Van K. Tharp's Random Entry System

[Lawrence Chan]

Quote from Vienna:

Actually, the interesting thing about the Marty Schwartz story was that my friend told me that Marty did almost everything the opposite way you are supposed to do it: he took profits as soon as they were there, often he did not let them run at all. He did not go for high R-Multiple winners. And when he felt he was right, he added to positions going against him. Go figure! And (I was imprecise in my previous post) my friend also said "I watched him trade for two weeks, 20 trades a day, and he did not have a single loser!". So there are many ways to skin a cat...My point is that Marty apparently REALLY knows how the markets work and therefore trades completely differently from what is the accepted gospel of some trade "coaches". So don't believe everything you read...

Just about the average down on loser part.

Many profitable hedge funds and pro traders (including locals) do that because they have a directional bias at that time until proven otherwise.

The directional bias part could be from analysis on higher timeframes, fundamentals, or, event driven.

Some people also call that statistical trading ... call it whatever you like

 

[Mr Subliminal]

Quote from dbphoenix:

... the point I've been trying to make. Or rather Magee's point.

Quote from Mr Subliminal:

I stand by my statement and have done the simulations to verify it. You (and Magee if he did say it) are wrong.

Quote from Mr Subliminal:

A simple quote from Magee, which would have finally put this matter to rest, has been conspicuous by its absence.

Quote from dbphoenix:

As for a "simple quote" from Magee, he devotes considerably more than a line or two to this subject. You'd learn a lot more by reading The General Semantics of Wall Street.

Quote from Mr Subliminal:

I'm sure I would, but alas the book, written in 1958, is out of print.

Quote from dbphoenix:

It's available under the title of Winning the Mental Game on Wall Street.

Upon your advice, I have just completed reading Magee's "Winning the Mental Game on Wall Street" ("General Semantics of Wall Street") and was relieved to learn that nowhere did he come close to stating anything that even resembles your spurious and unfounded claim which I disputed earlier in the thread. But this should have been obvious by your evasive reply when I asked you to quote him. My faith in Magee has been restored. As for you, ignoring for the moment who is right or wrong, your attempt at dragging Magee into this was a case of convenient memory loss at best, and premeditated intellectual fraud at worst.