arch I advocate that drills in markets using practice sessions where the person works at his pace and doing such with real time market data where a person is subject to sharing with the market is the way to rapidly gain, through experience, the knowledge and skills for optimizing making money in the market. Market knowledge and skills come from the market. Tapping this is done by drills. Then comes the payoffs. By staying in the market through the day, you open the opportunity to periodically take profits. Optimizing this comes from improvement which comes as a result of iterative refinement. Playing in your rock, scissors, paper play pen is something you are prone to do not me. I see you are planning to do something sometime. Go for it. You may even turn out to help someone sometime.
Truer words have never been spoken, but it is so much deeper than this. Though, it is a good place to put down the base camp tent and work outwards from here... BTW, there is one other mode, and that mode is the most interesting (and dangerous for the trader) mode of all...Entanglement... nitro
side bar. When I mistakenly thought there was a request for a newsletter; I posted an example of a trade along with the directions for using our resources ( I deleted it within the 10 minutes when I reread the request for info from ARCH and not me). The specific example could have been construed as a timely tip. It continues to knock off large gains (and make new highs) but will soon come to the end of the cycle. It is past the expectation according to its initial analysis sheet drill. Pay attention to the pro rata peaking volume and how it is approaching the left side of the channel and the fact that the usual number of cycle days is clicking awayand getting close to the end as previous indicated by the last 5 run ups. If you are an intermediate term trader and not trading the natural cycle use your own methods to continue to hold it (it is up 300% in the last few months) and therefore is a normal hold for intermediate term traders who operate on that level of money velocity (the natural cycle runs much higher).
I'm not sure whether that means you are in agreement with me or not. In any event, I cannot think of a better term for taking a position on an as yet unknown outcome. The bet may be an intelligent one or a foolish one irrespective of the outcome, but it is a bet nonetheless. Grob, I have read several of your posts over the course of my regular visits to ET. With due respect, I seldom understand what you have written. I don't pretend to be the smartest person here, nor do I think I am among the dimmest. I like to flatter myself by believing I am somewhere near the median. However, I am always more confused after I have read one of your posts than beforehand. I urge you to reconsider your writing style. If you have something meaningful to say, I assure you that it will be better received. To this end, I respectfully recommend: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/02...f=pd_bbs_2/102-4848341-7476111?_encoding=UTF8 As for your reference to drills and the analogy of the Marines, I think you may have something there. Although I have never been in the armed forces, I imagine that boot camp builds discipline through routine and helps to build soldiers. But I don't think that boot camp builds superior soldiers. I would think that it is a necessary starting point rather than an endpoint on the road to superior performance. As for your trading style or that of anyone else, I don't really concern myself with such things. I roll my own. Personally, I do not really care how other ET members trade particularly when I don't even really know who they are or have verifiable and representative evidence of their performance. I believe that, in the longer run, people are best served by doing their own thinking, particularly as it relates to trading the markets. And if they cannot do it on their own, I suspect that they will run into trouble. Perhaps I am just biased by what I have seen thus far that is available to the average person.
Thanks for the S and W reference. I reread it periodically and have several copies. I prefer it over the Chicago Style Guide or the or the book the guys in the green building in NY hand out. Many people have editied me and vice versa. There are some great stories floating around out there. The EOP ones are the best. I will make it a point to improve my posts by not just typing and hitting Submit. Because of the local scene getting heated up, I may just post finished stuff as attachments that relate to pertinent questions raised by those seeking a variety of views on key questions. ET is formally set up to not retain experienced traders and to draw new people. The vast majority seem to be those who are stuck in their place and are making points on the value of where they are stuck and/or just slamming people who do not share their views. Best for me to probably just post canned stuff that has been vetted by others.
I would hope its deeper than a few lines in a single post... Entanglement, do tell. Haven't heard that word in relation to markets before. You have hit on something important here methinks. There is a difference between depth and confusion. A truly deep paradigm is like a large body of clear water; all elements of the paradigm are transparent, in the same sense that the body of water is clear. Wherever you dive in, you can see and understand what is surrounding you. The challenge, and the depth, comes from the fact that there is so much water to swim around in; it is impossible to take in the shape and scope of the paradigm all at once. Physicists have said anyone who thinks they understand quantum mechanics, doesn't actually understand quantum mechanics. But at the same time, it is possible to read concise, clearly written books about quantum mechanics that explain each piece of the theory in logical, legible terms. Again, the trouble is that you are swimming around in an ocean when trying to comprehend all the elements at once. In contrast, a bad paradigm is like a limited pool of shallow, muddy water. It doesn't cover a whole lot, and it isn't very inviting to dive into in the first place. One often has to hold their nose, or gin up their courage, to take the plunge. There is reason why simplicity is stressed in so many fields and so many disciplines. Historically the most profound ideas in science, and the most successful ideas in business, are stunningly simple. Artificial complexity is a hindrance, not a help. It is clearly not fair to declare every confusing speaker a charlatan. But at the same time, confusion and obfuscation are certainly well known barricades for charlatans to hide behind. They are also useful for those who would pretend to be experts in a subject without possessing the depth of understanding they claim. Last but not least, confusion presentation indicates confused thought, even if the presenter is sharing what they believe in earnest. Again, not necessarily the case every time, but enough of the time to be a reliable tell. Put it all together--confusion, complexity, obfuscation, arrogance, dismissal, limited paradigm, fantastical claims--and you have a pretty dubious picture. One which could be remedied by a fresh dose of clarity and straightforward thinking at any time... but of course that dose usually never comes.
Here is a specific drill which Grob109 recommends for trading any index contract. It stays in the market continuously throughout the day and switches sides periodically. This drill is indicative of the quality of his research and market theories for trading index futures imho. from Jack Hershey Jun 2 2000, 3:00 am show options Newsgroups: misc.invest.technical From: "Jack Hershey" - Find messages by this author Date: 2000/06/02 Subject: 30 minute warmup bar trading. Fundamental Money Making Concepts. I use simple mechanical systems to get people to understand the basic concept of making money steadily and with little or no risk. When you trade daily for 6 1/2 hours a key thing to consider is not doing too much to make some money. By choosing a futures index of any sort on any exchange in the world, you have put yourself, for 6 1/2 hours a day in a place that is truly dull and unexciting. Being there is fairly safe and not too demanding so you can relax and repeat a few tasks over and over to make some money. I work first with 30 minute bars to frankly eliminate any sense of urgency. I use the prior days last bar to get the ball rolling, or I suggest you wait until the second begins to eliminate the end effects of the market. Here is a progression of four mechanical methods to illustrate making money primarily and secondarily to illustrate that losses are neatly reduced more and more as a little sophistication enters the picture. I also introduce how in a trend you can switch to the most favorable side of the channel to exit. Because this is very simple and mechanical there is no need to clutter it with a stop system as yet mostly because it an index tied to the performance of and aggregation of stocks. We can tuck stops in easily though as a commitment to our ordinary discipline. The four items in the progression are: 1. break out of prior bar. 2. slope pairs of bars. 3. overlapped pairs slopes 4. retracement. Here is the progression: 1. set up a 30 bar display for a futures index. 2. enter on the breakout beyond (above or below) the prior days last bar hi/lo. 3. hold until the current bar breaks out of the other end (from your long or short entry) of the prior bar. 4. hold on inside bars. 5. hold on successive bar break outs in the same trend. 6. on breakout of 3., reverse so you can take on new trend trade. 7. repeat 3. through 6. for remaining bars of the day. 8. settle at end of day. Backtesting of the drill on tradestation for the continuous ES data produced the graph below: <img src="http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/attachment.php?s=&postid=852219">
Your observation is perhaps keener than you realize. Consider the very first sentence: "I use simple mechanical systems to get people to understand the basic concept of making money steadily and with little or no risk." Anyone care to point out what is glaringly wrong with this claim? Not a trick question... talking basic logic here. p.s. Ah, I see your angle now... excellent performance graph. Gold star for subtlety