TA - Objective or Psychological Skill?
- Thread starter cornix
- Start date
Surf, my stats say the following money management rules would produce overall profit with my entries: 10 tick stop-loss and 12 tick take-profit in NQ for day trading.
Now if your theory of random entries is correct, same money management should work, right? Why not test it and see if it produces profit? If it does, you will be both right and have consistent money-making method in your hands simultaneously.
Now if your theory of random entries is correct, same money management should work, right? Why not test it and see if it produces profit? If it does, you will be both right and have consistent money-making method in your hands simultaneously.
cant be done with random entries,need ta for the edge,surf's rants against ta have caused his eyesite to grow imaginary blinders to blockout,like bernake with his shoe nailed to the floor,he can't get beyond the edge of his circle of denial,there is a whole world out there beyond itQuote from cornix:
Surf, my stats say the following money management rules would produce overall profit with my entries: 10 tick stop-loss and 12 tick take-profit in NQ for day trading.
Now if your theory of random entries is correct, same money management should work, right? Why not test it and see if it produces profit? If it does, you will be both right and have consistent money-making method in your hands simultaneously.
Surf,
Seriously, I know very little about Random Walk Theory but I do know that folks that truly believe in it are saying that any outperformance of randomness via any type of trade approach (e.g. fundamentals, TA, combo or something else) is due to lady luck).
If you believe such in is true about markets as being random...whatever the results in your own trading...its due to luck.
Also, why do you waste so much of your time & energy via a journal with all of that trade talk and defense of your trade decisions when you can just flip a coin and achieve the same or similar like result via LESS time & energy.
Maybe, you're going to reply that your "price drivers" is unique (secret sauce) that can outperform random trade entries with good money management.
I find it hilarious when a trader of the markets that talks about his/her own trade method (e.g. price drivers) will then use random walk theory as an argument when someone else talks about their trade method.
Seriously, I know very little about Random Walk Theory but I do know that folks that truly believe in it are saying that any outperformance of randomness via any type of trade approach (e.g. fundamentals, TA, combo or something else) is due to lady luck).
If you believe such in is true about markets as being random...whatever the results in your own trading...its due to luck.
Also, why do you waste so much of your time & energy via a journal with all of that trade talk and defense of your trade decisions when you can just flip a coin and achieve the same or similar like result via LESS time & energy.
Maybe, you're going to reply that your "price drivers" is unique (secret sauce) that can outperform random trade entries with good money management.
I find it hilarious when a trader of the markets that talks about his/her own trade method (e.g. price drivers) will then use random walk theory as an argument when someone else talks about their trade method.
If money management was the only cause of winning, then trading would be insanely simple: just continuously enter immediately after each exit or simply reverse to remain always in. Frequency of trades would be great and overall profit as well.
Sounds like something impossible, too good to be true, fantastic? Well, it is. Trading is not even remotely so easy. Why? Because it's not just money management. Money management is an important component, but successful trading is a combination of important components, each of them separately is not enough.
Sounds like something impossible, too good to be true, fantastic? Well, it is. Trading is not even remotely so easy. Why? Because it's not just money management. Money management is an important component, but successful trading is a combination of important components, each of them separately is not enough.
Quote from NoDoji:
Somehow I missed this while I was writing my big long post that pretty much said this.
It is a pretty powerful statement.
Unfortunately, a newbie would not get the importance of it. Reading your post would help put things into context much better than just the statement.
Quote from wrbtrader:
Surf,
Seriously, I know very little about Random Walk Theory but I do know that folks that truly believe in it are saying that any outperformance of randomness via any type of trade approach (e.g. fundamentals, TA, combo or something else) is due to lady luck).
If you believe such in is true about markets as being random...whatever the results in your own trading...its due to luck.
Also, why do you waste so much of your time & energy via a journal with all of that trade talk and defense of your trade decisions when you can just flip a coin and achieve the same or similar like result via LESS time & energy.
Maybe, you're going to reply that your "price drivers" is unique (secret sauce) that can outperform random trade entries with good money management.
I find it hilarious when a trader of the markets that talks about his/her own trade method (e.g. price drivers) will then use random walk theory as an argument when someone else talks about their trade method.
No, this is wrong thinking. There ARE edges available in the markets that have nothing to do with Lady Luck-- however, claiming all you edge is is 40% win ratio, isn't an edge at all and is in fact, if you win over time, pure luck of somehow having the 40% winners move enough in one direction to counteract the 60% losing trades-- that is called LUCK.