Quote from river:
This is at least the second time in the past week you have written about a binary path of 5 or 6 questions that takes a beginner to expert.
Maybe I'm making this much more difficult than you intended but I'm drawing a blank on this set of questions.
Any hints for us?
-river
I think everyone goes through getting up to speed trading by seeing several forks in the road.
The # of Q's could be figured out by looking at the ratio of winners to total traders. Probably 1 out of 10 are still in trading. those really making the money are probably 1 in 100.
The questions that I believe are important are:
1. Pro or Amateur. I chose amateur to keep my reporting to a minimum.
2. Boolean or probability? I felt it was very important to always "know you know" rather than betting. Not having to deal with risk is an impotant question to deal with. I do not have to deal with risk by my choice.
3. Getting the routine straight. I choose MADA and most choose OODA. Here in this choice is where you choose up/down thinking or right/left thinking. Markets make money going to the left. If your mind is working on only one process for the dominant sentiment all the time, you are not foooled as in doing dog fighting s a pilot would. Win win is different than win lose.
4. Making money. You choose between compounding profits or taking profits. You have to make the choice W. J O'Niell emphasized. Compound.
5. Thinking regime. The choice is deduction of induction. You can see that the financial industry always chooses induction. It doesn't work, of course. Deducing the the whole set of building blocks was very important. You only have to do it once.
6. The Biggy is deciding how to learn. Loosers usually are learningto make money as the learning goal. They get to learn fear, anxiety and anger instead. I lucked out by focussing on building my mind by doing what I was taught in everything else I learned... doing drills. In modern times neuro science is proving this is how to go about it. My emotions center on being supported (See hurricane post ...lol), feeling comfortable by always knowing that I know.
There are some neat consequences of the above.
And there is the history of how trading successfully came to be.
By missing out on any of the forks, the rest of the way is futile. Any once you go through a fork, the mind is not able to back track at all.
The whole of the financial industry is based on sales and marketing to get OPM which enables fees and commissions. Computer Science people who work in that domain learn to do stats and filtering mostly. Yet it is true they sit in a computer atmosphere based on Boolean algebra and never figure that out.
All those algorithms are based on reasoning and the reasoning usually goes to doing stats to prove what data says.
A log only works if the columns are set up properly. Computer Science has a way of making that work: RDBMS. The huge trick to see it that it doesn't have time in the data for knowing that you know. No wrist watches are needed. Events are what are ordered in markets.
These various categories are the juice. they each have unique definitions.
It is very hard (and priceless as they say) to simply understand that at any event, that is the unique place where that event fits.
My views are just what I figured out and no else really has to depart from where they are going. But, on the other hand, it is really neat to get there the way I went. I built my mind so there is a spectrum and everything fits along that spectrum. I call it "having a fully differentiated mind".
When all the pieces are available at any moment, I say I have facility. RDBMS says it all: Relative Data Base Management System.
Picture a market and its streaming data.
Think up how money is made in a market.
AHA!!!
The sentence you said was: Money is made in markets through .... price change.
At Goldman Saks they end with sales and marketing to get fees and comissions. BUT... they, today, still have to think up way to do that in markets. they charge for trading money not caring about anything else. One department does one thing another epartment does the opposite.
the corollary to money is made through price change is..... "you have to keep on the correct side of the market".
Covel keeps getting it wrong so he makes tapes of people who get it right. He follows them and he thinks they trend follow. THEY DO NOT.
They monitor and analyze instead.
In markets, we all know that price is the dependent variable. (Except for those in business and ecomomics.)
Price change in the dependent variable is lead by the independent variable.
So we watch the independent variable to know what will follow for the ependent variable, price.
So here we are in another post. This is where Covel would turn off his video or tape recorder. So far he can't make transscripts for either..... lol... I have dragon so I don't have his problems in that arena. Everything a person needs to know is already written down.
But it cannot be put in a person's mind to make future use of. None of it can be thought through thoroughly enough. It is just "gibberish" as Covel says. For him it IS gibbrish. His mind is not differentiated and cannot be for the rest of his life.
Volume tells you what price will be doing .
By repitition, you log the variables and get to see their inter-connections in each and every possible and singular finite way.
when leibnitz and Newton used to call and talk o0n the phone (in Latin), they argued over the pieces. One wanted to put them together and the other was into chopping the whole thing up into bits. Both agreed the smallest piece was so cool functions they eal with were considered continuous functions.
The market does no have continuous functions and it is Greek to most people instead.
We have these pieces....they always fall into the same orderr of events.
Everyone knows exactly what "good" piece is. You know by repitition. Two pieces move the market (the good pieces) The rest let you wait for a good piece. BUT this only describes the dependent variable.
If you see a good piece, you better look at the volume, to see whats next.
