It won't last long then. But having said that, the only objective measure of trader's success is profit (or maybe more detailed, profit in relation to other factors, such as drawdown, risk taken etc.).
Perhaps. But there's a good saying "winners are not judged". If something (doesn't matter just the belief or a real edge) makes person good trader, why second guess it and try to fix what works?
Not to be contrary but "wrong" beliefs can indeed be dealt with - once one understands how the brain really works. The emphasis on cognitive (thinking) and behavioral - or the cognitive approach to behavior - has obscured how the real basis of perception and judgment is in the senses, feelings and emotions. Once you make those explicit and treat them as data, the "wrong" beliefs begin to evaporate.
history is filled with traders who have made huge scores due to pure luck-- just like any pseudo random based reward system. You and the other TA believers simply can not deal with randomness, therefore you build a false construct to make things appear orderly-- breaking this down will be your first step to understanding how markets really work. Until then, your market view is based on delusion-- with any success attributed to money management techniques. see tharp, niederhoffer and Gallacher for further info. surf
It was Vegas and it was 2006. Thank you for being more specific on the context. In 2006, I guess you could say I was a student. I started using brownlines for peniclling charts at the beginning. I drew the master for making blank brown lines before that. I turned down a faculty position at the Jung Institute in '67 (Jim Pope was CEO.) You might have worn green, blue or green/blue. Thank you for your reply.
- in case anyone is interested in Denise's book: http://www.amazon.com/Market-Mind-G...r=8-1&keywords=denise+shull+market+mind+games
I'd rather you had not done that. This could lead to those endless scholarly lists like NTIS where they hand out numbers in batches of up to 6 at a time. Liz went on a jag on the beach in HI ordering copies of out of print books up for resale. Some of the prices get to 10X the original. Ugh!!!! If you ever get just one, get the feral dog studies. Gangs of competing feral dogs replicate almost pefectly international rivalry. You may have heard some financial agregations compete......lol Dogs beat Adam Smith, too.
I have a 3 ring called "polish sheets". It is also titled "The Book on How the Market Works". It is subtended by 28 more 3 rings. I should post here a chapter that expresses why predicting is not a requirement of trading. The randomness concept is also buried. OODA is the CW framework that generates all this long term memory you keep dredging up. Did you figure out why fighter pilots do not use TA? John Boyd made a multifeedback system for fighter pilots and qwuants applied it to your randomness. Making money at 20 to 25% a year is like what happens before lunch when MADA is used. We suggest to you that "you always know you know". Deduction proves OODA is untrue as a market betting system. Granularity of variables makes ALL market systems finite math problems. Therefore, by deduction, there is NO betting ever required. Can you figure out from algebra how simultaneous equations work? Count the market variables. Write this down as a number. That is the number of simultaneous equations you need if you only use those variables as mentioned in OODA. There are four questions. The first one has been posted and answered. What maths is used to do the operation of the market? Ans: finite. Monitor.....Analyze.....Decide.....Act....(MADA, 1957) This replaces the OODA of CW. The emotions are: support, comfort and confidence.... WHY? Answer: because, for all the events, "you know that you know". BUT you know all the "time" it is "random". The emotions that come with your life are: fear, anxiety and anger. WHY? You do NOT "know that you know". You are a not head. Get he NLP picture.