if everyone loses money, why not do the opposite?

1

1a2b3cppp

Essentially I'm not saying to switch your buys and sells. That doesn't work.

I'm saying, why not do the opposite of what most people do? If you get an entry and then you usually get stopped out, why not put your entry a few points away from where you would normally take it? Individuals wouldn't do that, therefore it would probably work.

I had this idea while looking at an average down system. Instead of starting and adding and adding, why not wait until you would've had the first couple losses, and then start? Basically instead of going for three buys against you, start at buy 3. Managing a system this way would then require data on how often it goes that far compared to the smaller trades.

So for example, if you normally long 1, and then it goes against you and you long 2, and then it goes against you and you long 2, and then it goes against you and you stop out, you'll close a bunch of winners but occasionally have a big loser. What you need to figure out is are those small winners that you're missing out on going to reduce your overall gain at the end of the day. Indeed, instead of long 1, long 2, long 2, you wait, and then you wait, and then you long 1.

Look for micro resistance. See 3 bars with the same high in a row? That might mean price couldn't get past that for a reason. Consider going short.

For the most part I can't image that massive funds care about individual traders. Participants mention, think about what the big guys are doing because they're taking your money. Not likely. It's as if you're going up against tanks with a stick. They don't care. The market would still exist without all the dudes at home using their financial accounts and trying to come up with a profitable system. Your 10 ES that you trade every day makes no difference, and even if 10,000 people were doing that every day (they're not), those extra 100,000 can't make a difference either.

I strongly believe that the key to successful trading is averaging into a position at turning points. Sometimes it's not going to work, so be ready to get out. It's better to take a loss and start over than to take a giant loss because you're being stubborn. Close out your 30 contract position where you're losing $1,500 every point against you. You know how many $50 wins it takes to make up a $1,500 loss? Like a billion. The concept then is figuring out MAE and such so you know when to stop. I need to hire someone to do this for me because I don't know how to get the data. Make resting limit orders so price comes to you. Ask yourself, what is all the other people doing right now? If you get it wrong, you're one of the stupid people. Every other person probably got it wrong. Think about it, what is the outcome of a system where most people lose? How do you profit from this? This is the only guru type question I've ever posted on this forum. You are extrapolating trends and not trying to predict the future. Each person goes whoa dude two lines crossed that means price is going to keep going in that direction. No. No. That's so wrong it's not even funny.

Do you think algorithms care about emotions and where it feels good to buy futures? These aren't even people anymore, so what does that stuff matter? The big offices don't say see that little guy has one stop order sitting right there let's activate it. Haha we took his $75 now he can't buy dinner tonight. Maybe they do.
 
I wished I could do it years ago.
I was hoping for an auto converter.
When I pressed buy, auto converter would automically switched order to sell
and vice versa.
 
1a2b3cppp said:
The concept then is figuring out MAE and such so you know when to stop. I need to hire someone to do this for me because I don't know how to get the data
More...

Based on what you've said, you don't need to hire anyone. You just need to have a basic charting package that has VWAP and then start testing distance from VWAP as entry points. You can test it manually with your own eyes and acquire the information you are seeking. If you simply treat each entrance as a different trade (while averaging in) you will develop stats on them. The stats will let you know if you can avoid entering on the first signal and take only the 2nd or 3rd entrance signal or if you need to take the first signal because price rarely goes to the 2nd or 3rd level.
 
maxinger said:
I wished I could do it years ago.
I was hoping for an auto converter.
When I pressed buy, auto converter would automically switched order to sell
and vice versa.
More...
It's pretty easy to lose money, so why not be your own market maker? It's not hard to implement. Do you think it would work for the unprofitable trader? I don't.
 
People lose not because they can't predict price movements. They lose because they lose more than they make. You can't win by betting against them, but still using the same bad statistics.

Even if you are correct in 90% of your positions, but you are taking small profits and waiting for reversal on losses, or even averaging losses, you will eventually lose all your money. It's not enough to bet against the loser.

It's pure psychology: it's much harder to see your profits go away, than losses to increase. I even tried to do the opposite: instead of averaging losers I averaged winners. This way I got plenty of small losses in a row, getting really big win at the end.

The only problem of this approach is that it requires much more money to trade profitably. If you use 0.01 lots at EURUSD for each level, you must have at least $3,000 at your account to adhere to risk management rules. These small losses may add up to big numbers over time. Yes, the payout may eventually double your account but you must survive in the game at the first place.
 
1a2b3cppp said:
Essentially I'm not saying to switch your buys and sells. That doesn't work.

I'm saying, why not do the opposite of what most people do? If you get an entry and then you usually get stopped out, why not put your entry a few points away from where you would normally take it? Individuals wouldn't do that, therefore it would probably work.

I had this idea while looking at an average down system. Instead of starting and adding and adding, why not wait until you would've had the first couple losses, and then start? Basically instead of going for three buys against you, start at buy 3. Managing a system this way would then require data on how often it goes that far compared to the smaller trades.

So for example, if you normally long 1, and then it goes against you and you long 2, and then it goes against you and you long 2, and then it goes against you and you stop out, you'll close a bunch of winners but occasionally have a big loser. What you need to figure out is are those small winners that you're missing out on going to reduce your overall gain at the end of the day. Indeed, instead of long 1, long 2, long 2, you wait, and then you wait, and then you long 1.

Look for micro resistance. See 3 bars with the same high in a row? That might mean price couldn't get past that for a reason. Consider going short.

For the most part I can't image that massive funds care about individual traders. Participants mention, think about what the big guys are doing because they're taking your money. Not likely. It's as if you're going up against tanks with a stick. They don't care. The market would still exist without all the dudes at home using their financial accounts and trying to come up with a profitable system. Your 10 ES that you trade every day makes no difference, and even if 10,000 people were doing that every day (they're not), those extra 100,000 can't make a difference either.

I strongly believe that the key to successful trading is averaging into a position at turning points. Sometimes it's not going to work, so be ready to get out. It's better to take a loss and start over than to take a giant loss because you're being stubborn. Close out your 30 contract position where you're losing $1,500 every point against you. You know how many $50 wins it takes to make up a $1,500 loss? Like a billion. The concept then is figuring out MAE and such so you know when to stop. I need to hire someone to do this for me because I don't know how to get the data. Make resting limit orders so price comes to you. Ask yourself, what is all the other people doing right now? If you get it wrong, you're one of the stupid people. Every other person probably got it wrong. Think about it, what is the outcome of a system where most people lose? How do you profit from this? This is the only guru type question I've ever posted on this forum. You are extrapolating trends and not trying to predict the future. Each person goes whoa dude two lines crossed that means price is going to keep going in that direction. No. No. That's so wrong it's not even funny.

Do you think algorithms care about emotions and where it feels good to buy futures? These aren't even people anymore, so what does that stuff matter? The big offices don't say see that little guy has one stop order sitting right there let's activate it. Haha we took his $75 now he can't buy dinner tonight. Maybe they do.
More...

As you can see from chart below of 10 minute ES, highest volume spikes are first 20 minutes, and actually last 5 minutes till New York closes, but there is very decent volume in between.

ifs


Dealing with fading entries, it is more of "when/where" to do so is more important than a constant where you are entering. All my scalping systems were designed to fall into an area of breakeven plus one tick, and generally happens based on weekly stats 40-65% of the trades. I use several different modes of where to average down based on speed, angle of slope and lack of volume(based on a third of a second increments), and this was developed from much back testing to find consistency of random price(noise). There are nuances you will need to discover at market turns and only by watching real time, and over time, can you expand your questions which you will have to answer. There are times where one would switch from points to ticks as far as averaging down cause of the climate of the market, if too wide you won't ever be able to add to a position and if not wide enough, you enter 12 positions in 20 seconds and you'd wish you stayed in bed.

"3 equals", still comes down to where is price in relationship of trend, early stages mostly be stopped out, so you be looking for later in trend to get out/in, but what you are not seeing, is when there is 2 equal highs, and of course you like to sell as close to highs as possible, so on 3rd bar, you sell with 5 seconds before the close of the bar, and price jumps 6 ticks, and often if you wait for close of the bar, might be a point or more below the highs of 3 bar top pattern. Actually, this pattern is better for exits for myself to get out before nailing 4 ticks.

The biggest concern you might have is you testing ideas but lack actual skills of seeing it happen few hundred times, and from my experiences, your back testing will be flawed. Think of it this way, you want to learn to fly a plane without ever taking off the ground, you backtesting how to land in cross winds, what to do on down drafts or micro bursts of wind, but until you experience it in real time, chances are you will lose your life if you flying alone without an instructor.

We all are trying to predict price.
"Do you think algorithms care about emotions and where it feels good to buy futures?"
You betcha and people have spent huge sums long ago on what the average guy is doing if price does this, women on other hand make for better traders-they often think in logical ways, men have egos to mess them up.

You watch long enough, you start designing systems based on where retail going to get screwed and help them to lose even more. Mostly cause they under funded.

There are dozens of "tricks of the trade" but you only going to get them from watching real time, taking stats by hand, printing thousands of images, you can't get this in back testing.

Buy tick data from
https://www.tickdata.com/historical-market-data-products/futures-data/available-futures-data/
I think the earliest they started was 1974
It not free but usually a few losses will pay for little of it.

I still think learning to trade trend first is way to go, except for trading stocks cause they rise more than flop down, I went other way in intra-day, you going down a dark, lonely emotional path, but maybe you much smarter than me and I do wish you well. I never been good joining the pack-lone wolf.

IMO
 
Analyzing trades and looking at charts from a different perspective can be quite beneficial. But inverting entries won't change the mistakes made due to emotion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top