Shirley you cannot be serious
Who's Shirley? Is she a new member on ET or that your wife?
Shirley you cannot be serious
You asked for a mathematical misconception. I gave you one.
"People tend to assume that if they have an equal % gain and loss they will end up even or with their starting capital."
The above quote is you, and that is troll bait. Shirley you cannot be serious.
If you are not careful from this point forward, you're gonna' get snuffed. Seriously, what is your question?
Idea-generation by yourself is very futile, so brain needs food, and that food can be anything, even lame formulas doing the same over and over again! 
There is a bias, find the bias, quantify it, trade in direction of bias when is over 60% (I trade at 70%; because I trade like a woosie, conservative, scared, save my capital above all else, child).
How do you determine a "70%" trade as opposed to a 60% ? A mechanical set up that has a history of 70% or a gut feel of being "more confident" ?
Stop trolling for arguments. K Thanks bye.
Can you please explain this statement?
How do you determine a "70%" trade as opposed to a 60% ? A mechanical set up that has a history of 70% or a gut feel of being "more confident" ?
re:60% vs. 70%
"beauty is in the eyes of the beholder" it is that way for the next 10 ticks. then reality kicks in.
I haven't read your post entirely yet but I give you the award of the best poster on ET. Everything you post is soo interesting!There was a bracketed reference just after that referring to a a cat.
It was a reference to the thought experiment known as Schrodenger’s cat. It’s application in real life is the superposition of a particle spinning in two different directions at the same time.
It was one of the few things that Einstein got wrong. His famous quote “God does not play dice with the universe”. In fact the universe is a completely probabilistic construct at the sub-atomic level.
The concept was that price is simply a tiny massless particle therefore the rules of quantum mechanics apply to it, it is both up and down at the same time. As I said before the actual application of quantum mechanics to trading is not well suited, but thinking about it, just the process of THINKING, opens up some doors.
The quantum nature of the universe is fascinating. Entangled particles changing each other’s spin, at large distances, at speeds faster than the speed of light. The experimental data is clear, this effect does exist. As to the why it exists that is still under much speculation. My personal opinion is the connection of the particles through a dimension that we cannot yet perceive. It would allow the maximum speed of c to remain universal, but a different path between the particles than what we know.
FUN FACT: If you take every single person on the planet lump them together, then remove all the empty space between the sub-atomic particles that make up their bodies. You are left with something approximating the size of a cube of sugar. We are a lot of nothing.
WHAT’S IT GOT TO DO WITH TRADING, HOW DO I MAKE MONEY FROM IT
The probabilistic rather than the certain is one method of describing how price behaves. Price is essentially a zero mass particle operating in a constrained two dimensional world. Valid and proven probabilistic theories can be simplified for the two dimensional plane of price.
I posted about this elsewhere and am too lazy to look it up at the moment. The basic idea was that I obtained a significant amount of data. I then created mathematical models to describe that data. Generally speaking, applying a scientific method of measurable evidence and a theory. So with a new trade I apply the mathematical models (they vary with the instrument traded). My result would be more along the lines of 72.3%, but I used 70% as a convenience in writing.
That is why I mentioned price distribution, and that it is not a linear function and not a normal distribution. The probability of price certainly changes the farther away you are considering it from the present price point. But I can get enough of an area that is within my boundaries of risk tolerance for a profitable methodology. It is not a matter of reality kicking in, it is a matter of calculating the probability and then at a point where the probability becomes too small, to no longer consider that trade as safe. It is a method of describing reality across all lengths of ticks.
ANOTHER COMMON ERROR
While not a pure mathematical error, there is a logical error that is common in this forum.
A poster will say:
“I tried “A”. It did not work. Therefore “A” does not work for anyone and is a waste of time”.
Utter nonsense. The failed “A” may very well work and be profitable for others.
It is typically posted around the studying of texts to learn fundamentals of trading. There is some bizarre etiquette that being ignorant is a badge of honour. A clique of the illiterate.
The fact is some people have very successfully read texts and used that knowledge to develop profitable methods of trading.
There are a large number of techniques for trading. I have looked at dozens and dozens over the years that did not work for me. That does not mean they do not work for anyone else.
Currently I use a method that is profitable, yet others state it never makes anyone money. I described it in another post, and again am too lazy to find it and post a link.
The reader may view my ideas anyway they wish. They may view them with disdain. They may believe that it cannot work and I will fail in the long term. They may insinuate that they have superior knowledge and a superior method. Well done for all that. Yes, yes, you are the superior person, go along and enjoy life and your riches.
HUBRIS HIDES PROFITS FROM YOUR VIEW
Miss ya Rip.
I can't count the times I've read "The odds of the price going up or down are 50/50". That might be true regarding the very next tick.
But the true odds are determined by the direction of the TREND in the current time frame.