Below, please find a parsed response to your post. What I need you to do as you read along is paint a mental picture in your brain of two individuals sitting at a table - each looking at one side of a coin as the coin sits balanced on its side. Neither individual can see the opposite side of the coin from where they sit. However,
one of the individuals at the table
has previously seen
both sides of this coin.
Quote from aeliodon:
Spyder, so you pretty much hit the ground running in SCT.
If you consider the
three years I spent trading Equities using the very same methods (without even realizing it) "hitting the ground running" then, I'd agree. However, most would consider three years something else entirely, and not, "hitting the ground running."
Quote from aeliodon:
What if you're just a natural at this stuff and all of us un-naturals are just wasting our time?
Your question assumes transference has not occurred in either Equities or Futures with respect to these methods. One need look no further than the Equities Journal to find individuals who
have learned to trade profitably using these same methods in another market. In addition, a number of individuals have learned to take profitable trades in the futures markets (or other markets besides equities). As such, it would appear that one need not be a 'natural' at trading in order to learn the methods outlined in these many pages.
Quote from aeliodon:
Also what do you have to say to guys that haven't gone all into this system? I mean I'm still stuck in January. But if I can just nail one or two ftts a day for 2-3 points per contract average per day and have a pf of greater than 2.0 than that's fine for me.
Again, please do not confuse
execution signals with signals of continuation or signals of change. Anyone 'still stuck in January' has chosen to do so. I see nothing wrong with learning to differentiate between continuation and change, but
choosing only to apply the lessons learned at various resolution levels (Forest, Tree, Limb). However, deciding to 'stop learning' and focus on entry and exit signals (nothing more than synthetic constructs used in trading) shortchanges your development. Again, if one
chooses do cease the learning process, then one cannot expect to progress beyond the current plateau. As a trader's comfort level improves along each step of the learning process, the number of trade opportunities the learning trader sees increases. In addition, as the comfort level and experience levels increase, so too does the number of actual trades taken. determining "what's OK for me" without ever experiencing what lies beyond the horizon is a bit like a child saying, "I'm OK with walking, I don't need to learn how to run."
Quote from aeliodon:
I think porgie was used a channel system based on SCT but he only used what he was comfortable with. He used to say all the time that he had a 100% no risk system. But I doubt he was all-in at all times.
Again, please review the original premise of this Journal. SCT is
not a goal. SCT is a consequence of the learning process. The most common variable within this process is
time. Some learn in a few hours, while others, take years to perfect the differentiation between continuation and change.
Quote from aeliodon:
I think he just took some the highest probability trades and was happy with that.
If you've never seen the other side of the coin, how do you
know what the other side 'looks like' - and by extension - which view you prefer?
Quote from aeliodon:
Do you agree that its okay to be content with just a few points per day or is edge trading mentality so bad in the long run for financial and mental health that its never worth persuing no matter how good the money seems to be.
I agree that if you have exhausted all mental efforts and worked as hard as possible to grasp the lessons, and as a result, find you can
only progress to a certain plateau without moving farther, then yes, by all means, remain happy with the accomplishment. However, your post indicates you have made decisions, not based on facts, but on uninformed opinion.
The reason I push people so hard to move forward is because the expert level tools and expert level trading is
no more complicated than any other level. Nothing about the methods described here are complex. We just have a
whole lot of simple to wade through in order to get to the other side.
Remember the two individuals seated at the table? Which individual do you think represents me? Since I've seen
both sides of the coin, I
know which view I (and most others) would prefer. Sure, its easy to learn a little bit, create a few entry and exit criteria and stop right at the Forest without ever looking at a tree. After all, years might pass before you could ever reach full SCT level so why even try? Remember, the
goal isn't SCT, the goal is to differentiate continuation and change in any market on any time frame (provided sufficient liquidity exists). Learn to do
that and you have an ATM Machine.
I'd be willing to bet if you learned
all the tools and used them appropriately to catch the signals for change as close to the actual tic as possible, you'd find yourself, almost accidently, drifting into the land of SCT without even realizing it.
.......
First by accident;
Then by design .....
Sound familiar?
- Spydertrader