The open isn't relevant. The trade was at 60. But I wasn't up, and I'm not going to enter in less than optimum circumstances. So, for now, I wait. So if you're in Europe or you're an insomniac, you're good. Otherwise, you just have to wait for an acceptable entry. It's worth remembering that we're still heading up toward the UL of the weekly channel. This can change, and the way up isn't necessarily slick. There will be lots of retracements. But the current trend is up.
I am posting that here so that if it provokes a troll attack it can hopefully be kept here and not clutter lajax's fine journal. If a troll does post to your journal, lajax, I urge you to make liberal use of the "report" button and request the moderators to remove it. It is time we take a stand against those who selfishly would ruin this opportunity we have to share with and learn from one another here at ET. lajax, it is obvious to me that you are going to do well trading because your work shows me that you are seeing price activity much as I see it. Your "plan the trades" schematic is similar to a post I had made in my journal (back when I could have a journal) and that, to me, is a big tell that you have not only done the work, but you really do see the flow of price as it is and that your vision sees past and through the bars. Finally, I would like to point out to others following along (and to one in particular) that lajax acquired this skill by doing the work exactly as prescribed by DbPhoenix. Exactly. There is nothing I, nor DbPhoenix, nor NoDoji, nor Redneck, nor KDASFTG, nor BhProp, nor Monoid, nor handle123, nor anyone else could have done or said to lajax for this to occur. You must do the work, and you either get it or you don't. If it could be bottled and sold, trust me, I'd bottle it and sell it - there'd be an inexaustable market and it would command almost whatever price I cared to place upon it. But the truth is - the TRUTH - is that anyone who does succeed at this game - whether as an SLA'er or VSA'er or Market Profiler, or MA crosser or MACD'er or whatever, the truth of the matter is that your success depends about 1% on what can be taught, and 99% on your own willingness to learn through observation and testing and the degree to which you are able to recognize and extrapolate from patterns of market behavior, and your ability to follow the rules YOU set out for YOUROWNDAMNSELF. If you do not have that ability, or you lack the willingness to pursue the work objectively, free of prejudice, with the belief that it may (not will, but may) lead you to discover your own path to consistently profitable trading, then you will likely never acquire the skill that lajax is on his way to possessing entirely.
I suppose I might also point out that a troll who doesn't know how to trade a range without being told where to enter and where to exit should probably seek opportunities in the food-service industry.
Now back to our regularly-scheduled program. I've mentioned "tells", largely because of the influence of Zen and the Art of Poker. But I didn't get into it in the pdf because they make little to no sense until one has spent time observing price behavior (why did it turn there?). And those who are just now looking at this will likely have no idea what I'm talking about. Such is life. Moving on, if price is expected to fall and doesn't, that tells you something (which is why it's called a "tell"), mainly that the odds have shifted to sideways to up. This gives the trader a 1:2 chance of being right rather than 1:3. Here, price formed a little bitty range from 54 to 58. But rather than continue the downmove that began early this morning at 78, it appears to be trying to move up. However, one will note that the 15m stride remains intact, and until that is broken, the odds for chop are greater than they will be when price takes an unmistakable direction. Edit: And now the line, or stride, is broken. Edit: And there's a ret. But we're only 6m away from the open. Edit: And the ret isn't confirmed (on the 1m). Edit: And if 60 continues to provide R as it did yesterday, then we may be back to ranging again. Edit: (0954) One can see here the difference between couldawouldashoulda hindsight and something that's worth testing (formulating a hypothesis). If one had assumed that 60 provided the same R as it did yesterday and shorted it at 0918, he'd have had a nice 12pt trade. However, that is just the sort of trap that is lain for those who don't test these things out. For one thing, we had broken the downstride by then. For another, there was all that pre-market mess between 54 and 58 to be slogged through. Therefore, in order for any of this to qualify as a tactic, it has to be tested to determine the optimum conditions for a successful trade at some point in the future. Edit: My editing window is just about up. I'm sure some of you are just raking it in, but what I see is sloppy trending and sloppy ranging and I'm just not interested. If nothing comes up soon, I'll probably just quit until this afternoon. I've got corn to plant.
This is a great plan. Use the 60 for your overall trend and then drill down to the 15 and the 5 for confirmation. Make your trades in the direction of the 60 on the 5 when the 5 is oversold/overbought against the trend of the 60 and shows momentum in the direction of the trend of the 60. Always prudently use capital, never risking more than 2% of Total Liquid Net Worth on any one trade/idea and you'll be fine. --Izzy
Clearly your example does not bode well for Marketsurfer's "Random Entry with sound money management is a winning strategy" theory. I'm not so sure you are the one best qualified to judge another's trading plan. For the record, your "prudent use of capital as edge theory" is down 59.25 ES handles, or -$2962.50/contract since you started your participation in the SLA journals. Clearly we are not helping you, and you will not hurt our feelings if you decide quietly to withdraw from participation here. I wish you well on your current long - I really take no pleasure in your losses. But it is fair to say that random entries coupled with a pure money management stop is not the path to consistently profitable trading.
Quoting this here rather than in the ES journal so as to minimize the risk of angering the natives There are professional gamblers and there are degenerate gamblers. Pro gamblers won't bet any amount on anything without a perceived edge. Degenerates, imo, are in it largely for the action. There are professional traders and there are degenerate traders. Pro traders won't bet any amount on anything without a perceived edge. Degenerate traders, imo, are in it largely for the action. Professionals live lives no one else can. Degenerates live lives no one else wants. One of the books DbPhoneix has recommended is Larry Phillips Zen and the Art of Poker. One of the topics I had hoped to get into in my own journal is what I perceive as a sort of gambling/trading "nexus." IMO, once you have decided what type of trader you want to be and you have defined your edge and developed your plan, there is much more to be learned from books by and about pro gambling, imo, than books by and about trading. Pro gamblers - especially blackjack, poker, and sports bettors, (as well as those who book their bets) - have a much better, stronger, more thorough-going grasp of the nature of an edge and the rewards (and risks) of disciplined application of one's edge than what one tends to find in trading books. I am sure that DbPhoenix recommended Larry Phillip's book as much for the "Zen" as he did for the rather striking similarities of trading to poker. But reading that book sent me down a path I would never have thought to explore, and it really has been helpful to me in terms of self-knowledge and understanding exactly what sort of behavior and emotional control on my part is required, and how understanding and recognizing an edge as an edge is itself a psychological support in maintaining that control. FWIW