As we start this new week of our collective attempt to improve our results (about 13 points last week as posted at least, without variation to the exits or sizing algorithm) over the self-evident near-breakeven coin tosser, we can draw self-evident (not necessarily without a great deal of thought), conclusions number 10, and number 9 below:
Conclusion 9:
It doesnât matter who you THINK you are. It doesnât matter what you have or have not achieved in the past. It doesnât matter what your formal instruction is or isnât. It doesnât matter if you can put a rolex watch in your wrist or not. It doesnât matter if you have previously made millions or billions in whatever enterprise (or dare I say, trading in the markets?) in the past. It doesnât matter how many simulations (or realtime tests on a smaller scale) of methods you have made to convince yourself and others that you have an edge. It doesnât matter if your wife loves you or not, etc, etc, etc. It doesnât matter what the past was or wasnât, the self-evident truth is that whenever you sit in front of a live trading screen you are fully capable of blowing up that account in a few clicks, and that you will have to exercise an enormous amount of self control to bring about a positive result trading the markets, because each new moment is unique, and no matter how similar to the past it seems to you, the universal FACT remains that no one, and I mean NO ONE, can step into the same market twice, not even once, because the market has changed and you have changed from the last time you engaged, and therefore one universal truth remains, that is if you wish to be a winner:
âYou will have to prove to yourself and others that your suggestions bring in at least 1 tic per day on average extra profit over the original method rules.â
This brings about Conclusion 10 as a corollary which is:
Everybody comes into âtradingâ with the idea to become rich by trading, because quite frankly the charts of the diverse financial instruments look to the newcomer (and to the not so new comer and goer), like an unlimited bounty from which, ever increasing riches flow to the winners of the game, if only one could exploit even a small portion of those moves that can so clearly be spotted in hindsight.
After many hours, days, months, years, and sometimes decades, it starts to dawn upon the ânewcomerâ that perhaps all those moves, that so clearly can be spotted in hindsight, cannot be exploited so easily after all. The anecdotal evidence is of course the trading results achieved versus what was really available in hindsight. After a longer while of this first insight, the ânewcomerâ begins to ask harder questions like: Would the chart look the same after this or that âhindsight entry pointâ if I had sold 1 contract there?. What about if I had sold ten, a hundred, a thousand, ten thousand, or one hundred thousand contracts?. Maybe with increased size I would have affected the market and the market would have affected me in such way that even the chart would have looked different?.
And from this reasoning process comes conclusion number 10:
WHAT IS (i.e.: The price-time-volume path) could not have been possible (outcome) if what was had been any different from what it actually was at every point in the past before AND after you got involved. In other words: It's not what you do that matters most, and it's not what they do. It's both.
This brutal truth (that is very easy to prove to yourself and others), is the cause of many grievances for the ânewcomerâ, as almost every weak setup he observes, and is sure of that works every time, till he decides to take it with real money, and then it fails to perform or performs much worse than what he observed.
This truth also explains the exponential increase in bragging in public forums in days that sport a big move versus range bound days where the bragging, although always present, is more contained: If all these pathological braggers had actually been âin the moveâ, the move would not have happened most likely.
This week, (as the few of us that are persistent assholes intent of winning at whatever cost), we will concentrate on finishing points from friday: 1 (money management, simulation of winning method to the borderline of losing with a winning method by overleveraging or degradation of edge by increased size due to liquidity issues) and 2 (Price-Time-Volume-DOM-whatever following to generate coin tosses with an edge, and subsequent management of position size to achieve/retain that edge (Exits, Sizing using Garch-Bayes as suggested by whoisjohngalt)), and we will continue gathering and from now on mainly ignoring (except when a useful point can be made) self-elected perpetual LOSERS for processing next Happy Friday. There seems to be an unlimited crop of those at Elite Trader (and in the markets). But we already knew that, as each of us is a potential loser in the making that everyday, and forever from now on and till death eventually comes to be:
âWill have to prove to ourselves and others (family, friends, landlord, bill collector, etc, etc, etc) that our suggestions bring in at least 1 tic per day on average extra profit over the original method rules.â
If no one else can come up with an optimal F coin tosser simulator for a 40%W 4:1 winning method by the end of the week, Iâll post a simple one in EXCEL for all to use, using the free liquidity hunting method (and much lower theoretical edge than 40% 4:1) gifted by Mike805, with very hard rules, and suitable for automation (which as we already know does not guarantee success due to the universal truth contained in Conclusion 10), and close the thread for âlack of interestâ. Letâs see if the small portion of winners/ persistent wannabe winners (me included) can ignore the stupid LOSER trolls for virtual genocidal processing till next Happy Friday.
Conclusion 9:
It doesnât matter who you THINK you are. It doesnât matter what you have or have not achieved in the past. It doesnât matter what your formal instruction is or isnât. It doesnât matter if you can put a rolex watch in your wrist or not. It doesnât matter if you have previously made millions or billions in whatever enterprise (or dare I say, trading in the markets?) in the past. It doesnât matter how many simulations (or realtime tests on a smaller scale) of methods you have made to convince yourself and others that you have an edge. It doesnât matter if your wife loves you or not, etc, etc, etc. It doesnât matter what the past was or wasnât, the self-evident truth is that whenever you sit in front of a live trading screen you are fully capable of blowing up that account in a few clicks, and that you will have to exercise an enormous amount of self control to bring about a positive result trading the markets, because each new moment is unique, and no matter how similar to the past it seems to you, the universal FACT remains that no one, and I mean NO ONE, can step into the same market twice, not even once, because the market has changed and you have changed from the last time you engaged, and therefore one universal truth remains, that is if you wish to be a winner:
âYou will have to prove to yourself and others that your suggestions bring in at least 1 tic per day on average extra profit over the original method rules.â
This brings about Conclusion 10 as a corollary which is:
Everybody comes into âtradingâ with the idea to become rich by trading, because quite frankly the charts of the diverse financial instruments look to the newcomer (and to the not so new comer and goer), like an unlimited bounty from which, ever increasing riches flow to the winners of the game, if only one could exploit even a small portion of those moves that can so clearly be spotted in hindsight.
After many hours, days, months, years, and sometimes decades, it starts to dawn upon the ânewcomerâ that perhaps all those moves, that so clearly can be spotted in hindsight, cannot be exploited so easily after all. The anecdotal evidence is of course the trading results achieved versus what was really available in hindsight. After a longer while of this first insight, the ânewcomerâ begins to ask harder questions like: Would the chart look the same after this or that âhindsight entry pointâ if I had sold 1 contract there?. What about if I had sold ten, a hundred, a thousand, ten thousand, or one hundred thousand contracts?. Maybe with increased size I would have affected the market and the market would have affected me in such way that even the chart would have looked different?.
And from this reasoning process comes conclusion number 10:
WHAT IS (i.e.: The price-time-volume path) could not have been possible (outcome) if what was had been any different from what it actually was at every point in the past before AND after you got involved. In other words: It's not what you do that matters most, and it's not what they do. It's both.
This brutal truth (that is very easy to prove to yourself and others), is the cause of many grievances for the ânewcomerâ, as almost every weak setup he observes, and is sure of that works every time, till he decides to take it with real money, and then it fails to perform or performs much worse than what he observed.
This truth also explains the exponential increase in bragging in public forums in days that sport a big move versus range bound days where the bragging, although always present, is more contained: If all these pathological braggers had actually been âin the moveâ, the move would not have happened most likely.
This week, (as the few of us that are persistent assholes intent of winning at whatever cost), we will concentrate on finishing points from friday: 1 (money management, simulation of winning method to the borderline of losing with a winning method by overleveraging or degradation of edge by increased size due to liquidity issues) and 2 (Price-Time-Volume-DOM-whatever following to generate coin tosses with an edge, and subsequent management of position size to achieve/retain that edge (Exits, Sizing using Garch-Bayes as suggested by whoisjohngalt)), and we will continue gathering and from now on mainly ignoring (except when a useful point can be made) self-elected perpetual LOSERS for processing next Happy Friday. There seems to be an unlimited crop of those at Elite Trader (and in the markets). But we already knew that, as each of us is a potential loser in the making that everyday, and forever from now on and till death eventually comes to be:
âWill have to prove to ourselves and others (family, friends, landlord, bill collector, etc, etc, etc) that our suggestions bring in at least 1 tic per day on average extra profit over the original method rules.â
If no one else can come up with an optimal F coin tosser simulator for a 40%W 4:1 winning method by the end of the week, Iâll post a simple one in EXCEL for all to use, using the free liquidity hunting method (and much lower theoretical edge than 40% 4:1) gifted by Mike805, with very hard rules, and suitable for automation (which as we already know does not guarantee success due to the universal truth contained in Conclusion 10), and close the thread for âlack of interestâ. Letâs see if the small portion of winners/ persistent wannabe winners (me included) can ignore the stupid LOSER trolls for virtual genocidal processing till next Happy Friday.
