Techniques for Day Trading the ES, NQ, YM, MES, MNQ, and MYM

[tiddlywinks]

So back to my question. Looking at the larger TF’s why was trade #2 riskier than trade #3? Both were adding to losing trades outside the channel on a 5 min chart.

Now will someone step forward and tell me why they, after looking at the 5 min..15..min..30 ...min 60.min.. charts think Trade #2 was less risky than Trade #3

Which is it? Riskier or less risky. ?? LOL.

Less risky, because the bottom channel-line was breached. In all the TFs! Previous support becomes resistance... an attempt to test is highly likely. A successful test opens a high probability to at least test the upper channel-line, or even attempt BO of the upper.

Volume is a missing piece of information that would provide significant confidence (and accuracy) to the decision however.

Thanks for standing up to the distractors, naysayers, and general buttholes.

 

[wrbtrader]

I think that you are able constantly making profits even you have to often add to losing trades are mainly because of two major factors: first you accumulate extensive experiences over your trading career to handle those adverse situations well, and secondly due to your huge pocket so that you can sustain huge draw down ( $13000 at one trade you showed ) but still managed to make a big profits ($~12000). You certainly have the talent to deal with those difficult situations.

However this strategy can be dangerous to novice with limited fund, as they would panic and exited when the added losing trades amount to big loss that they can not sustain or margin calls would shut them down in the middle of the trading.

It looks like you often like to counter trade the trends, as in your most recent day, in the trade #2, basically the market showed a strong down trend but you kept adding Long; while in the third trades, the market was clearly in a uptrend but you kept adding SHORT. Is this your favorite way of trading, or your system couldn't clearly indicate the trending for you? Many would find this kind of trading is stressful to say the least, and especially when you were in a hole of about $13000, even though you have made enough to sustain that kind of DD if it turned into a loss.

You raised several critical issues with education threads. Its something I started thinking about here at ET involving educational threads by others here at ET involving trading tactics typically associated with the result of risk of ruin.

The issue involves the audience / readers of these types of threads. A trader (the thread starter) doesn't really know who's reading it and definitely doesn't know the backgrounds or suitability of the reader for trading.

Simply, not knowing anything about the reader other than he/she is a member or lurker (guest visitor not register)...the educational thread can easily reach the wrong target...resulting in being dangerous to a novice (as you stated) that may be not suitable for trading for whatever reasons.

I remember earlier this year competing in a CME Group trading competition back in early March. I immediately notice something unique with the trading competition and education courses...you needed to register and pass a test after watching particular educational videos. It was the first time I saw something like that although I'm not sure when they started doing such considering I have no memory of them doing that when they were known as just the CME.

Seriously, its like someone telling you...before you can run a marathon...you first need to prove (verify) you knew how to walk. Yet, they understood that there's still no guarantee that they can run a marathon after learning how to walk via the way the education courses were setup. I realized than that they wanted to ensure the audience / reader understood certain things about trading (e.g. proper leverage) prior to engaging in trading.

Now imagine if brokers and forums (e.g. elitetrader.com) did the same thing before allowing someone to sign up.

Maybe warnings, disclaimers should be something that's posted in the first message post involving the education concepts soon to be discussed ???

Then again, if brokers & forum owners did the above, very few will sign up.

wrbtrader

 

[Overnight]

...you needed to register and pass a test after watching particular educational videos. It was the first time I saw it...although I'm not sure when they started doing such.
...

They've been doing it for quite a long while, and the test is so easy a caveman can do it. *insert Geico caveman commercials here*.

 

[wrbtrader]

They've been doing it for quite a long while, and the test is so easy a caveman can do it. *insert Geico caveman commercials here*.

I knew they had education videos when they were known only as the CME before becoming known as the CME Group.

Maybe the tests was something the CME Group started in early 2000 when it became an IPO in 2002 ?

As to the difficulty of the tests, now imagine you have inside knowledge that a large percentage of traders are not able to pass those tests...scary wouldn't you think.

wrbtrader

 

[volpri]

I meant to say why is trade#3 less risky than Trade #2. Sorry I am tired and was up late last night.

 

[volpri]

Which is it? Riskier or less risky. ?? LOL.

Less risky, because the bottom channel-line was breached. In all the TFs! Previous support becomes resistance... an attempt to test is highly likely. A successful test opens a high probability to at least test the upper channel-line, or even attempt BO of the upper.

Volume is a missing piece of information that would provide significant confidence (and accuracy) to the decision however.

Thanks for standing up to the distractors, naysayers, and general buttholes.

Sorry for the confusion. I was up till about 3 a.m. last night then arose kinda early plus being a diabetic my brain is simply not working good today. In addition, I am working on a training format project in an entirely different field. So.....let me try again posing the question:

In Trade #2 I averaged down or added more contracts LONG to a losing trade from my first entry. In Trade #3 I averaged down or added more contracts SHORT to another losing trade from my first entry. In both trades I averaged down or scaled in if you want to call it that...and ended up with a position of 8 contracts in Trade#2 and also 8 contracts in Trade#3.

Now here is the question: taking into account that I was averaging down LONG in Trade #2 (i.e. adding to a losing position) and in Trade#3 i was averaging down SHORT. One trade was assuming more risk, or taking on more risk than the other. So, considering the tactic I was using which trade was riskier and why?

The larger TF’s help to clarify this.

Hope this makes the question more clear. So look at it and give me your opinions. Thanks

 

[Seaweed]

Now here is the question: taking into account that I was averaging down LONG in Trade #2 (i.e. adding to a losing position) and in Trade#3 i was averaging down SHORT. One trade was assuming more risk, or taking on more risk than the other. So, considering the tactic I was using which trade was riskier and why?

Based on what you present, the trend was down, so taking shorts is the less risky option, as in trade #3, rather than the long in trade number #2. Both trades caused you to scale in when price was leaving the down channel, but its more likely for the down trend to continue, so taking the shorts is the better bet.

Now you did of course note that trade 3 was above the SMA, so that is perhaps a factor for you. In both cases though, price did re-enter the channel again as you have drawn it.

 

[volpri]

Based on what you present, the trend was down, so taking shorts is the less risky option, as in trade #3, rather than the long in trade number #2. Both trades caused you to scale in when price was leaving the down channel, but its more likely for the down trend to continue, so taking the shorts is the better bet.

Now you did of course note that trade 3 was above the SMA, so that is perhaps a factor for you. In both cases though, price did re-enter the channel again as you have drawn it.

Do you come to that conclusion looking at just the 5 min chart?

 

[Seaweed]

Do you come to that conclusion looking at just the 5 min chart?

Yes, I just went with the chart you posted, but if I look at the hourly, it looks different.

We have in general an up trend, and a more immediate range. So the dip at the green arrow down to 75 is actually a penetration of that strong level of support around 2984 over a couple of days. In this case, the longs perhaps were the less risky choice.

 

[volpri]

I think your chart is a 24 hour and my hourly is RTH’s But anyway I drew the channel of my 1 hour chart in on your chart. Except mine doesn’t show last few bars like yours does i guess because of when I took the snapshot?? Basically we got a broad b ear channel inba broader sideways range if we look at it from your 1 hour chart.