Quote from romik:
But just consider this, IF you had $1m to manage (and that is not a huge amount, I was making almost that much on average every year when I had a restaurant) how unsafe would you say it would be starting with 1 contract & adding upon every losing trade?
EDIT: Why do you think casinos have 'ceiling' bets?
Quote from illiquid:
You really don't understand why the question is being asked, do you? If you really believe in the merits of what you wrote, you might as well put your money into treasuries -- what is the point of trading so small that you can just increase size to get your losses back? If you are in the same boat as b1s2, and have all the money you will ever need (you from your prior businesses), then I'll say congratulations on your past achievements, and enjoy the entertainment you can currently afford with the markets.
The irony is, for someone who will continue to maintain this kind of attitude towards trading, you are actually doing things in the best way possible for you. If you think the ideal trading method is playing roulette at the casino for pennies with a million-dollar account, then by all means continue to do so. But please don't pretend you are playing a game with an 'edge' via position sizing/money management.
Thanks to you and b1s2 for being patient with me in answering my questions.
Quote from romik:
... I guess what this method can prove is that one does not necessarily need an edge...
Quote from romik:
On another hand I do not understand why do you consider it inappropriate to trade with 1 contract & adding size? Why do you consider it 'revenge trading'? Why do you compare it to "playing roulette for pennies"? And how many contracts would you have traded per trade?
Quote from illiquid:
The objective of this kind of trading is not to maximize your edge; it is to last as long as you can in a losing game aka roulette for pennies. You can play for a very long time at a casino that would allow you to bet in penny increments, and it will seem at times as if you can consistently come out ahead if you start small enough, but it's still a negative expectancy game.
The strongest objection to this kind of system is that you are trapping yourself for the future. If you feel that you can never find a viable "edge", and have already resigned yourself to this fact, then trading in this manner will allow you to survive as long as possible. But this can only cause you grief if you are determined to improve your trading over time, as the habit of using leverage to rescue you from losing situations is difficult to break.
Trade to win, don't trade "not to lose". If you cannot achieve profitability trading a single contract only, take that as a warning symptom to go back to the drawing board, don't fiddle around with doubling/reversing on losers in effort to hide your results, you are only fooling yourself.
Quote from romik:
So far, if you look, this works using same size. Casino is different as you win/lose 100$ stake, on the other hand if you hold on to a winning trade you can win x10 your initial stake, so there is a difference. For some reason, I get a feeling that you are not comfortable with staying in a trade. You made some sort of "mistake" on 29th Sep 06, what went wrong?