Lucias, where did I ever say I didn't believe in edges?? I had lots of edges in the 80s and 90s with the best being the datelining of international funds, the closest thing to a free lunch on Wall Street as there ever was. I also had the edge of trading at INVESCO and Strong funds where you could trade in and out of their funds at will and commission free. Then there were the edges of playing the new fund effect. Those edges may be gone now but there are still edges. For instance, my best month last year was October. Why? A sort of obscure datelining in the bond market since the cash bond markets were closed on Columbus Day while the stock market was opened and it soared that day. But you could still buy junk bond funds that day knowing they would be unchanged but would follow through on the stock market's big rally the next day when cash bonds reopened. So I made a much larger than normal purchase on Columbus day in junk and although the follow through wasn't as much as I expected the rest of the month they just kept moving up day after day. This decade my edge has been the junk bond market. But that is a story for another time. Just because one such as myself doesn't have any special trading skills or talents doesn't mean one can't have some edges gained from market knowledge and discipline. You are way too controversial and this isn't the first time you misrepresented me. I truly wish you the best of luck in trading real money and hope someday, like I did, that you can validate yourself via real money trading statements. But please, in the future, delete me completely from your posts. You seem like an honest guy and all that but just because you read a book I wrote over 12 years ago doesn't make me your mentor.
Yes, in his book he wrote a lot about how he technical analysis, didn't have any special skills etc. He wrote about how trading systems didn't work (for long periods of time) and how he couldn't afford to go for long periods without making money. I agree with all of that. I won't reference him any more, to his wishes. I don't know why people here are so ignorant to the fact I have 2 of the best tracked records at C2. I've said this many times. I can't post the links here due to rules. Most of the people reading this are just too ignorant, read too sloppy for me to bother with. I believe I mentioned my discretionary hypothetical did 60% with max 13% dd since inception. I believe I mention my system did 55% with 33% max dd. I believe I mentioned that I had a subscriber taking all my trades live in the market, trading 5-8 lots in ES and he made about 12k-13k real money over 3 months. This still must be treated hypothetical. Every real money trade is recorded. He didn't keep good records and so I don't know what exactly what he made but that's what my system returned. I checked his results on 2 days and they were in-line with hypothetical. Other people taking my signals have made thousands of dollars. That's recorded too. Every signal that had a real money trade has a button you can click and see what was taken using the autotrading system. I kinda realize now... I will end this journal. Nobody here has a clue even. To those who believe, in edges.. I have systems that have produced 120% every year for past 10 years. I have built systems. I know the difference between elite discretionary trading vs "edges".. I've been successful with both games. There is way too much emphasis put into edge. Achilles.. I've said it a dozen times. I don't answer to you. I'm not going to prove anything to anyone here because I don't work for you. I don't owe you anything. I've already mentioned my success in predicting the market... I've already mentioned my recorded success from my systems.. which does far surpass my favorite author's public track record. I've already did things that Dr. Steenbarger didn't do.. such as publishing all my trades. All my signals. I've already did things that Don Miller didn't do but claimed too. I can't think of anyone offering trading education who has a more transparent, more easily accessible, more honest, and better tracked record then myself. I don't NEED to trade real money to prove my worth or my abilities. And, again I'll never answer to you. In years to come, you will understand how foolish you are.. you will realize how ignorant you really were. But that's not going to be my doing.. that was your doing. My focus is 100% on my performance.. As such, now it is the time for me to focus 100% on my performance...
You can visualize the rally track in your head as much as you want (simulate), at some point you actually need to step into the car to drive and make a good track time (trade). While the simulation helps, you can always reset it. The same applies to your C2 account, when things go wrong you can make another system and you wouldn't have lost a dime (only potential future customer revenue). When you trade your own money, the idea of failure becomes much more serious. If you were truly convinced in your methods, you'd do all you can to get your account properly funded (even if it meant borrowing). When and if you reach this point of confidence, you will feel like every moment you are trading your system, you are losing money. Most of us have been cocky and overly confident at some point, in the end we need to grow out of it and recognize the risks involved in trading, objectively. When you do that and still remain overly confident, you are either a great trader or completely stupid. I'd also request a link to your C2 system or at least the name of it as you use it as verification of your performance.
Question+Answer scenario Question: You've refered to Gary Smith as your mentor even though you only read his book. He's cited you as misrepresenting him. Can you elaborate on this? Answer: First, I originally referred to him as my "book mentor". I don't like the way that sounds though and overtime I just shortened it. He's probably correct that I'm using the wrong terminology..I don't kow the proper vocabulary. But certainly HIS BOOK influenced me greatly. As for the misrepresenting, I have read the book over 5x, and I don't think I've misrepresented anything. However, it is hard to express anything fully and accurately. It takes what 4 GIGABYTE to store a 2 hour DVD.. obviously there is no way with a few words to express a much more complex reality. This is why I've gave him a pass without correcint him or citing references. But, I've read the book many times and know and agree with many of the ideas that he expressed. However, I've, also, expanded on that. I've understood the things he were struggling with and found the answers. Answers that I offered to share with him but that he refused. These are the answers to the questions he grappled with. If I so desired too then i'm sure I could find many references to back up anything I've ever attributed to his book. Question: Can you expand on how what you mean that you discovered answers to questions he sought? Answer: I'm not interested in sharing these answers at this time. It would give too much away. Its not about edges but about other matters. Question: Speaking of edges, you've been cited as saying edges don't exist? Answer: First, I have dozens of paradigms that I operate on the market with. I don't claim any single paradigm is the truth. What most people talk about as edges though are really just tendencies that may not exist in the future. This is expressed with statistical notions such as non stationarity and with philosophical underpinnings such as the Turing machine makes it impossible to prove any statement about the future until it has passed. Gary wrote to much effect about the limitations of systems and how he operated on the market with a much less rigid and dynamic basis. He wrote for example about how these systems might go flat for years or just quit working. I've had good success with both programmed systems and discretionary trading. I thus have a unique experience of attaining a rather high degree of success in both. I've a good understanding of how many professionals trade, as well. I'm of the belief that the trader with a richer understanding, a more complex understanding of the market, a more discretionary understanding is better preprared for long term success. Ray Barros made the distinction between a methodology vs a gimmick and I liked that analogy. This doesn't mean I don't believe that traders shouldn't have systems. To the contrary, I have systems and they help a lot.. I view them as "profit centers" or traders I can put into the game when I'm too tired or unable to trade. But edges? People talk about edges as if they were absolute. I imagine that if anyone knows what an edge is then Bob Bright would know and you know what business he's in? He's in the broker business. The broker is the only game with a true edge -- that and pure arbitrage. Question: What about proving your ability? Some people don't feel that what you've did has any merit because it was hypothetical. Answer: First, I'm willing to challenge anyone here from Don Bright, Professor Bone, Gary Smith, Maverick - even Bob Bright. I'm willing to challenge anyone in directional trading the S&P 500, predicting it or the market in advance, and I'm confident that I'll trounce all of them handidly in day trading. I mean that I'm willing to demonstrate my abilities for a worthwhile reward. This gesture is strictly a ploy for anyone foolish enough to play into it -- to benefit me. But, I've no interest in proving my abilities. Most people end up latching on to 'end result' ideas, that is jump thinking without taking a step back to understand the path, that is the ideas that led up that thought. Its a shortcut thinking and this is where most people go wrong. I mean I've spent 3 years+ saving for my little 6k account. These guys are millionaires. The notion that my trading a real money small account vs them just isn't comparable. Likewise, I mean let's say I double this account. There are traders who will say that's just because you were trading a micro account. that it doesn't mean anything because its not a million dollars.. Others will say okay you did that iwth a million but its not meaningful to the average guy with a 50k account.. You see why I don't play this game. That's why I don't answer to you. Yes, for me my record and my accomplishments whether in written form, with 6k, or a 50k are all meaningful to me. I don't subscribe to your beleifs. I don't see any fair way to make a real money competition. You could do it where everyone had to put up a fixed % of their net wealth and then they'd be trading everything against my little 6k account. You could do it on earning potential and time value of money. I mean you could do a lot of things. The end result you see how meaningless it is to compare yourself to others. What is more worthwhile in terms of seeing trading ability is to create a contest that has tight risk controls built in and uses very accurate simulation, which is possible with OEC Demos which montor the book. I mean max % loss per day, max loss per position, cut backs.. that would answer something as to ability. I would think PFG Best would be interested in sponsoring such a competition but I haven't seen that. The reward needs to be worthwhile too.. which might be difficult to many to come up with. Question: Let's go back, you mention "jump thinking", can you elaborate? Me: Yes and this is where both Gary and I are in agreement. There are vendors out there who are claiming to trade for a living who probably can't even trade for a profit. Any reasonble person should demand they produce records or don't give them your money! In this case, there is a legitament basis to demand they produce some proof. However, I've never CLAIMED to trade for a living. I've made it abundantly clear that much of my trading has been hypothetical. I am thus not compelled to do anything. There is no reward for me to produce anything. I'm not a SUBSCRIBER to YOUR ideas about what is meaningful. I don't report to you, not responsible to you, and therefore not obligated to do anything. What I've received is more of the greedy notion from some people who feel that I owe them something. I don't. Question: And, yet you've produced some of the most detailed trading track records of anyone with your C2 recrods. Answer: Exactly.. this is the preposterous thing. Don Miller claimed to bring transparency but made a blog full of fluff. I've got evey trade out there I made for past year available to anyone to see. I've got real-money fills that are reported from brokerage accounts of my subscribers making thousands of dollar. I do believe that Gary Smith is profitable but the only record that i know that exist in the PD (public domain) is his record where he didn't do well in a trading contest. Dr. Steenbarger wrote little affirmations on a website.. I've produced a winning track record and only received what for it? What for it? I'm out of that. I guess for bringing truth.. i get flack.. Show me any vendor or education provider with track records as public, transparent, as third party, and easily accessible as my own. You won't find any! You won't find a single one. Question: What do you say regarding some who claim you've an inflated ego? What are your plans going forward? Answer: I believe its important to be strong when you step up to trade. I disagree with Gary on this notion. But, I also believe you have to be ruthlessy honest.. I may have a large ego but I'm also brutally honest with myself. And i see that combination working well. Remember also that Dr. Steenbarger discouraged me from trading. This is someone who claims to want to inspire people to performance. Bone was rather nasty to me. Even Gary now doesn't want to be associated with me.. I call it the smell of winning and it smells good to me. As far as plans, I haven't made anything tangible from selling signals. I'm pessimistic that there is any reward in that. My plan is to just to keep training, keep working, and just do my best. I don't see myself answering to anyone here, ever. My return goals are modest.. I just want to STAY in the game. Get on the floor and stay on the floor.
Lucias, do you ever give it up. One second you say you will get me out of your little games and the next here we go again. How many times do I have to explain it was a paper trading contest and that I was profitable all four months I was in the the contest but dropped out because I readily admitted I couldn't compete with a bunch of crash test dummies who traded like there was no tomorrow with absolutely no money management boundaries. The winner had never made any money in his real money account and has been cited twice by the SEC for various infractions. So much for the value of paper trading. As for the "things I was struggling with"? The real money trading statements that were sent to the publisher showed 2 losing months over a 44 month period. As for the seven figure account you are correct there and although I certainly don't have your ego or invincibility ( I make mistakes on a daily basis) it gets a bit annoying being lectured by someone who has yet to prove they can trade even the smallest of real money accounts. Can I please rest in peace? I don't sell or market anything just trade my account and try to stay away from all this drama.
Gary, you say somethings then say other things. First, how times do I have tell you? I've made my subs thousands of dollars and that is recorded. Yes, its trading money for other people but I've had stress. How do you feel when you try to downplay what I accomplished? As I said, I don't hold or subscribe to your belief system about what makes a record worthwhile. Its all relative. I do have the most public record, the most transparent record of anyone and that is a fact. I don't care about your contest. But, you did hold yourself out as someone with real money statements.. can you elaborate on what type of statements you produced? Who audited them? What the returns were? I don't have them. I don't have a record of every trade you placed like anyone can see about my record.. I'm not here to sell anything either except the value of my ideas. I have 2 systems that one can go and see my trades.. Predictor Discretionary and Predictor Day. Anyone can go and see trades I've made. Gary, I don't some of things you are saying about me such as "seem honest". The phrase "seem honest" implies dishonesty. Its a slight thing. I'm no longer interested in sharing my secrets with you. You could come to me in private and ask how you'd prefer to be addressed then doing this in public. If you write a book and that book is popular and the ideas are popular then you can expect for people to reference it.. I'm not going to alter referencing MY TRUTH. If you can make some specific requests, some precise requests then I'll do my best to not offend you. All I'm presenting is my truth... The truth and the information I have. Anyone who reads what I write should see that. As I said I believe you but do I have records of every trade that you made like I've produced? Do you have a record of real time signals from 2 systems producing 60% and 55% last year? I do. yes hypothetical.. yes not all with real money but please stop trying to disvalue what I've accomplished. You probably don't have my ego because you don't have my ability. Dr. Steenbarger discredited himself when he discouraged me. You can't hold yourself out to be a performance coach and discourage -- tell someone to never trade -- with my ability and I don't care if who you work for. Its not right. I hit something like 80 or 90 winning predictions over a year (with only a few misses) at my best. You've said yourself you have no special ability. I do. What I like about your story and your book, is the struggle.. I'm not immune to that. But go back and read what I've wrote.. try to understand where I'm coming from. As I said.. it won't please anyone here if I double or triple a 6k account.. I'm not here to work to please anyone. I'm not here to do that and I won't. I'm not here to answer to any of you.. I don't subscribe to your belief systems.. I don't subscribe to your value systems. Its a different kind of language.. A different kind of music, as Sun Ra might say. Again, I'm rejecting your narrative. I do value my past performance. I value it as much as anything. I do value my ability to trade in the sim account... but that's just me. I do value my ability to spit a a pot of gold.. (I love that phrase, came from another vendor.. forget his name had a radio show). Yes I do value my ability to spit a pot of gold.. Gary if you don't want to get involved then best thing you can do is just be quite. I'm not out to get you. I don't care about your record.. I'm certainly not out to disprove you as your one of my inspirations.. I only mentioned it because it was a truth.. part of a larger narrative.
I want change gears a little bit and share something about a way to basically backtest limit strategies with extreme accuracy. So a lot of people talk about how you can't backtest limit strategies but sure you can if you record the book data. Historical book data is available but its expensive. For example, the Open-E-Cry demo allows recording of the book data. So what you can do is basically run a counter, which is what I imagine it does, and so you basically track the # of contracts in the book when you put your orders.. Example 1200 orders in book at level X You add your 1 or 5 lot Now you have a counter, 1205 Now, you can count on for every trade that occurs and basically know if you'd get filled because you can count each trade. So, you can actually do extremely realistic limit order strategies with this method. At this point, you really don't have to monitor what fluxes on the book. You just monitor the number of trades that come off at that level. Open-E-Cry has this for discretionary trading. I don't know if other trading platforms like Ninja support this? This technology exists and you know can do very realistic limit order simulations. It would be nice if Tradestation offered this technology... I mean you don't have to guess at all with this method.. you basically know if your limit would get filled. Of course, there are possibility of cancellations.. as well as the spoof supply.. (fake orders under yours) but I'm sure by monitoring the tape and the book fluctuations that you could get very accurate results. So let see 100 in book +5 105 (105 in queue) -100 traded (5 queue) Now we don't care if any spoof orders are above ours. The only unknown if there were spoof orders below ours. If the book level drops below traded level then we know that some orders were pulled. Example 100 in book -50 traded 40 in book (we know 10 orders were pulled) So next rule is that if the book is ever less then your queue then we re-assign queue to the current book level. The only "catch" is that if limits are both pulled under our position and added above our position then our fill will be slightly pessimistic.