I sent him the same stuff I sent you, Joab. Perhaps, he didn't recognize the value, or as of yet, not had time to review. Trading clearly moves from the 'gambling' paradigm (and well outside the box) when one 'sees' market changes as they occur (and often well in advance). Yes I voted (early and often). - Spydertrader
Trading can be gambling or not depending on what type of a trader you are. For professional traders, bank traders, hedge fund managers trading is not gambling but a business (or a job). usually those traders are well trained and experienced, well capitalized and have access to the best resources. This is their edge (not some stupid system backtested on past data). For undercapitalized, part timers, small speculators unfortunately trading is gambling. Only a few lucky ones (and persistent) will become professional traders (not gamblers). So the question should be: Is your trading gambling or not?
You're kidding right? Some managers of billions of opm are the biggest gamblers of all (and justifiably so).
Folks, I need to inform you that SpyderTrader has defined Market movement with Jack Hershey's methods. I can now tell you that I know of several methods and now SpyderTraders educational way to view the market, that leaves no doubt about trading being "not gambling". Reaction to price AS IT IS HAPPENING removes all risk. I should have considered SpyderTraders earlier PM....I thought he was just another crackpot...but I have now spoken to him on the phone and he is quite a serious fellow that is the trader that is trading for the esssence of trading, and not only for the money. Donald Trump said that he tried to improve efficiency and make things better within the companies that he took over...the money just came... I gotta go to the gym soon...cya Michael B.
I don't know exactly what you refer to, I've been there and done it on quite a few occasions (reacting, rather than positioning for a move) and I can tell you and I am sure will not be the only one to admit that it is a hit and miss scenario. So unless, you elaborate as to what reaction you refer to, it's still a gamble as far as I am concerned. Last Friday I've positioned for a move in EUR/USD approximately 1 hour prior to the move happening, due to technical problems I had to pull out of the trade with 20 pips gain, it moved ~100 pips soon after I believe. There was a temporary drawdown of ~20 pips. Now, a person reacting to the move would have profited this time looking at 1 min chart, other times you can easily get +20-30 scenario within a couple of minutes. So how can reaction to a move be profitable 100% unless you are after 1 pip, even that price target can not be viewed as 100% safe. So I would like to hear what Spyder's told you
I've borrowed this paragraph from a recent review of a FX broker by one of the ET members. After reading one can see that at times trading is very gamblesome due to 'Force Major' situations, which do happen, I personally had a horrible experience with X_Trader platform, which has cost me a bundle. Here is an extract from the review: - "I recently had a very bad experience with their trading desk. I entered at market during the Dec 8 NFP surprise, was filled in a few seconds with about 14 points of slippage (not so bad), and was in profit by more than 30 pips. I then went to close the trade as price seemed to stall, and for more than five minutes my order at market was rejected because "the market moved." However, the market was not moving more than 10 pips at a time at that point and my close order was, after all, "at market." The next best price should have kicked in -- so I called the trading desk. A dealer picked up after about 10 rings and said "Trading Desk..." I provided my account number, indicated that I was on the No Dealing Desk platform, gave my name and said "I want to close my position." The position was at breakeven at that point, but I wanted out. I was then put on hold and after a few minutes an agent from customer service picked up the line. This was totally disorienting. I then asked to close the position again, not quite believing what I heard. The operator said she couldn't help me and that she was transferring me to the trading desk. My position was now 15 pips in the red. (Wasn't I just talking to the guy at the Trading Desk?) After another two or three minutes, another person at the trading desk picked up the phone and the market had moved 70 pips against me. She offered to "close at market." When I told her that is what I asked the last guy to do almost ten minutes prior, she seemed unapologetic and said that because I was on the NDD platform all she could do was close the position. I replied, "Now that the market has moved 70 points against me, I can probably do that myself [insert appropriate expletive here]." Sure enough, my latest order went through, for a close at -73."
Another quality extract: - "The way I look at gambling and trading is this: In gambling, the house always has an edge. It varies by game, but they always have an edge. If they have a 1% edge, then for every million dollars bet, they will get $10,000 in revenue. If they run $100 million through that game, they will get $1 million in revenue. In casinos, some people win big, some people lose big. But statistically, the house knows that its edge will bring in the revenue. As a gambler against the house, you cannot get around it. You can, however, play games that have the least house edge and you can use prudent risk and money management to make a living gambling. It is possible and there are guys doing it. But that does not mean the house will still not get its revenue from others, like Aunt Martha and Cousin Bob. With trading, I am the house. I have the edge (side note: if you don't have an edge, you should not be trading). Your edge could be a particular setup that works 58% of the time. That's an edge. You could have a setup that works only 30% of the time, but your edge is taking frequent small stops and riding very large gains when you are right. That's a legitimate edge. Likewise, in spread betting you have to beat the spread. The point is, trading is like owning a casino. It is not like being a casino customer. That's why I get a little ruffled when uninformed people (usually well-meaning friends or relatives) say "Trading is gambling." They are, of course, correct. But in Vegas, the house gambles, too -- against the customers. Do they lose? Of course not. They have an edge. You have to beat the spread. Gotta have an edge and beat the spread. That's the grail."