A message to some day traders.
- Thread starter Amahrix
- Start date
You could say the same thing to eagles and other birds of prey (each with their own "strategies").
Various Ospreys that have been studied have had up to 70% success rates, and rarely if ever below 40%. This is far higher than Bald Eagles, who will make many attempts at snagging a fish before latching on. But an eagle’s method is easier on its body and feathers, and it can afford to have more misses. With their low-energy method of fishing, eagles hit/miss ratio rarely climbs higher than 33%.
You get free drinks in a casino.Yes, trading is absolute waste of time and money to 99% of people and it's also bad to our health. Giving up is sometimes wise choice.
However, as a hobby, it's better than Casino I think......
Huge big people are members of this forum and argue with words or anywhere else online. In fact, you should check out the health & fitness threads here at ET...some have posted their body builder like physique in photos of themselves. They don't look like individuals that will be intimidated.
marketsurfer (real user name) or surf (nickname) was a controversial former ET member that attacked day trading, attacked technical analysis, attacked vendors, attacked anyone that posted education info about their trade method and he often hijacked threads.
He was controversial because he was using technical analysis including recommending it at other locations outside of this ET forum. Just as controversial because he supported & defended other vendors that did not post here at ET forum (e.g. Timothy Sykes) including vendors that used technical analysis.
In addition, he had a secret sauce called price drivers that he was unable to post any verification of the trades he said he took here at ET forum. Often he described the price drivers as "we" designed it and manage it. Sometimes talking about quantitative statistical analysis within the same sentence of using the word "quant" but never posting any verification of any performance stats.
Yet, I thought it was a joke when I heard the forum owner say you're verified if you use your real name here at ET in another discussion after the departure of marketsurfer.
marketsurfer used his real name (often) here at ET...David Goodboy. He left this forum after a huge trade loss in which he was hyping, defending the trade all the way to the bitter end. Prior to his departure...he became a vendor (book author) and promoted his book here at ET while briefly a sponsor here at the forum.
Also, he was former hedge fund owner or manager that lost peoples money. He now runs a non profit organization and he's now a cryptocurrency trader that posts on twitter. Yeah, initially he would bash others here at ET that got involved in cryptocurrency prior to his departure from ET.
His posting style is unique and there's a certain way he used specific words...the OP of this thread does not have the same unique posting style as marketsurfer.
Famous quote I remember about marketsurfer...
I do not use technical analysis...I just like to look at charts for a reference about the price action.
wrbtrader
Last edited:
You could be right, however, I don't think so. I have been trading since 1969, and I lost money for 14 years every year. Then, in 1984, I made a profit. I have made a profit every year since then - sometimes as little as 11% (2008), and sometimes over 40%. That's a span of 35 profitable years. Accordingly, I think the past does predict the future. For example, check the prices for SPY for the past 20 years. See what would have happened if you bought at the close every Monday, and sold at the close every Tuesday. Go ahead, I'll wait... I think you'll find that you would have made money. I think you will find that you would have made MORE than by just buying and holding SPY. Even during 2008, you would have made money. Maybe this won't continue, but the 20-year track record makes me think it will.
My approach was to look into the past to analyze which moving averages in a given time frame reflected rising prices every time they evidenced an upward slope and reflected falling prices every time they evidenced a downward slope—where the association between the two phenomena produced a statistically significant positive correlation (as close to 100% as possible)—and then apply those relational patterns in the present to achieve successful outcomes.
The fact that I was a break even trader prior to finding these correlations, but have become profitable on a virtually daily basis since then (provided I am present to act expeditiously as dictated by said moving averages) suggests to me that all this talk of luck and non-luck might simply be thrown out there to stimulate a debate merely for the sake of debating, and not because there is any kind of objective/experiential support to back it up.