Crushed

Not quite, trending part was working well before too but it felt unnatural for me for the reasons previously stated. I think mean reversion still works but for a slightly longer term (holding for days, not daytrading).

 

call it mean reversion or countertrend trading, i know a few of these traders, i'm sometimes a countertrend trader,there are usually 3 a month, the biggest losing days are always these trend days , learn to spot em, I ust the uvol chart and add a dvol comparison, when either the dvol or uvol flatlines and the other rises all day, its a trendday, if you watch it long enough, no psychology needed, you will have trend(muscle) memory, and you wont fade on those days

 

correct, today was not a day for those who were hoping for LONG trade to make money.

Keeping losses small is the rule #1 to stay on the battlefield and gain ground.

I am still not good at this rule but learning.

 

yepper
alot of 'systems and methodoligies' work just fine if youre willing to stomach 20K worht of losses you take before the system hits the run ups that pay you back

personally - I aint gonna drop 20K on my way to making money

 

that happened to me today,

I was up maybe 15 days in a row, got killed today, killed. was long before the ISM, got killed, bought thinking for a pull back, crushed when Ben was speaking, then tried to go long at the close and got crushed again.

lost around $4000 today.

keep the losers small! I let BNI kill me today, lost over $2000 on that alone

 

I'll throw this out there. In order to keep losses small, know where you are wrong before you enter the trade.

 

RTM - 90% win ratio but get crushed once or twice a month which wipes out half the monthly gain(if successful trader).

Trends - 50% win ratio. no disaster days. few monster days per month which is basically all your profits.

If you are an avid RTM trader, you probably cannot avoid those disaster days, discretionary/auto or not.

 

The gospel truth.

 

Some interesting dialogue in this thread.

The three compatriots, bridenour, me2, and forsalenyc, have a common and very interesting orientation.

It may be possible for them to leave behind their common plight.

Over the course of time since the internet has afforded interaction among civilized people, it has been common to see people of like mind flesh out their views and empathize and commisserate. This is very civil and allows for people to feel that they are in similar boats.

To comment on steps that may forward people in various boats is uncommon. People defend their viewpoints to the exclusion of being able to move forward.

A flag comes up for me as I read each post in this thread. The discussion of the 01OCT09 was very informative. By any standard, it is now clear what happened.

But what is more important, for any group in a given boat, is understanding the "context" of what it is that they do.

This group failed as did all the other group orientations whose members commented here.

This became a lesson for each group and the skippers of each boat as they conduct their individual persuasive efforts.

I will solve your dilemma by changing where you sit and float. Then, by being away from your contemporaty dilemmas, you can attain a means of moving forward down your respective paths. Make a note to read traderzones very recent comment about me first.

We are in an inverted saucer that is formed or many pieces much in the same way a stone arch would be formed in a large building or a Roman viaduct. There is a keystone.

None of your systems have a means of dealing with the stones that make up the arch. A stone is a segment that begins and ends and placing it has little to do with anything but the very stone.

you slip along adding on the right and deleting on the left. This is your NOT dealing with non stationarity. Put together the day's charts for the week on a common scale. Each day is NOT a stone. Stones are SEEN as units within a stationary window whose left and right sides are determined very systematically and scientifically.

So none of you do this. The reason is your mathematical basis of operation is simplistic and unsophisticated.

Think about being able to ID the stones in this arch. It is over but you may wish to discover how to change your codes to make such happenings available at the time they occur.

Lets move on.

You do not take into account the discontinuities from day to day. Take the index you are using and discover its two different "instrument" characteristics. Each instument is decidedly different according to any common set of criteria desriptive determinent elements. During RTH it is one instrument and in between it is another totally different instrument. Look at the "before" open news between the 01OCT and 02OCT; adress the "behavior. Returning to discontinuities: take these discontinuities out of the ATS's you use.

Thirdly, news during RTH has been discussed.

No one skippering any of the boats is addressing this either. In terms of market contest, there certainly is a ay to handle news scientifically as well. Put it on the list of things to do.

Summary.

I am making a power statement here whose purpose is to apply one theme of thinking to three separate problems that are not being handled. What a problem is has been apply defined in the prior dialogue among the contributors. Every poster has these common problems regardless of trading approach. That is the source of the universal empathy and commisseration.

In mathematics, there is an applicable term that covers all the bases. you fail to deal with points of inflection. the deepest causal factor is the lack of ability or effort to deal with varying the width of the non stationary window. Obviously, a lot of traders DO NOT VARY THE WIDTH OF THE NONSTATIONARY WINDOW. In 12 step programs, admitting this or that is a step. In dilemmas, the important thing is to change the existing problem to another problem. Deal with non stationarity so that when it is important you can see points of inflection. Obviously one solution, see red necks second post of his career here, you can do what he did unconsciously and unawares but did not reap the benefits of, ever.

Between bar 19 and bar 20 of the 01OCT09, a point of inflection occurred.

Going forward in my summary assume that all approaches take into account having to have a varying non stationary window whose width change is triggered by signals as the "status" of the market changes. This brings up bieng able, consequently, to time the market. Market timing is a consequence of handling the market's sentiment. The main event for mean reversion is simply when reversion is or is not in effect. Long ago I used to post how this was done. In modern times not many people have the need for this. The group I mentioned, however, is just embarking down the MLR path. So examine an extension of my first solution for you. Take a look at the first derivative of the relative angles of the three MLR redneck could have suggested if he knew anything about MLR.suggested. I used to call this the "pinwheel" and it may have been before ET was invented.

Finally, for those on any sort of intellectual path, Where you arrive at some point is at the certainty of "knowing that you know" all of the time and this precludes any need for discretion at any time.

Knowing that you know has nothing to do with the future; it is related to the only time available for trading. Namely, the Present. Obviously, it is good to have leading indicators of the Present. that is what I have provided in changing the Dilemma to a problem which, in turn, has a solution (constructed above).

I did the solution before ET was invented, probably, and stayed with the original approach, well known, in 1957.

I'm not in your boat nor am I in anyone else's boat. Trading for a long time allows a person to look back at younger people who are doing their things.

There is but one pattern in markets and it deals with non stationarity. The market gives you the pattern, simply stated. As redneck thought up when he first posted (the market is fractal in nature), thus, unknown to redneck, the pattern is "nested" in each fractal. The pattern dictates its measure. The measure dictates the applied math.

The pattern necessarily dals with a combination of the market variables. There are many boats afloat that did not ship out with both variables. Obviously, the pattern is NOT observable to them. MLR does not afford a person the opportunity to see the pattern. The solution to be able to observe the pattern is to add the variable that was neglected. How about it? Will the people in your boat do that or will they abandon

 

I don't think any trader can avoid disaster days. The trick is keeping the losses manageable in relation to profits, and your equity curve fairly smooth.