Search results

I think not. Sorry. I must have explained it really badly, otherwise you wouldn’t still be asking whether I have any recommendations so that you can “copy someone”. That course leads to losses, not profits. You won’t find a good signal provider: if they were steadily successful, long-term, they...

No, I don’t and I probably wouldn’t care where they were from: I would avoid them all, anyway. It’s all about selection bias, really. It’s always easy to find a signal service that has recently had a good, profitable run. But it won’t help you: the reality is that it almost certainly won’t be...

Keeping good records, and learning about statistics and probability so I could analyze them realistically and accurately enough to be able to learn how to do more of what works and less of what doesn’t.

Where do all these numbers come from and why do you believe them?

Lol, maybe. Not so much if (for example) you take CME's definition of the "day," for futures-trading purposes.

I’m far from convinced by this point. I haven’t thought about it in great detail, admittedly, but instinctively I think, if anthing, that complex systems are probably more adaptable, in principle, to changing conditions. I think most engineers and physicists would probably agree with this...

Maybe I’m deluded or naïve, but I like to think that some things (e.g. “yesterday’s high/low”) are actually objective, factual and verifiable.

This is for sure: the 1:2 R requirement, in particular, will really make it terribly difficult. A strategy with an R of 1.0 and a win-rate of 60% has the same profit factor as the one you’re looking for, and would surely be a much more likely find? Why do you prefer to take fewer than 3 trades...

They do on our screens when we draw them there, and/or construct our own charts in such a way as to facilitate drawing them. In other words they’re user-defined, not market-defined (like so much else that people use, not always quite understanding clearly the difference between the two)...

He's written 4 books. He's been quoted as saying - I think not altogether jokingly - that he had to write the second, third and fourth ones to clarify in detail what he was trying so very badly to say in the first one, which is after all about as close-to-unreadable as a trading book can be?