That's right. Why share? It took me 5 years. Then 7 to really get it. Why do newbs feel entitled to a profitable strategy if they simply ask for it?
If you don't want to share anything useful that's fine, everybody accepts that you don't have to give away anything you don't want to. But if you're not prepared to share anything of value I do have to question the value of your posts. Personally I don't claim to know it all, but what I do know I'm happy to tell others. No candle ever lost anything by lighting another.
I couldn't care less if you question me or my posts. And it's totally illogical to dismiss my posts because I won't hand over my profitable strategy when u ask for it. But again, I couldn't care less. As far as edges go, yes, there are some that can be shared. Many already exist in the public domain, in some shape or form. And there's even more that can't be shared, because by sharing them, liquidity evaporates at key entry points and the strategy quickly loses it's edge. I have several, and most are of the garden variety, but it still takes years of work to refine, hone and perfect. Nobody in their right mind gives that away. Which is why no profitable day-trading method has ever been broadly disseminated in a cogent, straight-forward presentation. Basically, you're on a fishing expedition and it's an affront to those of us who've been around the block. But if you and the rest of the newbs want to share, go ahead. You're not the first guy to ask for a free lunch. Notice how many quality strategies have been posted in this thread, thus far? Zip. There's a reason for that. As a rule, traders don't give away our secrets to the unwashed. Most of us have spent thousands of hours to reach profitability. Just because somebody asks nice ? Com'on.
Maybe you should try learning to read, before using big words like deranged. Re-read what was written. Comprehend what was written. Then come back and apologize for this embarrassing post, because clearly, you have not read, and if you did, then clearly you have not comprehended what you read. Either way, thanks for bringing the TNT inside this thread. I'm certain the OP appreciates your contribution.
Clearly you need to learn how to write because your use of the comma in those two snippets is unnecessary and inappropriate. Indirect evidence, perhaps, of your tendency to opt for overelaboration or unnecessary complexity in other pursuits. It's true, I'll grant you, that you did not express a specific intention to employ the orthodox FX triangular arbitrage approach. You did, however, introduce it and employed it in your argument with Atticus. Still, the terseness of my response to you was founded largely on the epithet of 'deranged' you ascribed to Atticus. Why should I do that? Respect for the historical content of his posts. 'Embarrassing' statements in posts, if indeed I am guilty of such, are certainly not exclusive to me. Let's highlight one example from an earlier post of yours: "In the old days, Arbitraging FX was next to impossible" Actually, in the 'old days' (1970s, and probably for much of the 80s) arbitraging FX quotes was perfectly feasible and quite widely employed in treasury dealing rooms. Refer to any of Gary Klopfenstein's works for confirmation of this. As for your accusation of degrading the OP's thread, noticeably he did not attempt to challenge my earlier post that he was incorrect to posit that trend, support, and momentum were 'edges'. Perhaps he is too busy reading replies and contributions to an identical thread he started at a well-known forex forum.
Really, no edges posted on ET.... maybe you are wrong. For those that don't want to pay for an edge, read all 1,000 - 2.000 pages from JH. This is not an edge that I use, but some people are profitable using it.
JH=Jack Hershey ES P.S. No, I am not one of the traders that trade JH. I just wanted to clear up what JH meant.
Oh, I see, you don't like my syntax; in spite of the fact, that there was absolutely nothing illegal, and/or syntactically incorrect, in the way I, laid out the comma, in the sentence, that you used to shine a spotlight, on your real knowledge, and use, of the English language. Obviously, I'm having some verbose fun with you, because you actually were so transparent in your support for Master Troll Atticus, as to lead-off with a weak statement about my generalized writing style on a linear dialectic medium such as a Trading Forum. How problematic is that? At the very outset of your approach to me, you demonstrate that you are not being intellectual honest. Honestly, I have no idea why I am going to continue my reply to you, based on that fact alone. Yet, still, I march onward in delightful retort of something so glaringly obvious, LOL! [you guys are too much, really!] Just because you don't like the sentence structure, does not mean that it violates the rules of English language syntax and/or grammar. But, thanks for the advice anyway, however. Of course, the two years I spent as an English TA in College, basically means that I will have to down grade your paper to a C-, at best. We can start with your crude conjugated misstep of the word-phrase: "overelaboration." More appropriately: 'over-elaboration', would have been the more standard alternative. [hilarious!] If I were to sit here and pick apart your 11th grade attempt at correcting my English prose, I'd be here a month doing it. Spare me the scholastic burden of doing so, please. I hold three (3) technical college degrees, so I don't need an English lesson from anyone on "Elite" Trader. Of that, there can be no doubt. The assumption I make when I come to a Trading Forum with the name: "Elite" Trader, is that I don't have to explain what should be common knowledge. This is supposed to be location where "Elite" Traders, gather. The injection of Triangular Arbitrage, was used as a rhetorical counter, and simultaneously used as the explanation for the historical dogma about it not being feasible in FX, was simply untrue, when coupled with the right trading platform. Maybe I should stop giving "Elite" Trader, the benefit of the doubt and start assuming that there are precious few genuinely "Elite" Traders among us. [lovely!] Terseness? Try, condescending, that would be a far better adjective to use, here. I thought that you, were the English TA? To look for embarrassment while ignoring the facts, is a sign of intellectual dishonesty on its face. I'm not speaking about, referring to, or considering anything on this forum, or any other on the net, that does not include Retail FX. Therefore, I am obviously (this much should have been abundantly clear) not referring to either Commercial and/or Institutional Trading Rooms of the 70's, 80's or even the 90's and beyond. Why? Because, none of your Retail FX trades, will ever see the light of day, on a real Institutional platform's depth of market (DOM)quote column. So, I will not sit here and foolishly lay egg on my face, trying to force someone's 'Tiny Lot' Retail transaction, on the BNY Mellon's FX pricing stream. That would be comparing apples to coconuts. My reference was really to the Retail FX community, that has been trying for quite some time now, to execute Triangulation Arbitrage, from within the same account and while trading on the same Retail Platform. And, it is that combination of misfortune, that has lead many to believe that it simply "cannot be done." If I have to put on the training wheels and explain ever little nuance before I write the punch line, then we are going to be here all night long and quite frankly, I just don't have that kind of time on my hands these days. I was writing for those with "Elite" Trading knowledge, because this site took on the moniker: "Elite" Trader. Look, I find it very interesting that you would consider my replies to Troll Atticus, demeaning, yet you don't find his initiations of negativity against me, somehow a violation of "Elite Trader Ethical Code of Conduct." I find that very interesting, indeed. The logic of such a focus, escapes me. You come here, fly cover for an individual who clearly has some personal issues, if not mental issues and then you decry my reply to his negative instantiations with me. That's called putting the cart before the horse - it is backwards logic at best. Nice chatting with such a scholarly, knowledgeable and on-topic, "Elite" Trader. BTW - did I make any typos, or split my infinitive, or use unorthodox sentence structure? Because, if I did, I'd like to submit my preemptive apology now, to the resident English TA.