HI GAUCHO , It is true everyone comes to whatever place with a history and its consequences. What I say is just there because of this. A day in the markets for me is like playing a score. The persistence part of music is parallel to the persistence of data set movement for me. I do not have what you have for the markets as time passes. We are different. The day is already scored for me in each day's market. From open to close I do not see the intraday market being written bar by bar on a blank display to the right of the present. This is happening from distant inputs on a CRT as everyone knows but it is not my reality since I am participating with the markets. I have a Y=mx+b type mind. I also am in the Y= aX^2+ bx+c world and the power series and trig series and other series world too. Unfortunately, stat mech is there too. I am trading with sports memory like gliding, sailing, skiiing biking, driving, squash, tennis, baseball, kayaking canoeing, etc. Or music. I invented my way to sports memory, I know that now. Obviously there is nothing displayed in the future in terms of data sets. But the way it is for me is that what happens holds no surprises and I am always able to play the "music" as a composition as if it were any age (old) you want to assign to the score that is collectable and returnable to the librarian at the end of the performance. It was unfortunate that I could not make a point in this matter. There are ads of an automobile charging along into the landscape where the road magically appears and go to and fro as the driver enjoys the experience. This is intended to sell cars by having the viewer think things. It isn't a real display of how it is for car owners. Making money actually comes from owning an instrument whose price moves. I cannot get across to others how just any person can let go of their past orientation to be able to do anything or ,even just for a moment, consider something. People do not let go of things related to money and the safety they have as surviving in WHAT THEY THINK THEY KNOW. Some of the favs for people who will remain outside of a certain kind of knowledge, skills and experience involve: trends predicting availability of capital for the taking leading indicators of the instrument for making money using the position value as a referent of what the market is doing fear anxiety anger, etc... This stuff adds up to the conventional orthodoxy. Click, they are turned off to making money in any other way. One amusing dilemma is the one where a person so oriented looks at a print. The print is not a possible thing for many many reasons. The one I like best is the "gun can't be fired that fast" equivalent. Another one is "my data base does not agree with what is printed". One of the usuals is "six months of this level of profits with this timing is a once in a lifetime". Not a possibility of checking it out. A broker's FED EX'ed back up of 31 original T&S pages of hilited trades is "too much for anyone to be expected to confirm independantly"; after saying "this print doesn't have enough detail". The elephant in the room that the market represents and the other elephant there in the room of the trader who is at a sports memory level are never going to be seen by most people. People will invariably say a lot of things about how sprots memory must be working for a trader who uses it. That is simply a funny situation. When three guys stand around and talk about the feelings they have and how their minds operate in a group, then the other people are not talking or asking questions. they are silent and they ae glued to what they are experiencing. It is more than just them listening. The psychology of the markets is based on human behavior singly and collectively and it, per se, is not monitored in the conventions of the scientific method by differential math slices. The econometric model's facets and aspects of the direct, indirect, induced and substitution effects are not qualed and quanted either in the fleeting moments. It is never necessary to have the ability to trade with sports memory. But it just happens. A beginner sees Es prints go to double digit poionts quite soon. It is nott necessary to be losing money as a tuitition payment. Intermediates are adding contracts within each week as they trade because they are learning puposefully. Experts have to deal with how many contracts can be positioned under what market conditions. Everyone sees the levels of this expert trading day in and day out on the T&S and in the four games played on the DOM button and its stalactites. What keep people outside of the world of trading is themselves and how they personally have killed their opportunity by their baggage and garbage. A person persistently collects intellectual and mental baggage and garbage, mostly unconsciously. Every thing goes into the mind. Every day and all the time. 20,000,000 million unconscious units a second in brain function units. (10,000 conscious units a sec). Orally, visually, and kinethetically. A line is definitely crossed at some point. That is the BIG lesson of ET. the mind doesn't reject any ideas; it just begins to file them in places where they ae no longer possibilities nor part of "reality". These minds produce posts and they, in turn are part of the accumulation for others. It is one thing to not be able to get to a given fork in the road and it is another thing to not be able to take the fork to higher ground. One family, now, in 110 are millionaires. We know there are millionaires in ET. They decided to be. Anyone can decide to be. To decide to not be as a consequence of being "right" just means that the person no longer has the mental capability to come back across a line that has already been crossed. It is not an age based thing. And there are many good choices for making money and being a millionaire at almost any age. Operating on any level is satisfactory since the lowest is double digit per day. Going further is a good use of energy and time. Your personal effort is soon paralleled with your money's effort to work for you.
i kinda like the "YES'ES". To me they are the building of your finite conclusion set. Trading and purposeful learning are always in the picture. It is a constant transfer into the mind, around inside and over to a utility for trading. The WTF, formerly WWT, is a good debriefing notation. Go for it.
All you've done in this post is show that you're making the following predictions, while playing semantic games to pretend that you're not. A turd is a turd, no matter what you call it. POSITION......CONCLUSION.....PREDICTION Long.............Continue..........Market will rise Long.............Change............Market will fall Short............Continue..........Market will fall Short............Change............Market will rise
nice work, 666. you just reduced reams of jackspeak into a perfect diagram. this and the logical ones presentation works best in the past. bravo! surf
Thank you for this post. You have no idea how much it will help people to see things correctly. You assume (incorrectly) that continuation or change is tied to some sort of 'odds of success' for the future. If one reaches the correct conclusion, then, where you have marked 'prediction' turns out to be 100% of the time fact. In other words, continuation always, and 100% of the time results in the market continuing along its current trend. Just as change always, and 100% of the time results in the market changing its current trend. Not part of the time. Not most of the time. Not 99% of the time, but 100% of the time. Now if this is the case, why do people sustain losses? Easy answer, and it results from one simple aspect of trading. The trader who uses incorrect data sets for input analysis, or who fails to 'see' the market signal either continuation or change will miss the signal (or receive an incorrect signal) and experience a loss. This is true of any trading methodology - not just the one Jack describes. Missed or using incorrect data to generate false) signals result in losses (or at minimum, reduced profits) - irrespective of methodology used to trade. Thanks again for this fantastic post. I believe it clearly differentiates prediction from anticipation. - Spydertrader
hey spyder, with all due respect, this makes no sense. its merely another way of describing what happened. what's the difference between those who see, fail to see or just random entries? if you dont see, you can easily say "incorrect signal". if the entry is profitable, you can easily say--i saw, correct signal. it really makes no logical sense, being that, random entries can be profitable also--and then described in the same way. regards, surf
1. The market is not random (as I see it). 2. With time and experience, a trader (using a valid system) makes fewer errors and improves their profitability - again irrespective of methodology used. 3. One can say anything they like with respect to what one see's or doesn't see. You see the market as trendless. I don't. Others see the market in terms of probabilities. I used to, but no longer do. While each 'view' of the market certainly has its ability to profit. Following one viewpoint doesn't invalidate another. You can profit not seeing trends, Trader666 can profit with probabilities and I can profit using FTT's. There really is more than one way to skin a cat. - Spydertrader
Much respect to you Surf, but what he just said makes perfect sense. *** 1. The key determinant will be in what data sets for input analysis OR how the individual traders' method teaches him/her to 'see' the market signal either continuation or change. 2. As he also mentions, if a trader FAILS to see the signal, MISSESS the signal or RECEIVES an INCORRECT SIGNAL they will either lose money, or just make less money. 3. Last and not least, all of the above listed items exist in any and all systems as spyder mentions (except those that are perfect , and this thread just isn't the place to go there). Good trading, Jimmy Jam
interesting, spyder, thanks. i agree with #3 to a point. #1. i agree the market isnt random, within the traditional sense, but rather random within parameters when not subject to system shocks. Rather, your/our interaction with the market is random despite optical illusions the other way. #2. i believe in the intuitive process, despite that my empirical mind has difficulty with it, therefore, yes--- practice can improve your results hope this makes sense. surf
So we find that we have to keep refining what it is that you said... You said Then you said... Then you said... Mon ami, the above is what you said. You took the doc, tested it using the wealthlab code, introduced an additional condition of a randomly selected S&P portfolio, and got a negative result. How does a comma change any of these steps??? To this I responded that a different type of portfolio which is not random does not produce the results that you got? The conditions for a non ramdomly selected portfolio that gets a positive EQ curve is here...