Why Is The Obvious Not So Obvious?

[Ed48]

E48..if the above are all correct..then what could be so obvious that it is not so obvious ?

Something I tried a while ago was printing out historical line charts, of daily closing price, for stocks, spanning several months. I picked stocks which moved quite a lot*. (I haven't got the time for intra-day trading, so using a chart of daily closing price and holding for a few days or weeks would suit me.)

Then I put an X on the line for every day where, if I'd gone Long:
a) it would have showed an immediate profit within a day or so
AND
b) I could have put a very tight stop on it (ie. low risk entry)
AND
c) I could have made a 10% profit fairly quickly, without getting stopped out

I repeated the exercise with X for Short.

The results were quite interesting.

* there's no point picking non-movers if you want to make a fairly quick 10% profit

 

[Laissez Faire]

that is not my pc setup..it is the mt5 app default colors..not trading at the moment so no need to waste time changing things

i think i said that a drawdown of $500 is nothing..so half that is not going to bother me

Got it. So, by neutral you simply use black bars for both up/down bars on a white chart for example? Feel free to post your pc charts if you want to.

I would agree that $500 is nothing. Which goes both ways - unless your profits far outweigh your losses.

not sure how much was made exactly..will have to check..i do know that the last profit run was about $6,000 but as mentioned will have to check how much the 15 or 16 winners in a row contributed to this..btw..that $6k is now out..in fact..i have €2,200 in my left pocket that i withdraw from the bank today..i will be counting it some time in the near future when another €1,500 is added

So, $6000 gross would be 1200 MES points. With 1 contract per trade that gives you an average profit of 1200 / 16 = 75 MES points per trade. 37.5 points per trade if trading two contracts.

Obviously, a remarkable result and which leads me to think you probably hold your trades for a day or two. It does not seem to suit intraday scalping or even intraday swings (unless you're consistently buying/selling the day high/low).

 

[Laissez Faire]

from your experiences related for today..my assumption is that you do not use MTF in your trading..is this correct or not ?

MFT = multiple time frames?

If so - of course I do.

The curious thing is that I'd say my analysis for today was fairly accurate - yet I traded it poorly because of the reasons I mentioned in the post you quoted.

By market Open - I knew with high probability that Monday would be a range bound session with a pullback lower likely following last week's strong move higher. That's just the nature of the market. It goes up. It goes down. So, I was actually short going into the Open, but got stopped out on the opening spike.

Equally, I knew a pop above Friday's high could happen, too (but still within a range bound session), and entered long for the move higher which followed after we put in the morning low. This took us for a good swing higher above the opening price, but failure on that thrust up suggested we'd trade lower - AGAIN.

However, at that point, even as the market feeded me information that HIGHER was unlikely and that lower was more likely and increasingly so, I still held on to the belief or low probability scenario of going higher by the close. As a result - I stopped out my long trade a few points above breakeven and gave back a lot of unrealized profits as I had failed to take profits at a price extreme. And went on to take a few more stabs at the long side which ultimately lost me money.

If I instead had switched short again at that critical point - I would have had a profitable day.

It's possible that I'm just not flexible enough in my mindset, but as I actually consciously KNEW that a short would be the way to go, another part of me just wanted to stay long. It's like my analysis or method is not reconciled with the part of me which executes.

And at the end of the day it's possible that comes from a desire for profit.

I think that to trade successfully (consistently) - it's key to be able to see the market as it really is. And to not impose your own wishes or desires upon it.

And that's probably where I failed yesterday.

btw..i don't tell lies.. nothing to gain by it

You should trade ES instead, then. Ten times more stacks to count.

 

[Onra]

and...

View attachment 258565

Is there any hidden relation between the red lines or are these drawn looking roughly at S&R?

 

[fairvalue]

now..this is where it gets interesting..

Deaf Blind Can Fall

Duty
Breach
Causation
Foreseeability

unless you can fully explain all of the above to the professor..off the top of your head..without thinking twice about it..then you are next in line for the dime to ring home

well the time is out for an answer without thinking twice.

But I do want to take the chance to elaborte on this by writing, as it could help me to think that through - or at least train the muscle of using my brains:

1. Deaf Blind Can Fall is written horizontal
2. Duty Breach Causation Foreseeability vertical
   
3. The first DBCF is figurativ
4. the second is literal

1. The related question was, "Mr Pelt, if a person is Deaf and Blind, do you think that they Can easily Fall "? The question comes to my mind, if the words with the same first letter are correlateds - they are, it is the mnemonic help to recall the tort law points, as mentioned by Pelt and proved right by M3
   • Deaf/Duty: What ist related to hearing in the market - pits doesnt exist anymore, but if it has a figurative meaning and I recall The Economist cartoon. So if the duty of market would be to mantain the previous direction, but the market screams too loud in the other one ... or a time ...
     
   • Blind/Breach: A obvious limit is breached, but (some) market participants don't realize it or just want to hold on, hoping that everything will be fine ...
   • Can/Causation: it Can lead to a Sufferance, but does not have to. Is it there where the magic happens...
   • Fall/Foreseeability: if it works out, is the foreseeable action clear ...
2. I elobarted on that and found that logical in respect to trading

 

[fairvalue]

5. The best party to join is one where you have proof that eveyone is happy.

IMHO these were the biggest giveaway in the thread, especially no. 5.

View attachment 258339

higher lows, therefore no Stop Losses breached, in my opinion - so nobody is being attacked apart from minor corrections. Does this make sense for everybody else, too? Feel free to join in

 

[odlareg]

Generally spoken, you might as well study Gran’s plot.

GO

 

[M4-1]

well the time is out for an answer without thinking twice.

But I do want to take the chance to elaborte on this by writing, as it could help me to think that through - or at least train the muscle of using my brains:

1. Deaf Blind Can Fall is written horizontal
2. Duty Breach Causation Foreseeability vertical
   
3. The first DBCF is figurativ
4. the second is literal

1. The related question was, "Mr Pelt, if a person is Deaf and Blind, do you think that they Can easily Fall "? The question comes to my mind, if the words with the same first letter are correlateds - they are, it is the mnemonic help to recall the tort law points, as mentioned by Pelt and proved right by M3
   • Deaf/Duty: What ist related to hearing in the market - pits doesnt exist anymore, but if it has a figurative meaning and I recall The Economist cartoon. So if the duty of market would be to mantain the previous direction, but the market screams too loud in the other one ... or a time ...
     
   • Blind/Breach: A obvious limit is breached, but (some) market participants don't realize it or just want to hold on, hoping that everything will be fine ...
   • Can/Causation: it Can lead to a Sufferance, but does not have to. Is it there where the magic happens...
   • Fall/Foreseeability: if it works out, is the foreseeable action clear ...
2. I elobarted on that and found that logical in respect to trading

i think a few are picking things up a bit wrong..so..to clarify..

Deaf Blind Can Fall..mnemonic to remember the 4 requirements to prove negligence in court..if you fail on any point you lose your case..simple

Eggs Break Lawlers Lie.. mnemonic to remember the 2 golden rules to keep you in the game..being..never put all your eggs in one basket..and..never take advice from anyone else unless you fully understand it and what the wost case scenario is (how much can you actually lose)..

now..the point was this..you can use mnemonics to help you trade correctly..and not get distracted with wishing..hoping..praying..etc..etc..in other words..help you to do what you must do..which just happens to be the difference between.."knowing the path..and..walking the path"..

if i were Professor Charts..i would ask Mr LF to explain why he did not react to what was actually happening in front of his 2 eyes..and that.. ultimately..the only correct answer can be that he did not understand what was happening..for..if he did..then he would have reacted differently..

you see..everyone wants to be right.. which is not the correct way to think..there is no right or wrong way..there is just.. THE WAY ..if one does not know THE WAY ..then how can one understand what is happening..and what needs to be done..

if you find this hard to understand..you are not alone..in fact..you have eveyone who has been "taught" since 1580 in the exact same situation as you find yourself..

the only person who can solve your problems..are YOU!!

 

[M4-1]

Is there any hidden relation between the red lines or are these drawn looking roughly at S&R?

not intentionally..but if you examine after placement you will see that 10 points seem to be a move that creates "more interest"..

this could mean several things..such as the auto traders have 10 points in their algos..or..it could be just a coincidence..the only way to really find out is to analyze all the current running algos..which will never happen

the lines are purely areas where you can expect a reaction of some sort..what actually happens is the important thing..if you think like LF did..then you will get what LF got..simple!!

it's a game..a silly..stupid..ridiculous game..where an elite few are paid substantial sums of money..to gamble with money that is not even theirs..it is money that belongs to the ill informed plebs..

same shite..different century

 

[M4-1]

Got it. So, by neutral you simply use black bars for both up/down bars on a white chart for example? Feel free to post your pc charts if you want to.

I would agree that $500 is nothing. Which goes both ways - unless your profits far outweigh your losses.



So, $6000 gross would be 1200 MES points. With 1 contract per trade that gives you an average profit of 1200 / 16 = 75 MES points per trade. 37.5 points per trade if trading two contracts.

Obviously, a remarkable result and which leads me to think you probably hold your trades for a day or two. It does not seem to suit intraday scalping or even intraday swings (unless you're consistently buying/selling the day high/low).

i will post my setup next time i am on the pc..could be a while though..as i have far more important "legal issues" that are currently taking up nearly all of my time..but will eventually be sorted out..then it is back to the "never ending story"