newbie - is this the result of schools teaching "New Math"? If you lost $500 on a 416 share lot and made $1000 on a 1000 share lot, your net $/share is ($1000-$500)/(1000+416) = $500/1416=+$0.35/share, NOT -$0.70/share Rendering results into some fictional "units" does nothing to convey anything meaningful and carries an Enron-like air to it. The most obvious presentation of relative performance are the simple average return on initial margin and return on target risk measures. Then you can see both how productively capital is being used and how reasonable return is to risk taken.
<b>"I sense a bit of sarcasm "</b> None intended here or later. I was just summarizing your position as succinctly as possible. <b>"so if I got it right you are saying we should have separate person in our staff trading our calls"</b> No you didn't get it right. Last time I was there there were, I think, four staff members in the daytrading room. It doesn't seem too hard for one or other of them to be tracking a called trade and pressing the buy and sell buttons. <b>"and no single trader can take all the plays called"</b> I don't care if the trading record misses some of the calls. On aggregate it would all average out. You would miss some good ones and some bad ones. No-one is looking for perfection, just a general indication that the people in the room are teaching usable techniques that they themselves can trade successfully based on the calls made. You seem to be trying very hard to make this seem as difficult as posssible. <b>"I personally? "</b> No, not you personally. This is pure evasion. I asked why an account cannot be traded based on the calls made in the trading room. Presumably Bo and Russ would make the trades. The pace of the room would allow it I believe. Semantic nitpicking is a sign of someone who desperately wants to avoid the real issues. Do you remember "that depends on what "is" means" and "how do you define sex". Let me repeat my question. Assuming it is accepted that things are too hectic (no sarcasm intended) to trade an account in your daytrading room, why is it not possible for your position trading room (not you personally) to trade an account to verify that the experts in the room can make real money (rather than "units") using the calls they make in the room?
"<b>If you understood the RealityTrader.com position trading rooms money management idea- you would understand that posting $ profits doesn't make sense..... </b>" I do understand the concept and I don't believe that hypothetical dollar amounts would make much more sense than hypothetical unit amounts. Both ignore real world complications such as slippage and commissions. A verified trading account would give a much more complete picture than either of the hypothetical approaches.
but nobody is suggesting that trader should take all the traders pursuing quantity over quality. Point I was making was that the amount of trades called exceeds needs of any given trader - because there are many of them in the room, and each will take what he likes. And that's why I said (duh, this will be what, third time I repeat it?) that summary of trades called will not reflect with any accuracy the result given trader can achieve. That was the only point I made explaining why track records for intraday trading room are useless and deceptive. What, you guys don't agree with it? Then find me any room (again, intraday trading, stocks, tending to short term under 1 hour) that produces track record that could be mirrored by all, or majority, of room traders. Vad
we do give our best effort. It's just you and I have different views on how it should be measured. You think it should be done by track record or personal account audit, and we think differently. We are not afraid of anything we or someone esle might find. You, looking from outside, think we should do this and that. We, doing this and seeing things under different angle, think otherwise. You make certain conclusions off this divergence, and others might make different conclusions (and our membership certainly does).
For the very reason that each trader has different skill levels, you should record & post the trading potential of YOUR room in the form of actual results! The bottom line is I want to (as an interested subscriber with a vested interest) measure YOUR potential, NOT MINE! I want to see your STUFF! Then I'll extract from that what I can with the skill levels that i possess. But let's see what YOU can do so I can see what I MIGHT do under the best of all circumstances! What is so hard to understand??!!
Newbie, there is also a more to position sizing in swingtrading than simply taking a position that matches your dollars at risk criterion. Using your numbers, if you are risking $500 in a trade with a 50 cent stop and the trade triggers at 3:30 p.m. are you really going to buy 1000 shares of a $50 stock, thus exposing your entire account to the possibility of an over-night price shock? I hope they have taught you better than this. As a swingtrader I use two criteria in position sizing. No more than 2% capital at risk and no more than 20% of my account in any one position. If you take the second consideration into account, this means that you often cannot take a position reflecting the full 2% risk limit because the second criterion over-rides. Therefore, not all trades in practice have the same dollars at risk. Yet another reason to actually trade an account.
Originally posted by dufferdon <b>"so if I got it right you are saying we should have separate person in our staff trading our calls" No you didn't get it right. Last time I was there there were, I think, four staff members in the daytrading room. It doesn't seem too hard for one or other of them to be tracking a called trade and pressing the buy and sell buttons.</b> We are making rounds. I think I answered this like three times. Don't know why you chose to ignore answer and reapeat question over and over. <b>"and no single trader can take all the plays called" I don't care if the trading record misses some of the calls. On aggregate it would all average out. You would miss some good ones and some bad ones. No-one is looking for perfection, just a general indication that the people in the room are teaching usable techniques that they themselves can trade successfully based on the calls made. You seem to be trying very hard to make this seem as difficult as posssible.</b> Yeah, and each missed call would be immediately noticed and cited as proof that we forge the track record. This is no win situation, whatever you do you will be always nailed on something else by someone with different take. Been there, done that. One of room moderators (not our room) was trying to publish his personal track record. Critics found zillion new things to blame him with. Want to see if method works? Why do you think it's impossible to do by simple 1 week trial? Why do you need anything else? I am not trying to make it seem difficut, I am trying to show that it's pointless and potentially highly controversial. No track record published was accepted by trading community as truthful (intraday trading room, stocks, short term trads under 1 hour) <b>"I personally? " No, not you personally. This is pure evasion. I asked why an account cannot be traded based on the calls made in the trading room. Presumably Bo and Russ would make the trades. The pace of the room would allow it I believe. Semantic nitpicking is a sign of someone who desperately wants to avoid the real issues. Do you remember "that depends on what "is" means" and "how do you define sex".</b> LOL, desperately avoid? You gotta be kidding. I perceive it as desperate attempt to make us do something that we don't see as meaningful. No semantic nitpicking, you just switched from intraday room we were discussing before to position trading room (Bo and Russ), so I asked what I did. Again, they post their records as they find it the most objective. You happen to think that it should be measured differently. Don't get aggressive, OK? I am not interested in anything but discussion. If as a result of discussion we remain with our opinions unchanged, so what? <b>Let me repeat my question. Assuming it is accepted that things are too hectic (no sarcasm intended) to trade an account in your daytrading room, why is it not possible for your position trading room (not you personally) to trade an account to verify that the experts in the room can make real money (rather than "units") using the calls they make in the room?</b> They happen to think that in light of their concept, their trading philosophy based on risk/reward untis are better vehicle for reflection of results. I don't know why it's so hard for each given trader to see how he would do with his shares size. Why is it such a big issue, replacing units with shares? It takes seconds to convert one to another. Units allow more universal refelction and show risk management method effectiveness. That's our approach. You might disagree with it... so what? Please understand: you are trying to make us do things the way you consider to be right. We have different perspective. Who is there to say that one of us has ultimate monopoly for the truth? Experience of others and our own shows that the method you suggest is highly controversial and potentially very messy. We tried different methods and finally decided on our current. We believe free trial is enough to evaluate what we do. Simple as that. Can you take it as it it's said not looking for evil imtentions? Vad