I have read Al Brooks Bar by Bar, a number of Joe Ross' books and various and sundry price action treatises. I think Al's book is great ... I just wish he had written it in English.
I also read traders here who believe unless it is back tested it is not just worthless but is so worthless that two day old dog crap has more value
I am am fairly new. I am a marginally profitable swing trader (read nickles and dimes of profit ... not yet folding money) of a single NQ contract exclusively on a 5 minute chart except for the open where I use a one minute or a tick chart. I like the $5 tick as opposed to $12.50 and typically risk $50 to $65 on a trade and refuse to risk more than $90 all in including a $5 commission on any single trade. I like to move my stop closer the action after a minute or two or three
Here is my conceptual problem. My experience is that in business to be marginally profitable may not mean you are on the verge of success. It is just as likely you have had a run that is essentially random and that you have no read on where you are. If anything you may be at more risk than if you are losing because it is easy to convince yourself you are doing well for a novice and believe that as you build on your experience the deal starts to deliver more money and more consistency. Random success can, and frequently does, prevent novices from looking for a truly profitable business model.
Trading is obviously even more prone to random runs than most operating businesses; although I think most underestimate how often random sweet spots deceive the new guy in almost any field. IT HAPPENS ALL THE TIME!
I would like to hear from PA and back tested traders, but particularly PA traders, who can remember being where I am and progressing at some reasonable rate toward the land of milk and honey. I want to hear from guys who made PA + hard work and astute observation pay off.
Testers, please chime in but refrain from telling me there is no downside to back testing and I am the world's biggest A** Hole for not realizing it. I am familiar with that point of view and concede that it is rational and frankly maybe even compelling.
Their is clearly a huge divide in the trading community -- Discretionary vs Tested with of course a middle ground of guys that do a bit of both. I would love to see a spirited debate across this divide.
I also read traders here who believe unless it is back tested it is not just worthless but is so worthless that two day old dog crap has more value
I am am fairly new. I am a marginally profitable swing trader (read nickles and dimes of profit ... not yet folding money) of a single NQ contract exclusively on a 5 minute chart except for the open where I use a one minute or a tick chart. I like the $5 tick as opposed to $12.50 and typically risk $50 to $65 on a trade and refuse to risk more than $90 all in including a $5 commission on any single trade. I like to move my stop closer the action after a minute or two or three
Here is my conceptual problem. My experience is that in business to be marginally profitable may not mean you are on the verge of success. It is just as likely you have had a run that is essentially random and that you have no read on where you are. If anything you may be at more risk than if you are losing because it is easy to convince yourself you are doing well for a novice and believe that as you build on your experience the deal starts to deliver more money and more consistency. Random success can, and frequently does, prevent novices from looking for a truly profitable business model.
Trading is obviously even more prone to random runs than most operating businesses; although I think most underestimate how often random sweet spots deceive the new guy in almost any field. IT HAPPENS ALL THE TIME!
I would like to hear from PA and back tested traders, but particularly PA traders, who can remember being where I am and progressing at some reasonable rate toward the land of milk and honey. I want to hear from guys who made PA + hard work and astute observation pay off.
Testers, please chime in but refrain from telling me there is no downside to back testing and I am the world's biggest A** Hole for not realizing it. I am familiar with that point of view and concede that it is rational and frankly maybe even compelling.
Their is clearly a huge divide in the trading community -- Discretionary vs Tested with of course a middle ground of guys that do a bit of both. I would love to see a spirited debate across this divide.
