Trading should be boring not exciting. If you are excited or even fearful about taking a trade then you are on the wrong path. You need a plan that you have verified and put it in to action. If you started a new business would you just guess at what works or take a proven model that works and follow it to a T?
I agree. A key concept here is "verified." For me, it took two years of testing and keeping meticulous statistics until I identified my first profitable setup. Just one. That setup gave me relatively few trades, but they were consistently profitable trades. Over a period of 18 years I've added 8 other statistically verified setups. Good trading is tedious, requires meticulous attention to detail... and is boring as hell.
http://www.terrapinn.com/2010/hftusa/ Evaluate the market impact of high frequency trading and harness its potential by attending North America's premier HFT conference Join the leading hedge funds, proprietary traders, asset managers, brokers, exchanges, technology providers and institutional investors as they explore the opportunities and challenges ahead for HFTEvaluate the market impact of high frequency trading and harness its potential by attending North America's premier HFT conference Join the leading hedge funds, proprietary traders, asset managers, brokers, exchanges, technology providers and institutional investors as they explore the opportunities and challenges ahead for HFT http://www.terrapinn.com/2010/hfteurope/ The High Frequency Trading World Conference is the premier European forum for fund managers, algorithmic traders, brokers and exchanges
A man in a hot air balloon realised he was lost. He reduced his altitude and saw a man below. "Excuse me, but can you help me? I promised a friend I would meet him an hour ago but I don't know where I am," he said. The man below replied: "You are in a hot air balloon hovering approximately 30 ft above the ground. You are between 40 and 41 degrees North latitude and between 56 and 57 degrees West longitude." To which the balloonist replied: "You must be a broker." To which the man on the ground said: "I am, but how did you know?" The reply came from above: "Everything you told me is technically correct but I have no idea what to make of your information, and the fact is I'm still lost. Frankly, you've not been much help so far." The man below responded: "You must be a trader." To which the balloonist replied: "Yes, I am, but how did you know?" To which the man on the ground said: "You don't know where you are or where you are going. You have risen to your current position due to a large quantity of hot air. You made a promise which you have no idea how to keep and you expect me to solve your problem. The fact is, you are in exactly the same position you were in before we met, but now, somehow, it's my fault."
Here is a recent post from another thread that I think is very well-written and largely (although not verbatim) agree with:
Hi Badeco, interesting first post. Haven't read this thread in it's entirety so forgive my impatience. That said, and forgive the irony, 3 years is nothing in this game. I have blown 3 accts, worked some horrible jobs to get a stake. This profession has helped me grow as a person but I had to grow first!? "They" say you can't beat the markets, experience tells you when you can take a cheap shot.
I have been at the "game" for thirty years, last 23 years day trading, only thing that has changed is ease of getting in and out, charting, average age has gotten much lower of trader, margins much lower. But the barcharts have not changed, one might say the ranges have gotten larger, but bar charts make same patterns. I have wheat charts going back to 1920's, they make same patterns as yesterday. People lose for a host of reasons, usually poor discipline, but most often their inability to backtest over mountains of data. And for those who can't code, your testing have to be well defined. Too many have this "need" to either be right or make a boatload of money. Those of us who have put in the years, concentrate on totally different designs of methods to trade. I don't seek methods that will give the most profits, I don't seek more signals. We grow up hearing "More, More, More", but in day trading, having to pay commisions, it really is "Less, Less, Less". People make methods that are often too hard and too many. Find one method for entry, then the important aspect of trading are the 30 plus rules on how to manage the trade after you are in. And some of those rules are when to bypass your signal. I get some signals to enter but cause of the volitility is too great, I pass on them. Too many try to make the losing trades either become winners or a way where the signal does not come up at all. I learn so little from losing trades, I study why the winners were profitable. Too many have an all or nothing approach, either make or lose, how bout the "tie", find all the ways a trade can become a tie. Most of my profitable trades become this way very fast, they don't "hang" around. Did you do testing to discover how long till your trade hit a target? Did you test how long before it became a loss? So if after so many minutes of doing nothing but drifting, why not try to get out at breakeven? At what point can you bring your protective stop up to breakeven? Do you have rules on how to trail your stops, where are your targets? Vendors, Trading schools, chat rooms, if you are going to PAY these people, ask them for brokerage statments, if you pay them without brokerage statements-like jumping out of a plane wondering if there is a parachute or dirty underwear on your back.