Dear ElectricSavant, You never did answer my question. Namely, "Out of the first 1000 people trading in any given market on any given day... are you saying that none of them are gambling?" What say you? And lastly a last comment. No disrespect meant, just an observation. I think your concept of "unrealized losses" is a dangerous financial shell game that will come crashing down around you when you encounter a steady trend. This is not to say that your approach is not a reasonable way to trade much of the time. It is meant to say that your not taking the downside or weakness of your approach fully into concideration may just bite you bigger than you are accounting for... I say that because it seems that you are defining your system as one which cannot lose. Best regards- Peace and gtty, Lar
Lar, You never did answer my question. Namely, "Out of the first 1000 people trading in any given market on any given day... are you saying that none of them are gambling?" What say you? Well, if you look at the poll, apparantly not. And lastly a last comment. No disrespect meant, just an observation. Of Course not, not taken that way. I think your concept of "unrealized losses" is a dangerous financial shell game that will come crashing down around you when you encounter a steady trend. In system #1 or #2 or both? Yes if you trade just one instrument, and especially if you trade several that move together This is not to say that your approach is not a reasonable way to trade much of the time. It is meant to say that your not taking the downside or weakness of your approach fully into concideration may just bite you bigger than you are accounting for... I say that because it seems that you are defining your system as one which cannot lose. If the nature of the instrument in System#1 proves true, then it is a mathematical exercise. Again, if the deviation is 3 times longer then the final destination, then there can be a trade size developed to make a profit without gambling. (maybe the deviation is 12 times in some instruments and perhaps I am being kind, by saying 3 times) Look at your 10Y range like the deck of a swimming pool. Look at the water as where the money is made. The level goes up and down. As it goes up and down, it is defining what percentage of the max 10Y range it occupies. As far as Buy and Hold... and never taking losses....or cutting your losses. This can be used in these systems and all three are in System#2. We have not discussed parity much in System#1, as this is a poll and not the purpose of the thread. Folks, should we try some more examples to demonstrate that trading is not gambling?...Your turn. I invite those of you who think trading is not gambling to demonstrate by example. LoL....What say you? Please Vote. archive your thoughts here and go down in ET history! Michael B.
Hi ElectricSavant, I wasn't interested in the results of the poll... I am interested in YOUR opinion. Namely, "Out of the first 1000 people trading in any given market on any given day... are you saying that none of them are gambling?" What say you?
I have never stated that folks do not gamble in trading...So to answer your question, No I am not saying that some of those people are gambling or not... I used to gamble, as I stated in my opening arguments. I just have found a way to take the gambling meter down to zero DYNAMICALLY...and wanted to demonstrate HOW, by example. Lar...There are several threads in ET demonstrating the age-old argumnents here. Lets try to make this thread different. Lets prove it out, by examples. Now please there is another thread for gambling...put your gambling examples there... FOLKS YOU CAN CHANGE YOUR VOTE...CONTACT A MODERATOR... Michael B.
I will say this again. Nothing trades in a straight line...and if you can measure its deviation...then you can alter the time and the size of your trades to take the "gamble" out of trading. Guess what!, you clever ones could do this dynamically. Even if the range is infinity, you could reverse-calibrate the time that you desire... Michael B.
lar, come on...persuade me...I'm sorry. Please I do not want to have a closed mind. I do not want to present myself as being on a quest. I like your comments and find your posts interesting. Ask anybody here. I always try to be honest in my posts. I will tell you if I think gambling is trading or vice versa... Here is a secret, I believe all of you are correct. but lets examine a way that removes the gamble. I say it is there. Michael B.
Hello Electric, I did vote and it was that trading isn't gambling in my eyes, however in others it is. It depends upon your perspective which can be very subjective. For those without rules and sound money management to limit losses, it can be just like gambling. For those with rules and a strategy that gives them a positive expectancy over time, it isn't. Another thing to consider is why does an individual gamble or trade? If you're after the thrill or rush that comes from being in the moment, with the chance of an outcome in your favor, which excites you, I'd say you're a gambling. Though they are excellent gamblers who understand risk, and have the discipline to cut losses, in order to continue to be able to play the game or another one, and not for the thrill of it. Should you choose to see it from a business perspective. Where there are outcomes that have a higher probability than others, and even some that don't. Then make a chioce to limit your exposure on any one trade or bet, I'd have to say you're not. What is it seek from the outcome? For for some it's the process, the end result is a $ figure. In gambling on any one hand or pull of the handle, or roll of the dice, or spin of the wheel, what you place is gone should you be wrong. In a trade, one does have the option of exiting with only a partial loss, do we not? Exercising that option though is another matter. Of course neither gamblers or traders should ever bet the wad at one time, but it happens. Have a Great Day! Kelly