Forgive me, but I think that you have just described a nice, calm way for a person to trade himself into oblivion. Further, unlike you, I tend to believe that most people underestimate the work required to reach a level of reasonably consistent profitability. I think that most book sellers and all trading seminar promoters feed on this misunderstanding. That's why trading draws so many people and causes so much disappointment for the majority.
to tatsimon - no, you do not move SL to +4 - the objective of the system is to take small loss, small profit or HUGE profit. i took 100 trades and fully expected to lose 200 pips (the objective for me was to desentisize myself to profit or loss) and surprize - i was up 50 pips also if the big gains are excluded the result was still way better than the pure expectancy that's not enough to make a living - but it's truly surprizing to thunderdog - the point that i'm trying to make is that the key to trading it the strict set of rules, and emotionless execution i've read in several books something like this: "entries can be random, but the money management can still make the system profitable" i do not think that this is correct, but something like "entries can be ALMOST random, but MM and strict set of exit rules will make the system profitable" probably is a correct statement. I also tend to think that we humans can be good at predicting the market movement, but emotions screw us and make our trading unprofitable
Personally, I have never found it to be that easy, but perhaps I am one of those awkward people with absolutely no rhythm. Certainly emotions can play a negative role, but suggesting that profits are almost assured once emotions are under control is somewhat of an overstatement, in my opinion. As for random or near random entries, I recall a post of mine almost 2 years ago: http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=570825#post570825
ok, i should tone it down a bit/ qualify a bit when i say entries are "almost random" or "at will" they are kinda not really. the entry rules are fairly strict even though just verbalized and not quantified. e.g. in the slow periods, between 4pm and 7 pm eastern try to go against sudden sharp moves to the boundaries of a channel. or try to catch the move after the morning news etc. etc. as you can see there are rules based on my observation of the market(s), but nothing as simply describable as a MA x-over. now "profits are almost assured once emotions are under control" probably is a correct statement IMHO, but one should also understand it in the context. usual path into trading is to spend 2+years learning the tools of the trade, elliot, XOs, fibs, support, res, pivots etc. etc. etc. then finally aspiring trader understands the importance of emotions and after he masters them he becomes a successfull trader (some actually become successfull traders without mastering emotions). but by that time he already looked into the screen for 4000 hours and knows the tools of the trade. it would be interesting though to get someone, to teach him to control his emotions, to aligh consious and sub-consious etc. etc and then just introduce him to trading just explaing the platform etc. in a very simple manner and see how he will progress. but this experiment is stiil awaiting its experimentator
A scam artist's ideal victim is somebody who thinks this way, somebody who blames himself when victimized by others. A seller of worthless advice or other trading support better protects his position, if he can first sell the idea that failure is always the fault of his customer, and never that of the charlatan himself.
Thank God trading is difficult. Thank God there are losses and disillusionments and self-doubt and worry. Thank God there are drawdowns. If trading were easy then every Tom, Dick, and Harry would be a successful trader who stuck with his program. The profits would have to be split up among many more winners.
""We all hold the keys to our own jail cells." Seems to me this is much better than if someone else held them.
I think you have taken the phrase out of context. It is not so much about accepting blame as it is about the potential for personal empowerment. I think it is an interesting and useful concept, although I do agree that it can be overdone to a fault by the naive or the unscrupulous.