Hank, what you don't grasp is that when we trade like this, and we do consistently. We don't need major money. We make enough to make us very comfortable and it gives us a kick that the "major" money is clueless to how we do what we do.
How can you talk about money when there's a principle at stake? Though I got the sense that Spike does make money, after all that.
At 11:17 ESM5 was at 1195 At 12:17 ESM5 was at 1195 At 13:17 ESM5 was at 1196 This is what a short trend looks like?
Winter, you don't trade on the trendsignals. It gives you the direction. If the trend is short you sell high and buy low and you never go long. How low did we go? I also said that the trend was short from the opening. I only posted the trend when i came home. I knew that a big part of the move was over; but it's better to post something then nothing and say at the close: i know what would happen. The trend surely wasn't long because we stayed all the time under 1195. And the move isn't finished be patient. The trend gives the direction where the risc/reward ratio is the best. That's the only use of a trend.
Spike, notice there was no response to my chart or explanation detailing trend and profitable trades created from past price data.
A simple yes/no will suffice - are you saying that the one hour period in question represents a short trend by your definition?
Very nicely said. And you can manage to make good entries by 'scaling-in' in the direction of the trend. Even if no single entry is perfect, on average the entries will turn out to be good enough to make very profitable exits (most of the time).
interesting philosophy. i must say, i am learning from this thread ! thank you nickel, spiker, prof, turfman , and others.
i can grasp it, prof. although i don't understand your system but i do understand this : one can certainly do much more trading small , than trading large in the traditional manner.