The way I like to think about trading is by taking the same mentality that a basketball player would to his game. You can't just pick up a basketball and have a goal of scoring 30 points in a game. What you need to do is practice and focus on your mechanics and fundamentals and if you score 30 then that is a byproduct of the process. What I think Mav is trying to say is that if you focus on the process and the development, much like a basketball player does in practice, then the money will flow from there and you can have long-term success.
OK... I'm back... Disregard previous example... We're looking at mutually exclusive events by the law of union of probabilities... so that's... Let's do -.1 from 5/10 or 1/2 to get... 4.9/10 to account for the loss due to commission... So the probability of getting a winning trade increases with every trade to where it is more than certain... BUT... this is deceptive due to the fact that your actual chance hasn't changed... Over 10 trades this is... 4.9/10+4.9/10+4.9/10... 490/10 = 49/1 BUT on every trade your chance is still 4.9/10... At least in this example. Law of Total Probability http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Total_probability Total probability can't be applied here because we're not doing conditional probability... That is... We're not measuring... what the total probability of getting a winning trade is if we get a previous winning trade.
You guys don't get it... Basketball has boundaries and rules... trading doesn't except that the game is over when a security goes to zero... It's actually worse than a coin flip because of the fact that coin flips have set payouts... Trading doesn't... If you get a trade right it doesn't actually mean that you can get the 1:1 payout that you would on a coinflip... It's open ended which makes it completely unpredictable. You can make 3 times as much or roll back down to a stop loss.
every game has it's rules , trading within topsteps rules is where you have to adjust,the loss limit is a tight leash and as a funding company to the unknown,passing this test reduces their odds of funding a losing trader,adhering to these rules until they get to know you is a beginners step to a future,they don't make it easy and they are looking for a low risk trader,that's not to say your viewpoint is wrong, it just needs to adapt to theirs if you want to pass the combine,if that's anyone's wish,practice under those rules until you have it down. then join the combine
m2c - Basketball's a decent analogy. Shots are like trades. Driving to the lane for a layup is a risk/return. You're trading the chance of getting fouled, blocked, turnover for a chance at getting close to the basket. Everyone wants to be able to shoot from 1ft away, and everyone will try to stop you - for you to be successful you need to figure out a way to take that shot and succeed more often than not. ...or, like in trading, you can choose a different strategy. Maybe you work on your three pointers instead, or you work on being the first guy down the floor for fast break chances, or not, maybe you decide you should be a coach. Each strategy though has a commensurate reward for the risk. You get really good by capturing that premium without the normal downside...and then you become the poster boy for Nike and buy the Bobcats.
Yeah, TST even says somewhere that scouting criteria is subjective and that some who pass the combine may be asked to repeat it. So if you're gambling and get lucky and put up great numbers... you're obviously not going to get funded. You've got to be a solid trader.
1) How do you objectively distinguish between "gambling" and "solid trading"? 2) The firm needs to have a "bias" towards funding people than not in order to maintain confidence among those in the combine.
I don't know how they'd make that distinction, but when I read that passing the combine does not necessarily guarantee funding I figured that had to be as a security measure to protect themselves from potentially funding someone they weren't comfortable with.