You Have To Live It To Believe It

volpri said:
One of the best articles I have read in a LONG TIME. Thanks for sharing. It is kinda like orthodoxy (correct belief) vs orthopraxy (correct practice). You can have all the correct beliefs, knowledge, confidence and understanding (orthodoxy) but if you don’t do the right thing at the right time (orthopraxy) then none of a traders orthodoxy really matters.

In addition, learning on a deeper level takes place with orthopraxy as opposed to theoretical learning from orthodoxy. This said we usually need both. Orthodoxy to know what to orthopraxy (can save much time and suffering) but learning without doing is theoretical knowledge in ones experience and does not lead to success.

Some stubborn mules ONLY LEARN in the school of hard knocks......sadly...View attachment 200577
More...

Reminds me of a cartoon that I've looked for numerous times, and never found. It shows some speaker-guy up on a stage, standing between two easels -- one of which has a drawing labeled "Ass" and the other a drawing labeled, "Hole in the ground." The speaker is holding up his finger as if to make a profound point.

The caption carries his statement: "Welcome, gentlemen, to Advanced Management Training."

God but that still cracks me up.....
 
I have a daily, oportunity, to speak, with many people, who gambles at least once a weak,

in sports lets say,

e.g goals between teams.


I explain them RRR,

in trade deal of 1:5 , where traders chances, are, at the very least 40% ,

because he chose a single stock, out of 200, with a perfect entry point,


where they have,

1:5 ratio as well,

but ,

given the fact , that,

sports have so many variables, injuries, red cards, rain etc
(even if one has, an extraordinary ammount of knowladge on both teams),

gamblers chance, are 30% on avarage.

20%~ world wide (?), just a guess.


Because of IQ, greed, drugs,

or simple desire to escape 9 to 5,

by choosing such an easy path -

they don't get it.


Or it's my own foult , in the way of explaining.
Most likely.
I bet on this.
 
Sprout said:
Your statement is indeed true.

There is a body of work here on ET that gives a framework by which to test this hypothesis:

Volume leads price;
If volume is increasing, then the price trend will continue.
If volume is decreasing, then the price trend will change.

By observing the market in it’s basic granularity, one can discover the truth of the market’s system of operation as a Boolean function for themselves.
More...
Often true but you do have exhaustive volume. Bear trend going on for a while. Suddenly big bear bar on high volume. Then in a blink of the eye a reversal and bear trend ends.

Then you can have very low volume and trend just grinding up all day like in a Small PB trend.

Also what price does on volume is important. For instance, big volume..bid is being hit over and over price not going anywhere. What is happening? There is an institution sitting there buying up all the sellers. Why is the institution doing this?

Then you got to consider "why" the volume? Is demand increasing? More buyers coming in and swamping the sellers? Or are the sellers backing off and the buyers have to ratchet it up a notch...then another notch..then another notch. Sellers backing off and creating artificial demand. Why?
 
volpri said:
Often true but you do have exhaustive volume. Bear trend going on for a while. Suddenly big bear bar on high volume. Then in a blink of the eye a reversal and bear trend ends.

Then you can have very low volume and trend just grinding up all day like in a Small PB trend.

Also what price does on volume is important. For instance, big volume..bid is being hit over and over price not going anywhere. What is happening? There is an institution sitting there buying up all the sellers. Why is the institution doing this?

Then you got to consider "why" the volume? Is demand increasing? More buyers coming in and swamping the sellers? Or are the sellers backing off and the buyers have to ratchet it up a notch...then another notch..then another notch. Sellers backing off and creating artificial demand. Why?
More...


We observe the same phenomenon. We have different vocabulary to describe it and a different framework to interpret those observations.

Break Outs happen on both high and low volume. Both exist both are distinct. Breaks Outs exists and at times become Failed Break Outs.

The ‘why’ comes from understanding volume. Like Russian Dolls, Faster trends nest inside slower ones. Trends can be complete or they can be interrupted.

The non-Dominant move of a trend occurs on lower volume than the move that initiated the trend.

Pullbacks and retraces at times can become reversals.

The ‘why’ is that volume leads price, no exceptions.

The only exceptions occur when there is a limited understanding and limited perception rooted in not true beliefs - just like the article in the OP elucidates.

Most beginners approach the markets with a mental morass of non-distinction they characterize as noise.

All noise can become signal as one’s discernment grows. Discernment grows by doing work. Work can be approached with logical efficiency or random irrationality or a mix of both.

We all get to choose; to make imaginary or real, obstacles in our path - stumbling blocks or stepping stones.
 
Last edited:
Nice article. Thanks for sharing! This is actually old school neuroscience, nothing surprising. We develop our vision by combining perception (visual data) and experience (motor sensory data), and only this way we develop a sense of the external world.

We should keep in mind, that there's no such thing as reality. Reality exists of course, but in our head, there is only our perception or a picture of what is out there. We can never trust 100% our perception and should know that it is only a reflection of what's outside.

Same with trading. We may think we know what is going on in the market, but this is only our understanding based on limited information processed through our brain. I like to say there is such thing as Reality Distortion Field and it bends everything we see through the lenses of our own mind. That's why we are prone to make mistakes and to see things that are not real.

So many traders fall into this trap of believing their own thoughts even if they face serious evidence they are totally on the wrong side. Best way to improve as a trader is to develop a sense to detach your decisions from your belief system.
 
tommcginnis said:
Reminds me of a cartoon that I've looked for numerous times, and never found. It shows some speaker-guy up on a stage, standing between two easels -- one of which has a drawing labeled "Ass" and the other a drawing labeled, "Hole in the ground." The speaker is holding up his finger as if to make a profound point.

The caption carries his statement: "Welcome, gentlemen, to Advanced Management Training."

God but that still cracks me up.....
More...
hB646BCE8


close enough
 
volpri said:
One of the best articles I have read in a LONG TIME. Thanks for sharing. It is kinda like orthodoxy (correct belief) vs orthopraxy (correct practice). You can have all the correct beliefs, knowledge, confidence and understanding (orthodoxy) but if you don’t do the right thing at the right time (orthopraxy) then none of a traders orthodoxy really matters.

In addition, learning on a deeper level takes place with orthopraxy as opposed to theoretical learning from orthodoxy. This said we usually need both. Orthodoxy to know what to orthopraxy (can save much time and suffering) but learning without doing is theoretical knowledge in ones experience and does not lead to success.

Some stubborn mules ONLY LEARN in the school of hard knocks......sadly...View attachment 200577
More...
%%
LOL Old school desks;
we learned back then + now
:caution::D:D
.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top