Email to Mark Douglas, 01/21/02
Dear Mark,
I have just completed both your books. In the final chapter of "Trading in the Zone", you strongly recommend the completion of an exercise in which one is to trade a system for at least 20 trades where the entries, exits etc. are all rigidly predefined. I want to go through with the exercise faithfully - however I am a discretionary trader using a top/down approach, and presently would be unable to fully define on paper my predefined entry and exit criteria, which as a Nasdaq trader are basically Level II, time and sales, Nasdaq and S&P futures oriented, with a little bit of help from strictly unsophisticated TA like support and resistance. On the one hand I don't want to cheat and use discretionary trading for the exercise - on the other hand I must find something which I believe has an edge. On p.172 you mention the 3 stages of a trader - mechanical, subjective and intuitive. As a discretionary trader I am in the subjective stage, but as I have yet to methodically complete the mechanical stage, I will need to find this mechanical system with an edge - something I don't really believe in 100%. Can you guide me through this dilemma? I have decided that I must work on my beliefs and discipline, so doing the exercise is mandatory. Should I do the exercise with any mechanical system with the 2 drawbacks of
(i) lack of 100% belief in edge and
(ii) it's not the style I'll be eventually trading
or somehow compromise on the rigidity aspect of entries and exits and use my discretionary system?
Looking forward to your reply,
Sincerely,
Tom
=============================
Email from Mark Douglas, 01/21/02
Tom:
If you stay focused on your ultimate purpose your dilemma will resolve itself.
The only reason why it's necessary to do the exercise by trading mechanically is to convince the rational part of your mind that "every moment is unique," and that "you don't need to know what will happen next to make money." If installing these two beliefs is your primary purpose, then having a mechanical system that you "believe in" (meaning one that will be right and make you money),
isn't necessary to accomplish the objective.
I did say on Page 197 that the bottom line performance of your edge is not that important. Based on the correspondence I've been getting since the book was published, I would say that I should have really
emphasized this. The profitability of the edge you choose for the exercise is not the primary consideration. Meaning, if it costs you money to do the exercise, that's fine. What is important is setting up the potential conflicts and confrontation as I describe them on page 200.
If you can find or devise a mechanical edge that breaks even -- I would say you're doing fantastic.
Good luck,
Mark Douglas
==============================
PM from Magna, 01/22/02
Tom,
Thank you very much for sending that my way. Very, very interesting when he says:
...If installing these two beliefs is your primary purpose, then having a mechanical system that you "believe in"...isn't necessary to accomplish the objective.
That may be true, that is you don't need to "believe" in it which I agree with, but later he says:
The profitability of the edge you choose for the exercise is not the primary consideration.
The keyword there is
EDGE, which, by definition, means probability is on your side (otherwise it's not an edge...)
Then he says:
If you can find or devise a mechanical edge that breaks even -- I would say you're doing fantastic.
Maybe he's relating the unimportance of profitability to the relatively brief, 20 trade sample, because
over the long haul a mechanical edge that breaks even...is NOT an edge!
Anyway, what'cha gonna do?
Magna
===========================
PM to Magna, 01/22/02
Magna,
Clearly, as he states in his reply, not only you and I had this dilemma. Edge or no edge, I will go through the exercise, and repeat it if necessary, until such time that I don't feel the conflicts he mentions on p.200 and I can execute the system without fear and hesitation. My logic is as follows :
I don't have to reinforce my belief in my edge. I know my discretionary trading has an edge from my results. When I am selective, position-sizing correctly and using stops, I have no trouble stringing together 6, 8 or 10 consecutive, modest winning days (my maximum is 23). I
do have a problem taking a loss, I
don't always predefine my risk, so what happens is that eventually I give huge amounts back in a couple of days of
wild trading. I am in the "boom and bust" cycle - and I want out. I will "optimize"

some system to delude myself into thinking that it has an edge and use it for the exercise. At best it will be break-even and I will just lose commissions. But hey, Mark Douglas says that's not the point, and I agree with him.
You're right about Douglas' loose usage of the term "edge" - but we know what his point was.
So there we have it - after I have selected my system I would like to send you my full rules for entry, exit etc. for your comments and suggestions.
Tom
==========================
PM to Magna, 01/24/02
Magna,
I'm still tinkering around with setting up the parameters of my system - much more complicated than I thought. Just hope I don't waste too much time trying to find the holy grail. To think all this time I was trading using only the S&P futures and my gut feeling, is frightening. After this exercise, I will have to formalize my "seat of the pants" discretionary trading - not too much though cos
we are the edge

I am always envious of you guys discussing this chart pattern and that setup - I never really did get into TA. I may reluctantly have to introduce some indicators in my trading mainly for exits
I have taken a complete hiatus from trading, and sometimes it's really tempting to jump back into the fray. I don't want to get too carried away with all this "re-definition", but if I don't change my behaviour, I'm doomed to eternal "boom and bust", and I'm not prepared to accept that anymore. I won't, as you say, eliminate all conflicts, but at least will learn to recognize them and hopefully control them a bit. I could've (should've) done all this methodical preparation over a year ago
before starting to trade, but to be honest with you, do you think one can appreciate
all the stuff in books like Tharp, Elder and Douglas
before one has experienced all the pain, frustration and humiliation firsthand? Maybe, but perhaps a lucky few only. Even now, it's very difficult, and I haven't even gotten to the exercise stage, let alone what will ensue thereafter.
Tom
===================================
PM from Magna, 02/13/02
Tom,
Just wanted to check in with you and see how the development of the system was coming along. Hope all is well, if you haven't been trading over the past few weeks you haven't missed a helluva lot. Mostly a bunch of tough, choppy, low-range days.
Magna
===========================
PM to Magna, 02/14/02
Magna,
Thanks for thinking about me. Well, Douglas was right when he said that the reader will find it difficult to do his exercise. I've been tinkering around with different systems and what started off as a quest to find
any reasonable system has turned into the search for the holy grail (which we know doesn't exist, and is just a stalling tactic). So, I haven't been trading since our last exchange, and will not, till at least I work out why I don't want to do his exercise, whether it takes another week, month or year.
Tom
============================
PM to Magna, 03/21/02
Magna,
I have decided to slightly modify Douglas' exercise and will be formalizing as much as possible my top-down approach, something I've never done. It will still be discretionary, but at least there will be mention made of stops, position size etc. In the meantime I'm watching (not trading) the market and reading. I'm in no rush. It's interesting how someone, who is logical and knows the theory, never wanted to predefine a stop, or a trading plan for that matter. That is what I have learned from attempting Douglas' exercise. I will start trading when I have a trading (discretionary) plan in writing - and I'm probably talking about no more than a paragraph. I promise to send you that paragraph for your comments before I start.
Tom
==========================
The first draft of my trading plan was sent to Magna in mid-April - it was
more than a paragraph and must have been the hardest thing I've written in my life. After a few more emails, we put together an acceptable version and shortly thereafter I resumed trading.