Why oh why can't I stick to my plan ?

Quote from Grob109:

cicsman,

The posts you have made indicate that you have a misconception about what a plan is.

No one else seems to be picking this up or, they too, are operating in the manner you choose.

It may be a good idea for you to review 15 or so complete excellent plans of others to get a handle on what you may consider to design and build several plans for trial purposes.

Do not consider any plans less than 100 pages (typed and illustrated) for starters because the abreviated ones are incomplete. Most plans have 10 or more subsections.
More...

You are out of your mind! Do not consider any tranding plan less then 100 pages?????? What have you been smoking??? 100 pg plan is less useful than a 1 pg plan! ...... trading plans should be set up to be streamlined and easy to follow... .. remember...and understand.... 100 pages......LOL

As if trading is not complicated enough....

dont know if i wanna finish this post with this :p

or this :mad: :mad:
 
Quote from lilduckling:

You are out of your mind! Do not consider any tranding plan less then 100 pages?????? What have you been smoking??? 100 pg plan is less useful than a 1 pg plan! ...... trading plans should be set up to be streamlined and easy to follow... .. remember...and understand.... 100 pages......LOL

As if trading is not complicated enough....

dont know if i wanna finish this post with this :p

or this :mad: :mad:
More...

Neat post......very very funny.

Very funny.

Monitor..analyze...make decisions....take timely action. 60 words for each will keep it down to 240 words....and you still have room for 10 faces.....
 
Quote from lilduckling:

You are out of your mind! Do not consider any tranding plan less then 100 pages?????? What have you been smoking??? 100 pg plan is less useful than a 1 pg plan! ...... trading plans should be set up to be streamlined and easy to follow... .. remember...and understand.... 100 pages......LOL

As if trading is not complicated enough....

dont know if i wanna finish this post with this :p

or this :mad: :mad:
More...

Ditto.

After one really understands what to do, I'd say anything over two pages is too many.

Of course one may be interested in this plan: http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?threadid=54894

;-)
 
the market makes you do nothing............it can't......you give or take............the market can do neither.........the market is a tick running up and down a bar.........you can make a decision.....it can't.....it gets into high probability position.....we see that we take it ...........it can't give it to us........
 
Quote from Trader666:

If this is addressed to me, you're mistaken. I never said I don't understand Jack's demented Grobian drivel. I'm very open to new ideas and will take a concept from anyone and subject it to rigorous testing to quantify the edge it affords, if any. And that's what I've done with bits and pieces of Jack's over the years, and have never come across something of his that doesn't crack under stress. If you know of something that you think will test out, go ahead, I'm all ears.
More...

You make a profound point here.

Your view of what you glean, you make use of.

You have a methodology for checking out what you find.

It sounds like you look at the parts of a whole to find what you are looking for.

Further, it sounds like you are searching for a "concept" and that you "get" concepts.

You go through rigorous testing for a purpose.

The purpose is to "quantify the edge" it affords.

All of these pieces you have found "crack under stress" during the rigorous quantification of the potential edge the specific piece represents as a concept.

Years have gone by as you deploy this process of yours and you get a 100% consistent result.

These results are very important. They are consistent with the results of others, collectively speaking. 4 out of 5 people have determined what I do and espouse is bullshit. Your results are even better. They have been obtained over years and nothing whatsoever in any case has any value as you have cited and for the consistent reason you cite.

Further, you have determined that actual results that others have gotten using money, etc.... are collectively crap, your critical assessment and terminology.

I feel that your objectively in seeking other unknown concepts that others have in use is a good idea. You can process them for the benefit of others and determine why they really aren't making money for these people who are using them to make money every day.

A volunteer VI team is part of the group I associate with. They invented it to eliminate pitfalls that could occur when VI's try to use materials and such. They are not as yet dealing in the spectrum of rigor that you deploy, etc... They are just people who use the stuff and try to make sure that it is characterized in such a way that minimizes screwing its use up.

My conclusions regarding this stuff is that you may be disgruntled by your results if you expected, over the years, for anything I do to work as an edge for you. I don't do edges nor do I think they represent a possible way to make enough money to be a full time trader. Anyone who deals in an edge or edges will have a very difficult time constructing a trading business plan that will be useful for making money.

It may be that as you have spent time gleaning for edge concepts, that you missed the view that I have that indicates a holistic approach is involved for making money. Iterative refinement is an expression I use to describe more and more synthesis to better reach a whole orientation.

I track about 80 edges. these edges are defined by others; they say that they work sufficiently for them for the purpose of making money. There are a lot of books that classify edges, etc....
 
Simple - make your goal sticking to your plan, instead of making money. Spend a year only taking trades in accordance with your plan. That should get you in the habit.
 
Quote from Cutten:

Simple - make your goal sticking to your plan, instead of making money. Spend a year only taking trades in accordance with your plan. That should get you in the habit.
More...

Excellent advice Cutten ... so obvious and yet nearly always overlooked.
 
No offence Grob but, your approach to trading is so complicated that its only suited for the most highly intelligent scholars. It leaves people like me... that have a small bird brain.... out of the trading world. I guess thats why i dont care much for it.

I wanna trade too like everyone else.... but reading your past posts... i feel like..."oh shit... what have i gotten myself into to.... this trading business is way way over my little head.... im screwed" I wanna trade... not build space ships.

Now i dont mean that trading is not complicated... its very complicated.... infact its like layers on an onion... you figure out one layer of complexity... only to discover another layer beneath it.....BUT ..... for Pete's sake..... trading is just about how much am i willing to pay for something you are willing to sell, and vice versa. NOT trying to figure the mathematics in quantum physics to calculate time travel through black holes. 100 page trading plan sounds more like an ISO manual... which would enable anyone right off the streets to be able to trade by strictly following the rules in the manual..... which would never work.

SO..... maybe im the only person on this site with a 67 IQ ..... i must prove to everyone that theres more to trading then brains and fabricated complexity. We are opposites i guess. My theory is this... anyone... anyone can make money trading.... as long as they dont have a psychological monkey wrench to jam up the learning gears. All it takes is time... and not running out of $$ before then. By the way... last year you said i wouldn't make it in trading.... well July will be 3 years...and my account is nearing an all time high..... so you were wrong my large craniumed friend.
 
Quote from Grob109:

You make a profound point here.

Your view of what you glean, you make use of.

You have a methodology for checking out what you find.

It sounds like you look at the parts of a whole to find what you are looking for.

Further, it sounds like you are searching for a "concept" and that you "get" concepts.

You go through rigorous testing for a purpose.

The purpose is to "quantify the edge" it affords.

All of these pieces you have found "crack under stress" during the rigorous quantification of the potential edge the specific piece represents as a concept.

Years have gone by as you deploy this process of yours and you get a 100% consistent result.

These results are very important. They are consistent with the results of others, collectively speaking. 4 out of 5 people have determined what I do and espouse is bullshit. Your results are even better. They have been obtained over years and nothing whatsoever in any case has any value as you have cited and for the consistent reason you cite.

Further, you have determined that actual results that others have gotten using money, etc.... are collectively crap, your critical assessment and terminology.

I feel that your objectively in seeking other unknown concepts that others have in use is a good idea. You can process them for the benefit of others and determine why they really aren't making money for these people who are using them to make money every day.

A volunteer VI team is part of the group I associate with. They invented it to eliminate pitfalls that could occur when VI's try to use materials and such. They are not as yet dealing in the spectrum of rigor that you deploy, etc... They are just people who use the stuff and try to make sure that it is characterized in such a way that minimizes screwing its use up.

My conclusions regarding this stuff is that you may be disgruntled by your results if you expected, over the years, for anything I do to work as an edge for you. I don't do edges nor do I think they represent a possible way to make enough money to be a full time trader. Anyone who deals in an edge or edges will have a very difficult time constructing a trading business plan that will be useful for making money.

It may be that as you have spent time gleaning for edge concepts, that you missed the view that I have that indicates a holistic approach is involved for making money. Iterative refinement is an expression I use to describe more and more synthesis to better reach a whole orientation.

I track about 80 edges. these edges are defined by others; they say that they work sufficiently for them for the purpose of making money. There are a lot of books that classify edges, etc....
More...

Wow... between flying your GROB 109 (where the gliderport gives you free tows for some reason); dining at the Princeton Inn; driving your 12 cylinder cars; working on your golf handicap of 12; connecting with Equis, Worden Bros, and IBD; considering offers from the "coast" on doing productions; trading 100,000 share lots; mentoring your legions of toadies (all of whom are making money on a level I haven't conceived of) etc., it's a wonder you have time to respond to lowly me. But somehow you managed to and I'm humbled and eternally grateful! I'm clearly not in your league and could be wrong about all of this but here's my take anyway...

Unfortunately, you're the sad victim of incorrect thought with respect to many of the points you make. Psychology and the mechanics of execution aside, the components of trading are very simple. Determine a set of tradables, decide when to enter and in what size, and decide when to exit and in what size. You seem to need to hide behind complexity and holism to avoid objective assessment of your "methods."

It is within the above framework that I've evaluated elements of your "teachings." For example, in a rare moment of clarity (Fri, Jun 21 2002 12:57am in misc.invest.technical) you described "rockets":

"To find a rocket you only have to have your quality universe (they are very high quality stocks with EPS and RS at 80 to 90 percentiles each. The only indicator that is significant is the Stochastic (5,3,3). What you look for on your daily charts are the stochastic rising deliberately to the 80% line and overshooting it and then critically damping on the line; perturbations will cause it to look entwined on the line. There you have it."

This one's on my "to do" list but here's how I'll proceed. Take the set of tradables (stocks with EPS and RS at 80 to 90 percentiles each) and evaluate what happens when the daily Stochastic (5,3,3) of stocks in this set overshoots the 80% line. I'll stress test by evaluating how these perform in bullish, bearish and trading range market conditions, how sensitive the results are to changes in parameters, etc. I'll quantify to what extent, if any, "rockets" perform better than random. If I detect a distinct, quantifiable edge, then I'll look at "rocket" variations... the possibilities are endless. Then and only then would I combine them with other system elements.

As for holism, of course all parts of a system are interdependent and sometimes in ways that aren't intuitive. But if you want to create complex, Byzantine methodologies from components that have no edge and use the magic of holism to make them profitable, have at it but that sounds like Grobian voodoo to me. I personally prefer to combine components that do have a quantifiable edge. In other words, I don't try to make good wine out of bad grapes. But that's just me and unlike you, I've been wrong before.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top