Jack,
Great to see you're back. Your presence is badly needed in this kind of thread.
nononsense
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Why Can't I Trade with the Trend
- Thread starter Flashboy
- Start date
Great to see you're back. Your presence is badly needed in this kind of thread.
nononsense
Quote from ktmexc20:
I don't know Prof, first I think that you and I are mind set on two entirely different time intervals... (even though fractal relationships cause this to not even matter, really).
And with that I have to say that the primary phYsical characteristics of the market ( that I study) cause me to say that I believe you are delusioned.
Not saying though, that your methodology might not be extremely profitable and accurate, but you can't be talking about the most foundational physical characteristics, as I am.
I stated 4 absolutes that occur in a totally random Market place . . . prove me wrong.
Quote from easyrider:
Proftlogic
I was checking out your results so far this year for es on your website. Do I read it right when it says 203 trades so far with no losers?
edit: oops. I see now that these are hypothetical results. Do you have any actual trading results anywhere?
If you read the trend the only way you could lose is if you were aggressive in your entry, countertrend trading or holding a position overnight where you are not in control of the trade any longer.
And yes I do. I actually trade for a living . . . do you? And the CFTC has checked out my site and traders participating in it and I'm still here . . . any more questions?
Quote from Grob109:
Borrow a yellow crayola from a child to underline whats new to you. Mark in a color of your choosing, what you need to change in your mind. Say each one at least five times to make anything even start to stick. [/B]
I see resurrection is common is trading forums. Welcome back Jack!
Quote from NickelScalper:
The real issue is whether or not past price action determines future price action.
Not necessarily. It is possible that past price action could have no effect whatsoever on future price action, yet still signal the likely character of future price action to a sufficient degree to make a profit.
Jack
That is one of the best posts ever - thank you. You are becoming very lucid in your teaching.
Jrkob
Was using RAND() in Excel. THanks for the link. On a few thousand simulations the average end point of the random number chain (20 bars) was zero, so I expect it is working. The average return from buying low and selling high on the random number chain (without foresight) was very significantly higher than zero.
That is one of the best posts ever - thank you. You are becoming very lucid in your teaching.
Jrkob
Was using RAND() in Excel. THanks for the link. On a few thousand simulations the average end point of the random number chain (20 bars) was zero, so I expect it is working. The average return from buying low and selling high on the random number chain (without foresight) was very significantly higher than zero.
Quote from easyrider:
No need to get testy. All I asked is if you have any actual trade results I can look at. Surely someone in your position has some audited results for potential customers to look at.
I don't have customers. I teach and love what I do. You want to learn . . . great. I will spend a thousand hours with you to assist you if necessary. I have the patience of Job. If you don't want to learn what I teach . . . don't. No pressure here.
Someone said the other day, "Teach a man to fish and feed him for a day". You all know the rest of that. I have my own version of the next part. "Teach a man to fish and he'll sit on the bank and drink beer all day". I teach people to trust what they see from seeing the same scenario play out with perfect consistency so pulling the trigger is an afterthought. Guru's are a dime a dozen. Traders trade for themselves and must trust themselves and there decisions perfectly to succeed. Doubt will fester and kill a trader both financially and psychologically. I believe a trader must eliminate risk not limit it. Of course I'm a delusional fool and have no clue what I'm talking about so please discount everything I say.
Quote from NickelScalper:
Efficiency theory says that current market price accurately reflects all publicly available information.
It doesn't say that - it says that in a perfectly competitive market in an equilibium state, the current market price accurately reflects all publicly available information. Given that no perfectly competitive markets exist (perfect competition requires infinite competitors, or finite competitors with infinite capital and infinite competing ability), your claim doesn't apply to any existing market.
Limiting capital available for market transactions means that things such as liquidity conditions can prevent inefficiencies being exploited. Limiting competition, or limiting the scope of competition, implies a similar restriction on market efficiency.
Economic theory, when applied to conditions prevailing in reality (rather than in a theoretical perfectly competitive market), postulates a world where markets *tend towards* efficiency, but where competition and capital is limited, where unearthing edges and processing information takes time and varies according to talent, research resources, and effort, and where new developments are creating new potential edges all the time. The process of searching for inefficiencies is an ongoing one, in line with the opening up of new markets and asset classes. The fact that exploiting inefficiencies takes time means that edges don't disappear over night, but rather take days, weeks, months, years or even decades to disappear.
Above-average returns on capital ("edges") are subject to supply and demand, barriers to entry, lead times, competition etc like everything else. If the assumptions of efficiency theory held in the real world, then no businesses would ever turn an above average profit, and no individual would earn an above average income. Yet we can see higher than average returns on equity being generated by countless businesses, and plenty of people generate lots high incomes and excess wealth.
Prof
Being a logical person and a trader Im sure you can see how another trader might have a little problem with the claim that a person following your method would have made 203 consecutive trades this year without a loser. Since this is your system and you are the expert it is logical to assume that you are having similiar results in your own trading. Can you just give me a ball park figure on your actual winning percentage? I'll go first. Mines right at 50%.
Being a logical person and a trader Im sure you can see how another trader might have a little problem with the claim that a person following your method would have made 203 consecutive trades this year without a loser. Since this is your system and you are the expert it is logical to assume that you are having similiar results in your own trading. Can you just give me a ball park figure on your actual winning percentage? I'll go first. Mines right at 50%.