Why Profitable Trading Is So Difficult

[Daring]

...........

Good news is you have 100% accuracy.

Bad news is your sample size is 2.

 

[Grandluxe]

Interesting... let's review...

Nodoji claims to have a method that nets between $1500 and $5000 a week per CL contract, and it is 100% objective.

She says here she asks interested students to do a home work of finding a certain pattern in 2 weeks of price action...... and no one will do it. I understand most people are lazy, but surely at least a few are willing to do such a simple assignment???

Previously she said that she in the past shared exactly how she trades with a dozen ET members and that those members could look at any chart of any day and tell you exactly where she traded and why. Yet none of those people can come out and reveal their own testing of this method and what the results were??? I know if someone gave me an objective method that was so successful I would certainly test it and then report back whether or not it could produce the results claimed.

I wonder if some of the dozens of Nodoji students who have refused to do any of the work are willing to say why not?? There are always people jumping to defend her from any kind of questioning, so surely they can answer why they wont do the work she asks. There must be a reason. Maybe the student is lazy as ND says, or maybe they are not lazy but have some problem with the assignments or methods given to them, or maybe some other reason............

not a week, a day.

 

[dbphoenix]

Interesting... let's review...

Nodoji claims to have a method that nets between $1500 and $5000 a week per CL contract, and it is 100% objective.

She says here she asks interested students to do a home work of finding a certain pattern in 2 weeks of price action...... and no one will do it. I understand most people are lazy, but surely at least a few are willing to do such a simple assignment???

Previously she said that she in the past shared exactly how she trades with a dozen ET members and that those members could look at any chart of any day and tell you exactly where she traded and why. Yet none of those people can come out and reveal their own testing of this method and what the results were??? I know if someone gave me an objective method that was so successful I would certainly test it and then report back whether or not it could produce the results claimed.

I wonder if some of the dozens of Nodoji students who have refused to do any of the work are willing to say why not?? There are always people jumping to defend her from any kind of questioning, so surely they can answer why they wont do the work she asks. There must be a reason. Maybe the student is lazy as ND says, or maybe they are not lazy but have some problem with the assignments or methods given to them, or maybe some other reason............

So why haven't you done it? Have you asked her to share? Has she not been forthcoming? If you haven't done any of this, why not?

 

[dbphoenix]

Topic: Why Profitable Trading is So Difficult

Simple answer, because it just is, and when someone claims how easy it can be, proof never seems to appear, but excuses on top of excuses.

The fact that these back and forth discussions about consistent profitability continue to haunt us years after years in public forums is substantial evidence.

Something difficult takes decades to master, yet many are only willing to give it years.

Not quite. Trading may not be easy, but it is simple, and it shouldn't take more than a few months to get it. The reason why profitable trading is so difficult for most is that -- as ND states in her first post -- those traders are not prepared. If one is prepared, he is far more likely to have winning trades than if he just guesses his way through the session, or trades his "guts".

Proof? Of what? If someone tells you, in advance, exactly where an entry should be made and you don't take it, of what is that "proof"? If the someone him/herself doesn't take it, so what? If the someone takes it with one contract, or two, or a hundred, so what? The entry is the entry. It is what it is. Either one takes it or he doesn't. If he doesn't, he makes nothing. Whose fault is that?

Back in '98 I had the great good fortune to be in a trading room with Teresa Lo. She traded only the NQ and only for the first 90m. She talked us through every twist and turn of price movement for 90m, telling us where the possible entries were going to be and leaving it up to us to take them or not. Did she take them? Who cared? What possible difference did it make? She had a thoroughly-tested and consistently-profitable trading plan which she shared freely. If a given participant refused to follow it, how was that her fault? If she provided "proof" that she took the trade, how does that profit the participant who ignored her?

It's up to the trader to assume the responsibility for his trading. It's up to the trader to do the work. No one is going to reach through his monitor, take his hand, and transmit the order for him.

 

[darwin666]

nice thread...let me attempt to summarize it..

so its about

• zero to negative sum game( when u add up commissions, other costs)
• boring repeatable set ups..
• consistency. and
• first and foremost discipline to follow thru and control your emotions-( read the mark douglas book-disciplined trader

thats pretty much it.. folks!

 

[foozler]

I wonder if some of the dozens of Nodoji students who have refused to do any of the work are willing to say why not??

I can see why you ask would ask, but the answer may not be as interesting or insightful as you would hope. Take myself, for example: I funded my first trading account in 2005. As part of my "being a trader" (because, of course, I somehow must have thought that all there was to being a trader was to place trades and accumulate trading paraphernalia) I bought, amongst other books, systems, etc., a book on trading price action which was self-published by an individual trader.

Did I study it? Heck no! I barely opened it, as I recall, and I didn't get around to reading it until 2013! And as it turns out, it has proven to be, for me, a helpful little book. It has opened my eyes to seeing price action as I had never seen it before.

But during all that time between my receiving it and then finally reading it, I have sucked as a trader.

Is that the author's fault? Is there a defect with him, his trading, and his understanding of price action because I didn't do the work required to investigate and possibly benefit from his system? And if, having read and studied this system, and having spent the better part of the last four or five months actually working on a trading plan based in no small part upon my understanding of this system, does that mean that should I fail in my attempt to become a consistently profitable trader that that failure is somehow the fault of he who provided me the system? Of course not. That would assume, as many here seem to assume, that those who teach are somehow responsible for the ability and willingness of the student to apply the lessons correctly.

We are all familiar, I would guess, with Ed Seykota's postulate that "everyone gets what he wants from the markets." That would seem to be true. And it is only once one decides that what he or she really wants is to trade a consistently profitable trading plan that they settle down to do the work required to develop and acquire such a plan. Of course, that would presuppose that that individual has also concluded that to be consistently profitable requires a well-crafted, well-researched plan.

A better discussion thread for many here at ET might be this: "Everyone gets what they want from participating is trading forums" - discuss amongst yourselves.

 

[trader198]

trading is not simple,not easy neither.
trading is not teachable.

singlers, artists are not produced. they are born with.
traders too

Not quite. Trading may not be easy, but it is simple, and it shouldn't take more than a few months to get it. The reason why profitable trading is so difficult for most is that -- as ND states in her first post -- those traders are not prepared. If one is prepared, he is far more likely to have winning trades than if he just guesses his way through the session, or trades his "guts".

Proof? Of what? If someone tells you, in advance, exactly where an entry should be made and you don't take it, of what is that "proof"? If the someone him/herself doesn't take it, so what? If the someone takes it with one contract, or two, or a hundred, so what? The entry is the entry. It is what it is. Either one takes it or he doesn't. If he doesn't, he makes nothing. Whose fault is that?

Back in '98 I had the great good fortune to be in a trading room with Teresa Lo. She traded only the NQ and only for the first 90m. She talked us through every twist and turn of price movement for 90m, telling us where the possible entries were going to be and leaving it up to us to take them or not. Did she take them? Who cared? What possible difference did it make? She had a thoroughly-tested and consistently-profitable trading plan which she shared freely. If a given participant refused to follow it, how was that her fault? If she provided "proof" that she took the trade, how does that profit the participant who ignored her?

It's up to the trader to assume the responsibility for his trading. It's up to the trader to do the work. No one is going to reach through his monitor, take his hand, and transmit the order for him.

 

[trilogic]

And maybe more importantly foolish topics such as this one that keep "the board" alive and paying advertisers happy


another "trading" topic ... oh boy

nice thread...let me attempt to summarize it..

so its about

• zero to negative sum game( when u add up commissions, other costs)
• boring repeatable set ups..
• consistency. and
• first and foremost discipline to follow thru and control your emotions-( read the mark douglas book-disciplined trader

thats pretty much it.. folks!

 

[dbphoenix]

We are all familiar, I would guess, with Ed Seykota's postulate that "everyone gets what he wants from the markets."

I particularly like “A losing trader can do little to transform himself into a winning trader. A losing trader is not going to want to transform himself. That’s the kind of thing winning traders do.”

 

[cmb]

...........