who writes about blow ups? rather sophmoric
Waiting to Blow up...
- Thread starter Bad_Badness
- Start date
Rather experienced. It's always a possibility. Ignoring it is sophomoric.
Your just giddy cause of Biden’s APPARENT win and Mr T’s APPARENT loss. Watch out for those reversals ROFLAs well I see were not where (twice) in OP and following post your not you're.
End of today's spelling bee.
Not sure about the rest of the details but I like the “averaged down” bit LOL with one caveat: averaging down should not be done to BE but should be done to make a profit. Therefore, it should only be used if the context warrants using it. Not just to get out of a losing trade. That said...I do it a lot. That ought to say something about the contexts I like to trade in.....and it is one of my favorite modus operandi when scalping. Of course it breaks most of the gurus’ rules which tickles me pink.....All constructive comments welcome. Here is an generalized summary.
A discretionary ES trading system, 70 days for 5 points a day. Just finished it last Tuesday. I wanted to see how long before it blew up, because I knew it would. Why?
The "never mind" details:
- Because average win was 1.35 points and a 64% win rate, 3% loss rate, and the rest where "scratch", i.e. under 0.5 point P/L.
- 5.4 trades a day, Min 2, Max 12, Mode 5.
- Averaged down on unrealized looser up to 3x, to get a loss into a scratch.
- Of course, that will not always work, so the stop got triggered at -25.0 TOTAL points.
- Stop Triggered twice, or 1-35 days.
- 12 days (17%) an unrealized loss came within 3 points of the 25 point stop but recovered to scratch. Happened 15 times.
To me this seems very suspect to bother coding up. I don't think back testing is that great a determinate of future performance in general. And in this case, the system relies on real time data that is not available in historical data.
- Never went negative.
- Order size was never an issue. Under 12 contracts.
- The losses where well distributed in the 70 days.
I know this system goes against a lot of dogma, but....
rather experienced should mean its NEVER a thought and mok re than that its never possible in application. If you have blown up before it is because you did something wrong.
If you are not confident and peoficient enough to ensure not blowing up then you shouldnt be trading in the first place.
Alright "tradeking", how long have you traded full-time, with trading being your main income source?
There are all kinds of risks, from exit orders not executing to broker maleficence. It's usually something you didn't think was possible. Your confidence is cute.
exit orders not executing and broker maleficence? never had either of the above happen to me in any magnitude that would even remotely cause me to BLOW UP or BLOW OUT.
well over 15 years and yes I am part of the winning side day in and day out. My goal is to be a winner everyday and it is not uncommon for me to go weeks without a losing day.
It is unreal just how basic most view trading. why dont more people think about the mkts think about the participants and wonder why is it that I deserve to win and make money consistently? Blow ups and blow outs can and should be obviously studied and understood but to make any trade or set of trades with even a remote probability of a blow out just means you shouldnt be trading. there could be a nuclear war in an hour that would blow up or blow out most people on earth if big enough but do i wake up every morning and say man i hope the nukes dont get fired today. today could be the day.
oh no is this the day i blow up in a vaporizing nuke shockwave ? nope. i keep doing what i do. trusting that my fellow administration and humans and machines are all doing everything they can to make sure there is not a nuke war in the hour and that I hope is the confidence you have in your broker or your executions and your redundancy plans for instances where a broker may go offline etc. what is your total size what is max risk if everything went dark for an hour?
again i am since birth waiting for my death.
Hi Volpri,
Thanks for the comment. I agree on the the profit bit. Whenever I enter a second or third lot, it is NOT because I want to average down but it is because if I did not have a position, I would "take it here". Turns out about 50% of the time, I make a fat profit on some or all the lots because that it what the market is offering. The other 50% of the time, I cut some off some or all, just as a risk management move. There is always another trade setup coming and I can get back into a better rhythm. It all of course depends upon the market action, on many levels. I think that is the beauty of scaling in. I am not overallocated at the start, but within my allocation, and can smooth out ES from the larger players and order eating Bots.
ES is no picnic from a retail broker and consumer connection. I do it in large part for my swing trades: chart reading skills and to know the status of the overall market for rotation and correlation purposes.
IMO works even better in scalping. I use it extensively.
%%
THAT;
+ who gets the dividends?? No one /ok, thats not a deal breaker\but strike1,strike2.
LOOSER spelling/thats ok i dont use a spell checker all the time also, but sound$ like a looser stop loss than prudent.Even more so with his small profit .target................................................
Actually could add to loser once with a 2 or3 X leveraged ETF/assume a smoother uptrend than es. Could does not mean you should.
IBD battle tested trading allows 3 times add to winners, NOT losers/loosers.
But thats single stocks winners/not losses+ in a 500+ page non leveraged trading system.
