The quest for less risk and more certainty will very likely result in paralysis by analysis and the resulting frustration will lead to chasing and overtrading and losses that make you scratch your head at the end of the session and say "WTF was I doing?"
I’ve been trying to put this into words for a long time. It is that my statistics were all screwed up by the chasing and overtrading and losses… to the extent I could not get a real handle on what the risk actually was.
My stats that said it was obvious things could work… but they didn’t work.
Like Mark Douglas says, and NoD is saying here, analysis doesn’t get you out of this – objectivity does.
Why? All I knew was that the risk I was experiencing was greater than made sense. That’s scary.
As NoD says, you know you have the key to the kingdom but it doesn’t seem to turn the lock. Now that is frustrating, because the obvious, direct and even simple isn’t working and that hurts on a deep personal level – leading to more analysis…
The longer I chase and overtrade and lose, the less quantifiable the risk becomes. The less I can get a handle on it. The harder it becomes to accept... because it is like some nebulous Halloween spirit/mist that grows and lurks.
So, it may be that one of the steps toward objectivity is doing what makes risk real, that is, making it actually quantifiable.
You know where this is going. A plan simple enough to be actually doable, repeatable plan.
It’s not discipline.
I think for me discipline happened when my plan started tweaking my behavior, instead of me tweaking my plan. Which was a sign I actually had a real plan that could work.
I keep going back to Mark Douglas where he says you have to have absolute confidence you will be profitable in an uncertain environment.
There is the chicken and the egg of which comes first, the confidence or the profitability. Frustrating.
The plan comes first. But it has to be simple enough in the choices and beliefs that I can actually do it, and then repeat it consistently. Susana demonstrates that. What she puts out, no matter if it will win or lose overall, it is absolutely clear enough to be back tested and put into live practice. You can do it. You can get real stats.
IF I can actually do it – which happened when my plan got simple enough it changed my behavior because I knew I could actually do it – THEN I can generate real stats on the risk as well as the potential profits. I’m on solid ground.
There! That is the seed for confidence… the source that sprouts into objectivity.
Don’t know why it is taking so long for me to make this point, but there is something about the nebulousness of the risk that really messed things up for me.
Mark Douglas says I need to be able to absolutely deal with risk. How are you supposed to absolutely accept it if it is nebulous? --> It was an unexpected consequence of simplifying similar to the way Susanna though and did it... that took out the nebulous. Risk is real. I love it!
The quest for less risk... "WTF"?!