That is nice, but what if I can't tell, just what kind of opportunities the next 10-20 days bring? So I might not be able to give you a good guess on my predicted profit, but I can try my best and then you can look at my record and decide. Let's say if one starts the Combine in the summer doldrums, obviously his profit target should be lower than doing it in earnings season or around economic releases.... The point is, with a particular strategy you can't always tell how many times the set up will happen in a given timeframe... +1
I don't think TST need to fade anyone. They make good money from the business model itself, which is making money from membership and the combine fee.
Well, I nixed the soybeans conversation because I haven't tried trading them since. Unfortunately, about every session has been a sweet trend move in that symbol afterwards... including yesterday. But for the duration of this program, I expect to focus on CL alone. As carefully explained, software fumbles were part of the problem... not the whole problem. Did I do a poor job in clarifying that point several times over? The real errors are I did not press the expansion sessions and I pressed the contracted sessions in CL last week. Everything else was secondary to that. Lastly, the only reason I "pissed away" a nice day was due to focus on minimal-profit performance rather than trading for profits. That too was explained to death as well. Between you and me, if I was trading real money with no performance deadlines and up $3010 at 7:15am eastern... I am shut down and done from there. Just like I've done hundreds of times in the past for myself
Actually, if you price your trades to be truly 1:1, you need to sustain exactly a 50% win rate over the long run to break even. That is better than 95% of active day traders will ever do! Of course there are strings of losses. That is why we have a limit to our risk per trade. No big deal. Fact is if you are shooting for a higher ratio you will have more losers and longer strings of losing trades. That is just plain statistics. You are right that letting winners run is an age old adage. Most of those that teach these principles have never made money at trading. The overwhelming majority of the traders that follow this advice lose money. I personally have read chess books, studied chess, and I eventually became a master. When I put the principles in books into practice, they worked. I read poker books, studied it some more, and next thing you know I am winning, and made a living at it for 7 years. I have been studying trading for 10 years. I have followed the advice of the "experts". I have worked damn hard at it. I don't tilt or double down on losses or anything silly like that. But nothing ever worked when it came to capturing larger swings. The only time I started making money is when I just started scalping momentum on stocks. Why is it I have never seen a single "expert" produce a winning statement? Is it because they are humble and don't want people to know they've got some $$. Hell no! Look on the poker forums. Anytime one of them goes on a nice win they post that graph for all to see. I used to do it to too. People bragg all day long. I'm sure some are good enough to predict trends. I am not. Most are not. You know I like you and have defended you in the past (not that you need it), but even you have been complaining for years that the tape sucks. I've seen you post a winning blotter with the promise to keep posting for x period of time and then you are gone. I can draw a conclusion from that. Maybe the tape doesn't suck. Maybe that is just the markets. Mostly random, with some direction here and there. Why put the pressure on yourself to predict, when you can start off just reading momentum, rolling with it, and letting randomness keep you from losing too much.
50/50 will result in net loss over time when you factor in commissions, slippage and random acts of adverse price movement such as unannounced interest-rate cuts, fat-finger and flash-crash events, etc. You must do at least, at the very least 60% correct and more like 70% correct in order to make money over time with anything near 1/1 ratio. I personally have never seen anyone accomplish that... but I know a number of guys who are 40+% correct with 2/1, 3/1 or 5/1 ratios. Just because you've never seen that in your admittedly brief career does not mean it doesn't exist Like I said earlier... give it six months to one year, then judge results from long periods of time cumulative. Your current sample size is way too brief.
I have made decent profits in swing trading being right just 38% of the time. If anyone understands trading they will know exactly how that is possible. I will only say this. Every successful trader finds a way to trade that feels right and works. To presume that that is the only way anyone can trade successfully is the height of folly.
i see nodoji using al brooks, i see mav using acd, i see shopster using fibs, i use market profile,they all work and they give you targets in advance,you need to adapt to the markets,in chess you see 6 moves ahead with 6 variations,in poker you see cards gone from the deck and deduce your odds,both a form of prediction by riuling out scenarios one by one,market is no different, what have you been studying ? could it be the the finiteness of a deck of cards and the restrictions in chess give you a smaller field to analyze,if so, you may need to be less finite,those games you think inside the box, in the market you think outside the box, morgan,jpm,gs are on the outside
The only difference is mcd is not charging you $160-$400 just to apply for a job that you have a less than 5% chance of ever getting. Your example is flawed because tst is asking you to become a business partner where you supply the brains and they put up the money. Who in their right mind would not do dd on a potential business partner ? You are paid 1099. You are not an employee.
If they wanted to fade the money would be made fading the 95% that fail the combine Unless you make the unprofitable traders pay you every 2 to 4 weeks to apply for a dream
I know how it was possible... your r/r was better than 1/1 <grin> Listen, 1/1 is never that when you factor in the real-world reality of trade costs, slippage on stops and black-swan events against. I've yet to see anyone else acknowledge those realities here in this conversation. Now, I'm never one to point out problems without offering possible solutions. How about targeting +1.5 / -1.0 ratio instead? I know from experience that almost all trades that work for +1 go further than that. So how about this scenario instead: +1.5, -1.0, +1.5, -1.0, +1.5, -1.0, -1.0, +1.5, +1.5, +1.5 on ten turns. 60% correct hit rate +1.5 x six wins = +9.00 -1.0 x four losses = -4.00 net result: +5.00 on ten turns Give that a try, instead