I don't know why I did it, but I read through the entire Charlie Dow part of this thread. My conclusion is that Charlie sounds like a hack who feels like he needs to put a well educated newbie in his place and demands respect just because he's been trading for a few years (notice no mention of his profitability over the years, the true measure of a trader's success). I can understand one follow-up after his initial post, but each reply afterward belaboring his point further eroded his credibility. I think that systems traders (i.e., as opposed to discretionary traders) inherently rely on a longer term positive EV rather than pure trade-level success rate to get them to profitability. My system is only successful for 52% of all trades, yet the success rate increases progressively on a daily and then weekly rate, and on a monthly basis I'm 100% profitable, and the equity curve is nice and smooth.
good points - sounds like you are clear on what works for you. welcome -- bonne chance in 2006 ! b.t.w I recently limped w/J 6 in position - flop came K J 6-- I raised 4X BB - re-raised 8X - I then pushed all in- 2500 and was called - K6 vs. J6. I lost and was out of the tourney. in hindsight how would I have suspected Ks UP-- rather than simply putting an aggressive player on a pair of Ks- he didnt raise PF either. Would you have layed down your 2p (J6s) with one overcard on board and an ALL IN bet?
Over the holidays I devised a new, third strategy which soundly outperforms my previous two. For the time being I am switching to S3 exclusively, since I am only trading 1 contract until I build my account from $5k to $10k (assuming). In the meantime I am going to start testing a hybrid strategy which trades on the combined signal of the three strategies, to see how that performs in comparison to just the best of the three. Current balance: $5119. Hey, at least I'm not down (yet). Cheers, Fletch
Well, well. This year is starting off nicely using Strategy 3. S3: 2 trades, +$1660 Balance: $6770 Fletch
Ok, so I finally got all three of my strategies integrated into a single strategy in TS so that I can play with various kinds of signal combination for a net strategy. My 3rd strategy, S3, is pretty volatile, it's either long or short most of the time, so I tempered it by turning it off when either S1 or S2 gives a signal the opposite way. This improved the overall profitability of the strategy, as well as reducing max drawdown significantly. So I think (hope?) I've got a winning net strategy combining S1,S2,S3 to trade for awhile now. Now I have to resist endless tweaking and see how this thing performs. Backtesting indicates a $30k a year trading one contract. If I net half that in '06, I'll be thrilled. So there you have it: '06 goal is $15k net trading one contract. Fletch
Ya know, I couldn't agree with you more. I can beat the rake -- it's making mistakes here and there that cause me to break even or slightly less month after month after month. I actually don't even like to play poker unless it's live anymore. It's stressful to me. It's funny -- my trading mentor says that trading can be more stressful to him than poker. He says he can sit at a poker table and be all relaxed and be like, "Oh well, I lost X amount of dollars." He treats poker like it's just fun. You put me at a table and I'm nervous and everything and I've been playing for awhile and have won some small tournies... I am all upset when I lose money at poker -- basically the traits you DON'T want as a trader... However, (thank God) if you put me in front of my computer to enter and exit trades, I feel right at home...I don't make too many mistakes... I may hesitate here and there or enter too quick relative to my plan, but overall, if I lose, no biggie -- hey, it's all part of doing business. I think the different personalities and the way we react to trading is so interesting. I spent a little while studying the psychology of trading before I put money down...
Hello Fletch, Im a grad student. Mathematical Econ. 1st comment: When most people think of gambling I think they mean a person who places a bet with little regard to probabilities and statistics. Thats why the comment was made. Its a "dirty word" on elitetrader. In a sense you dont have a gambler's attitude. As for the Ivies getting hired, thats true. One reason is in order to attract major investment capital in their competitive industry you must secure the best people from the best schools. Most of them are given the nice paying quant jobs. Trading and quant. analysis should go hand in hand in my opinion but for some reason most quants dont nec. go on to be traders in insti. firms. Different skill sets I suppose. Oh yeah, institutional trading, contrary to popular opinion is very different than what most of us do. These traders are less "speculative" and are more interested in taking the other side of the trade to provide liquidity amongst other things - Source: Vault.com book on trading and institutional sales. Like you Ive heard that quant skills can be detrimental to trading. I try not to take that to heart. Unsuccessful trading probably depends more on the psychological makeup of the individual. Some people have it others dont. Stat. knowlegde shouldnt hurt. However stat/quant skills are a sufficient but not a final condition to trading profitably. Successful trading depends on too many factors unique to the individual to make any kind of generalized statement. Hey, each trader is different. I mainly trade with tech. analysis with a hefty dose of time devoted to risk and money mgt. You may or may not be like me but who cares as long as we are making a consistent profit? Ive heard some engineers do well and others are better off in engineering. Theres a trader on New Market Wizards who was a music major. Last comment: Maybe you have the attitude of a prof. poker player rather than a gambler who blows it all in one night in Las Vegas. There is a difference. My Source: Watching John Malkovich and crew in Rounders. Anybody go see that movie? Fletch2, hope you enjoy trading like I do. Im just hoping do this longterm. What I like about this? Not having to answer to a boss and being able to work alone - Like warren buffet does.
Fun thread. Ill take a stab at that. Consistency given edge, variance, and sample size.... you are consistent in a trading method if through a sufficiently large enough time series you are 99 percent or so confident that the trading method gives you that same edge, and variance. Man, I hope I made sense b/c Im starting to question what I just said. Anyways, since individual methods can "decay" through time Im more concerned about being consistently profitable over many methods (statistically independent). Plus Im in a constant lookout for new strategies/methods.
Yeah, but those people don't know any real gamblers, and I don't mean twilighters with a cig hanging off their lips while they pull a lever. A real gambler knows the odds, knows how to get an edge, and plays to win. Fletch