Quote from teasinggtara:
I think I have it in a nutshell: there are no rules so the learners teach each other and the observers don't believe because of what they observe.
Different people read something and take a way different preceptions by their inference combining what they take in through their senses. Various people, thus lend various learning biases be they visual, audio or kinesthetic.
You believe (infer to anything you read) that rules are how a person does things, so learning rules is a good idea for you.
You learned to read and sing as a consequence of collecting rules for doing each apparently. A language resulted in each case because your mind got differentiated in some way.
The alternative for not using rules is not that people teacher each other. The alternative to learning rule sets is learning the language of the market in a manner that the mind becomes differentiated.
A consequence of learning the language of the market is that the differentiated learner knows that he knows what is going on all the time on the given skill level he has acquired.
A beginner knows he knows how channels progress, when their overlap begins and ends and thus the MADA works for him each lap of MADA done over and over as a channel progresses. His process is to build (annotate) tapes into traverses into channels in terms of the geometry of both price and volume. Thier correspondence is algorithmically established using a hypothesis set and its parametric measure (a single measure of velocity measured geometrically).
Six levels of skill further on,the expert has reapplied what the beginner practices, several times over with respect to traverses, tapes, internals, and the same techniques on another market, the Premium, the DOM and T&S combo, OTR tick charts in two markets and he knows the leader lagger relationship of all those subject panels. Many scripts and snippets are applied to the panels as well for sensory convenience.
A simple vocabulary was reapplied in a fractal context over about six fractals there exists an iteratively refined the trader's differentiated sensitivity to the time of events where all events are in relationship to one another. This is the definition of effectiveness and efficiency.
All traders have beliefs of what is possible for them and for their role models. It is easy to note these two marks on the continuum of performance of each trader and each role model representitive. There is another set of marks on the continuum: the marks of others who do different and unknown trading activiities.
Most people compare these outsiders to what they know and see as their goals. In your case it is clear what all of thse marks are on the continuum.
The final arbatreur of what is possible, most people do not use or are not aware of. The weekend drill of boot camp made the relationship of knowledge and skills to the market's offer very clear. there was a direct relationship and in the limit the standard was taking the market's offer.
Backtesting does not check the performance of what is being tested against it's ability to take the market's offer.
taking the market's offer is also tied to its capacity. The weekend drill was designed to test this capacity limit as well. For example, in ES it is 10,000 contracts per account.
Observers have beliefs and they are not subject to change unless certain standards or limits are met. Nothing outside of observer beliefs can be true to an observer. This is cut and dry, no exceptions. The position of people who do what others (observers) deem to be impossible (beyond their established beliefs) is that there is no way discourse can change their views.
The consequence of this is that the phenomena has value for decision making by users of the method. Users cannot work with anyone whose beliefs close out the opportunity to learn.
Trader666 is an example of a person who cannot prove to himself by using roughtrader's results that the two document editions (the original 22JUN06 and the second, 10OCT06) of "Putting the Pieces Together" are a proof of both 1 or 2 order(s) of magnitude profits within a single time span (100days). roughtrader did not have to be at those two IBD meetings, he only had to deploy their principles.
You and trader666 filter yourselves away from working with practitioners. Just as Steven could not "buy" his way into the Tucson activities.
From my viepoint when nutshelling, it turns out this way:
Knowing that you know with regard to market operations may not be done, logically using rules. Therefore, a suitable alternative is learning the laguage of the market by completing a purposeful learning process (like learning to read) which builds the mind's long term memory by differentiation). Those who observe the process and its results will always measure whether it works or is valid by their belief standards composed of their preformance and that of their role models. It will be deemed unbelievable and impossible as a consequence of this outside test.
It is the nature of communities to protect those who are joining the community. Many people who find what others are doing to be unbelievable and impossible, protect these newcomers from making the mistake of considing what they know and believe cannot be happening. They encourage newcomers to join with them and have the same beliefs founded on the tests they performed.
In future years, a lot will change. we spent five years in this forum introducing an algorthm or paradigm on what we call "pool extraction" and it applied to three types of capital application in various markets. I attached a schematic of how the pools are extracted and swept using various methods. the descriptors may be a little criptic but they are ordered the same way for each approach.