Jack, is there need to deal with partial fills when you are at 50 contracts(non-dom trade), or it`s just ok to enter 50 lot a pop? tnx
I got 600k and need to go out and spend some, while you are improving your Anglish , sucking your mammy`s tit and poop with your granny`s doughnuts
50 contacts a pop works quite well. If you re doing a multiple of 50 ,you can stay under the radar more easily if you do multiple pops. Carving can be both ways. Since I reverse trade, I consider leaving the order level at 50 and do the exit and rentry as two pops (pop pairs). If you are dealing with multipes of 50, then you keep doing pairs of pops to eat up the total hold ser of contracts. When trading point to point on patterns, coming off the LTL is more "spikey" that coming off the RTL. I watch the OTR and space closer together on dom to non dom trades (LTL'd and VE;s) and conversely on non to dom trades a spread the partials out more. Among other time frame signals, The PRV on volume and the FTT 's on YM are the "smoothest" indicators for each of these reversals. You will see a P on the TN charts which is a measure of "acceleration" of volume coming into volume peaks. (this uses three volume values and can repeat on strong move endings). When regarding the capacity of the markets, you can follow how many partial fills your print shows on these turns. Going into midday you will have to spread the time interval among multiple 50 lot blocks. This means start a little earlier and end as soon as possible. Study the 2 pairs on the OTR for the shift in how long each pair's dwell is dominant and note the ratio of times. On a short to long the dominance of upper pair happens before the dominance on the lower pair. Then it is equal dwell then it is the opposite dwell that dominants. Calibrate yourself to see how often you sample observations. you will notice you can sample much more rapidly that the pairs are flip flopping. On the set of indicators (MACD and fast and slow Stoch) you also get to see the flopping of the ends of lines from down mostly to flat and then flat mostly to up. All these rhythms are easy to get used to even at te expert level of 20 the 40 turns over RTH's.
Thank you for reading my post to make your judgement. Recently, you were able to engage in asking questions of two other posters who were articulating their respective sensitivities to two approaches for extracting the market's off technically. If you note that I am engaging in answering questions of others, why not take some first steps to quiry them about their questions and what my answrs helped them learn or consider? The risk you face is fairly great. It is the same as Acruary faced when he went through the process of reorienting hs trading from one method to another. Acruary was a brave person to tell his story of his new self realization. The is little chance that you will become converant with the category of traders aptly named by the owners of Tradr'sExpo, to wit: "Great Traders You Have Never Heard Of". Groups of four of such traders appeard at each Expo and were hosted by te owner of Expo for two hour sessions so they could interact to prepared questions, They always met at lunch before the session to determine the question set. One especially nice aspect of the sessions was the transition from the moderator introducing questions to a period where the experts jusat interacted among themselves by maintaining a high quality of discourse. Your knowledge seems to be stuck at the "Trend Following" book levels. We both deal with quants, you from the materials gathering viwpoint as Bass did when writing "The Predictors" I on the otherhand, having trained in theoretical phyics, deal with quants and their managers on a colleagual basis. you probably feel what they say to you is "gibberish" because of the cast diffence in your training compared to yours. I do not find anyone's comprehensive approach to trading as gibberish. Certainly most approaches do not approach the market's offer. It seems to me, you have a range of "believability" for trading results that are possible. It may be that this range is the renge you established by reference to Henry to get the ball rolling in your book which came as a consequence of 8 hazardous years of a journey. This is roughly 1/6th of my trading years. For the record, I do what I post to help others learning to do what I do. You may want to consider that my range of performance is just beyond your range of "believability". Maybe it is based upon you brief experience in observing the trading world from the outside. Would it be possible if you did not understand something for you to go beyond asking for clarification instead of making an unfounded judgment like "gibberish"? Why not learn a little about trading by and getting some coaching from someone in the business. Give Schwager a read to find out how the wizards get their levels of performance.