can only be mitigated by experience..

One can dream... right?

while we're at it.. why not an oscillator & some stochastics too...

Can someone more able explain this to me... It will be greatly appreciated from the very very bottom depths of my heart. Yours Truly..

umm.. I don't get you lindq.. Wouldn't it be more sensible to PAY your house off 100% so that you have no debt. Thus, if you can cut it, then it is better to pay cash for a $50,000 house than to take a mortgage on a $500,000 house. Because you'll be paying WAY TOO MUCH in interest.

Hey Mr. Hershey, you give without asking anything in return. You sacrifice yourself for the benefit of others. I am sure you have even greater riches waiting for you in another world. Thanks, #1 fan.

Hey Chaos, So, what is the difference between putting down 20% to buy a house... you are taking on a leverage factor of 80% and what you are talking about, which is taking on a leverage of 15% at the max so that you will be in a position to cover the loss and move on.

1) How did you lose 80% of $200,000 ?

I don't know.. it just doesn't add up. So, If someone has $1,000,000 Net Worth of investable $$$, then they are only to take on a leverage of $150,000 at the max? Seems like a bit too conservative to me.

Why not John.. ? plz more details... what's wrong with having some lovin' in this world.. I mean, there has to be a particular kind of girl that is marriage material... If so, who would be her?

FIVE ways to not have a LOSING TRADE: 1) Never place a trade. 2) Enter the trade and never close it out. NEVER !!! 3) Enter the trade, and only exist when profitable. 4) Trade on inside information. 5) an ASTUTE swing trader who escaped the ODDS/the law of large numbers.

OK.. you say it is IMPOSSIBLE. But, what if there comes a swing trader that is good at picking SUPPORTS and RESISTANCE points, and he traded enough to not run into a losing trade YET.. He escaped the ODDS of having a losing trade. That is also a very likely possibility.

You'd give up on a trade after a mere 7 years? Patience predominates PERFECTION.