The risk reward may not have been there but statistically I had a very high confidence level that my 1st target would be hit and if it was then there would be follow through (which occurred) but I was exhausted emotionally (I was 1 our in the trade and on average my trades last about 6 minutes.
I was looking into NLP for a while to re-program myself (I didn't really understand much then - not that I do now) but I found different articles that claim that NLP "The balance of scientific evidence reveals NLP to be a largely discredited pseudoscience. Scientific reviews show it contains numerous factual errors,[14][17] and fails to produce the results asserted by proponents" from Wikipedia. Gabe
OK, I guess I'm confused about how the trades are shown on the chart. It looked to me like the first trade was quickly terminated for a loss and the second trade took a while to exit for a profit.
Yes you are correct. I exited the 1st trade b/c my stop loss was hit based on the time frame that I used to trade (3 min) The 2nd trade I just set the S/L to my standard and it was not hit but my 1st target (a fixed value) was hit. I took out the rest of the trade manually for reasons I wrote about earlier. This is the dilemma I have to work on. When to use a technical stop and when to use a stop based on stats that I derived from historical trades. Gabe
IMHO, you're over thinking everything and searching for a magic solution. I once recommended a book (nothing to do with trading) to all my friends based on my absolutely stunning personal experience that came about by my doing the things the book recommended. Eight of my friends read the book and did those things as well and every one of them had a very positive experience as a result. A couple of my friends did a Google search of the book and replied to my email with arguments against the validity of the information in the book based on the commentary of a blogger whose blog came up fairly high on the search. To this day, these two struggle with the issues that following the recommendations of the book resolved for the rest of us. Just sayin'...
Which book was it if I may ask? Just to add to my previous reply to you about the 2 trades. Had I used my fixed stop, the 1st trade obviously would not have been stopped out and my targets would have been hit. I'll have to look at my stats again and see whether there is a benefit to technical stops compared with the maximum historical stop. Also, since my plan calls for trailing the position behind the previous bar's extreme, that would have to be evaluated as well but my initial thought is that I should keep my trailing method, only after my 1st target was hit. Gabe
Gabe(?) Regarding the unconscious mind : as RN wrote, you can see its clear existence under unusual circumstances. You have to understand what "science" means : it means that in the future or even tomorrow, some scientist might find out that there are limits to whatever knowledge is presented. This is from "scientists" point of view. Others point of view is "science means I am right, and all the rest is wrong". Also, there is a reason every area wants the qualificatif science in front of it : social "science", economic "science"... but for some reasons mathematicians do not need to have science around their qualificatif. This so as to open your mind to the issue of "uncertainty" in science, and "ego" and "pride" involvment involved when talking about science. This so as - IF you do not have a "scientific" education baggage- you can avoid falling into basic traps when it comes to knowledge : find out if pride and ego are involved into whoever is impacting the knowledge. Real scientists ( the good one in any area) have a good characteristic : very low pride and ego. Note that serious agencies ( like the FBI) who are always on the look-out and search for very good psychiatrists and psychologues, do not bother with "self-help" book writers and do not recruit any person just because they were trained in psychiatry or psychology. These agencies job are critical : they go and look out for people who really know their job really well - aka know they can be wrong first. So if your psy has qualified you of "autistic", and whatever, it might not be necessarily true: 1) the psy himself might not be a good one 2) knowledge in psychology and psychiatry keeps improving with new techniques, so who knows if your psy was "stuck" with out-of-date technique. 3) not all techniques work on everybody. In the same vein you don't use a reversing technique in a strong trend. Each technique has its history, aka limitations. 4) there are tons of techniques ( Nlp, Emdr, Mrp, etc...) in psychology and psychiatry. In the same vein there are tons of techniques in trading. But obviously you only use some and you don't know of others that might work. Same in psychology/psychiatry. So when it comes to psychology/psychiatry : my rule had been : " I am not a specialist, he is not either otherwise he'd have been scooted by the fbi. However, as I don't know everything and I need some help in this area, I will listen to what he says, BUT, I will make sure I have at least 4 independent and unrelated other people/psy... to listen to as well. I do not want to be taken for a ride and milked". Much slower approach, but in this day and age, one is never too careful.
It has nothing to do with trading at all. Keep in mind that CL's leverage and volatility combined with the seemingly "safe" construct of the 1-min chart is what my friend calls the Devil's Chocolate. Tread carefully. All the best to you! NoD
NoDoJi what is the title of the book? I am always looking to learn. what does the Devil's Chocolate mean ? I really admire that you managed to read all of Al's books. Not an easy feast.