# Trading full time - what do you think will happen?



## jersey10 (17 April 2008)

I am 29.  I live in Brisbane.  This is my story so far.  I am looking for feedback / opinions of what you think may happen based on my plan to become a full time trader.

I have always been interested in the sharemarket and property investing.  I purchased my first shares when i was 18 or 19 via managed funds and also purchased Telstra 2 shares which i still have.  I bought my first property in 2005 and my second in 2007.  Over the last 3 or 4 years i have become particularly interested in share trading and moreso in the last 4 months in trading full-time (some would say obsessed).  I have done a share trading course 2 or 3 years ago which taught me about trends, stop losses, position sizing, brokers, chart patterns, support & resistance, moving averages, etc.  I have read a lot on this forum, am currently reading Reminiscences of a Stock Operator and plan to read Trade Your Way To Financial Freedom and Nick Radge's book next (or the at least the first 50 pages everyone is going on about).  I have recently become a monthly subscriber to The Chartist and also learn a lot there from the nightly analyses.  I have changed from working 5 days per week to 4 days per week and plan to reduce my working hours more as I progress with my trading ability.  The extra day I have I spend studying trading as much as I can.

My immediate plan is this: I have $40 000 trading capital and I plan to follow one recommendation from The Chartist at a time using the full $40 000 or as much of the $40 000 as position sizing allows.  I will select one trade I believe is most likely to be profitable.  I will continue to learn and develop my own trading plan (however I'm not even sure if this is necessary if Nick Radge is doing it for me, will I develop a better trading plan than him? What is the point? I may as well follow his analyses and just modify the trades [position size etc.] to my own circumstances).  My next educational move would be to do The Chartist course and possibly some other trading courses throught the ATAA or the like.  I am also considering doing a private consultation with Nick Radge as well.  I have thought about doing a Masters of Business in Finance as I am interested in this area.  However I am not sure if my efforts to become a full time trader would be better utilised on the aforementioned educational avenues.

My goal in the short term (the next 2 - 3 months) is to generate income from trading that will allow me to reduce my work hours more so I can devote more of my time to developing my trading.

My medium term goal (1 - 3 years) is to be trading full time and be able to pay myself a salary from that.

My long term goal is to be Nick Radge (lol).


I would like to get some feedback as to what you think will happen as a result of my plan to trade full-time.

Am I being too optimistic?  Are there things I should be doing as part of my education I am not?

Thanks for reading.  Would appreciate any feedback.


Jersey10.


----------



## jersey10 (17 April 2008)

only on the asx games


----------



## Trembling Hand (17 April 2008)

Sorry deleted that question about have you traded yet.

And with $40,000 how much did you make. I would think trading stocks you simply will not be able to produce the returns to get any way near producing $ to live on.


----------



## MRC & Co (17 April 2008)

Hey Jersey,

I would strongly recommend decreasing that position size.  40k or 100% of capital on one play?  Way too large!  I would be using about 5k per play with that size trading account.

Are you planning on investing in futures, equities, options?  And what is the timeframe you are looking at, intraday, position trading etc?  

Masters is a waste of time IMHO if your goal is to trade full-time.

Remember, your #1 goal at first is to preserve your capital and stay in the game!  Or this dream could be just that, a dream, within that 1-3 year timeframe!

It' refreshing to see someone dedicated and passionate about learning and willing to put it out there on the line.  You remind me of myself. 

Good luck mate and as many times as friends/family say "most traders loose" just remember my signature.  Live your own life and over time, I am sure you will find your own niche as long as you preserve that capital base first.  

I believe before any of those books you mentioned, you should read Nicks book and probably do his course (though I cannot comment on the later).


----------



## nizar (17 April 2008)

Generating an income from $40k within 2-3 months to be able to cut back your job is way too optimistic in my opinion.

Most traders need longer than this to become proficient.

Are you taking a discretionary approach or a quantitative approach (backtesting, etc) ?

Take your time jersey, the markets will always be there.


----------



## jersey10 (17 April 2008)

Trembling Hand said:


> Sorry deleted that question about have you traded yet.
> 
> And with $40,000 how much did you make. I would think trading stocks you simply will not be able to produce the returns to get any way near producing $ to live on.




Certainly not enough to live off.  Agreed. I have read in other threads you would need a lot more than 40 000 capital base to produce returns to comfortably live off and if i end up being any good hopefully i could get to that in the future.  I do think realistically I could make 50% over the course of 12 months on $40 000.

Are you saying you would trade something other than stocks to produce a greater return from $40 000 starting capital?


----------



## jersey10 (17 April 2008)

MRC & Co said:


> Hey Jersey,
> 
> I would strongly recommend decreasing that position size.  40k or 100% of capital on one play?  Way too large!  I would be using about 5k per play with that size trading account.
> 
> ...




Planning on trading equities at this stage, but after reading about forex a bit particularly on this forum I would like to trade that at some stage. Know next to nothing about it at the moment however.

I would be interested in knowing why you believe a masters would be such a waste of time.

thanks for feedback.

Jersey10


----------



## Trembling Hand (17 April 2008)

jersey10 said:


> I do think realistically I could make 50% over the course of 12 months on $40 000.




Why? You haven't even traded yet. You haven't even had a positive month.

Lets just say you do make $20,000 in a year how much of that are you going to lose on tax, data & computer, Admin, books, subscriptions etc. You will have about $10,000. And I would say this is best case for a beginner.


----------



## jersey10 (17 April 2008)

nizar said:


> Generating an income from $40k within 2-3 months to be able to cut back your job is way too optimistic in my opinion.
> 
> Most traders need longer than this to become proficient.
> 
> ...





If i could make 50% on that $40 000 over a twelve month period (i.e. $20 000) that would enable me to take the next step down to work 3 days per week and concentrate on trading for an extra day of the week.

Most certainly it is a discretionary approach at this stage.


----------



## mayk (17 April 2008)

Many people come here and ask the same question.

Why don't you take this a step further and on a weekly basis inform us of your success/ failure etc. Then this will be an evidance to people that either it can be done or they are dreaming.

I know it is off topic, but the good point is,  you are going to start from scratch in trading and that may help others to learn.

By analyzing your technique and explaing them to  most newbies (my self included), you will learn alot and might one day become Nick ( who ever that is )

Good night and good luck!


----------



## MRC & Co (18 April 2008)

jersey10 said:


> Planning on trading equities at this stage, but after reading about forex a bit particularly on this forum I would like to trade that at some stage. Know next to nothing about it at the moment however.
> 
> I would be interested in knowing why you believe a masters would be such a waste of time.
> 
> ...




Hey Jersey,

Basically, you need to learn a few things.

What instrument(s) suit your personality, whether that be futures, options, equities or a combination of these and perhaps others.  

Then in which market you are going to trade them (S&P, Gold, Crude, Wheat etc) and on what timeframe (intraday, swing trade, position trade, trend following etc).

Following, you will need to know which set-ups are best used for the various markets and over various timeframes, inclusive of whether it is a trending or choppy day.  Lastly, a plan to execute each set-up and the rest of your trading aspects, max drawdown, rules when to trade and when not to trade, keeping track of results of each set-up or when perhaps emotions got in the way and the results.  

This is best learnt by researching information specific to trading and through the real deal.  You will not gain this from most academia (no offence to the industry, I have 2 degrees myself).  

Cheers


----------



## brty (18 April 2008)

Hi,

I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest that you need to forget about trading for quite a while Jersey.

Reason being that you hold Telstra2 that you bought, what 9 years ago, and are still sitting on a 40% loss.

In my way of thinking, if you cannot accept a past loss and move on, you are not ready for trading. The classic from losing traders is that the keep their losers because they pay good dividends.

If you think you are ready for trading, why are you still holding this loser??? Are you married to the position???

bye

brty


----------



## MRC & Co (18 April 2008)

Come on, he is probably just reading about accepting past losses now.  Does not mean he cannot trade.  Though obviously has to learn about position sizing, whilst Nicks analysis will help with the set-up and plan.  

Not to mention, if he now wants to trade and realises it's best to cut the dogs loose, but beleives his long-termer is fundamentally undervalued, why not hold it?  You can trade and have an investment portfolio at the same time.


----------



## Kauri (18 April 2008)

Go for it mate.. sounds like you know what you want and how to go about it, and have the right attitude...
I wouldn't try to cherry pick Nick's service... _unless you are on a Forum_ most people have more losers than winners, strange as it may seem,.. it is the management of them that makes the profit.. play his whole field with *good risk control *and take the opportunity to learn.. and not only from the setups..
 Forget the degrees, the couple I have haven't helped me at all, admittedly they are both in the second degree..  oops..Itha... don't come after me..  :couch   


Cheers
...........kauri


----------



## mayk (18 April 2008)

Kauri said:


> _unless you are on a Forum_



 LOL


----------



## barney (18 April 2008)

Hi J,
Some good advice from the lads.  None from me, other than don't put any more cash into a spec than you are prepared to lose.  If you are trying for 50% p.a. return you may be tempted to try speccies .... 50% is a tough assignment on "regular" stocks .....

Two degrees you guys !!! ............ What are you skiting about .........
I've got 360 degrees ......... and I use all of them everyday :viking:


----------



## stevo (18 April 2008)

50% profit is achievable... as is a 50% loss. Since only one stock is traded at a time the possible outcomes over a year will vary considerably depending on stock selection. One or two big winners could make the difference, as could one or 2 big disasters. 

The problem is most people begin counting the winners before they even start and tend to downplay the just as strong possibility of losses. So you visualise yourself sitting on $60,000 at the end of one year, but think about only having $20,000 left as well. 

If you make 100% on your first trade will you put the whole $80,000 on the next trade? If you lose $15,000 on your first trade will you replenish your trading capital and do the next trade at $40,000? Or will you go forward with only $25,000? I can throw heads 5 times in a row quite easily - 5 losses in a row is very achievable.

Personally I would be much more comfortable with 4 to 5 positions - then you have the opportunity of going with the winning trades and cutting the losers. 

You could easily be fooled into thinking that you have some innate skill when it comes to trading but really you were just lucky.

Good luck

stevo


----------



## Nick Radge (18 April 2008)

The rule of thumb I suggest is trading should make 3x your current annual income before you decide to take the plunge to full time. This is mainly because there are associated costs, equity gains aren't usually linear and there is substantial pressure to meet living expenses. 

Also don't forget that many full time traders are simply slaves to their screens rather than a boss. There is a guy who lives up the road from me who made $1m last year, but spends 7am - 7pm at his screen. I played golf with him a few months ago and he spent 60% of the game on the phone. Can't say I see the point.


----------



## tech/a (18 April 2008)

> I will continue to learn and develop my own trading plan (however I'm not even sure if this is necessary if Nick Radge is doing it for me, will I develop a better trading plan than him?




Seems youve already started.



> My immediate plan is this: I have $40 000 trading capital and I plan to follow one recommendation from The Chartist at a time using the full $40 000 or as much of the $40 000 as position sizing allows. I will select one trade I believe is most likely to be profitable.




$40k---not enough.

Radge himself suggsts you need to return 3 x your expected "Wage" if trading fulltime.

So lets say $75k a year thats $225,000

My next point how well do you think a business would do with $40k start up capital---It wont be a market leader in the near future.

So back to $40k
To return 200K with 500K you'll need at 40%p/a return
That in itself is no mean feat to most.
500% on 40K---impossible ---except for TH.

Radge WILL teach you how to trade profitably.
Rather than taking the fish.
Learn HOW to fish!


----------



## Trembling Hand (18 April 2008)

Nick Radge said:


> Also don't forget that many full time traders are simply slaves to their screens rather than a boss.




Funny that. To get to the top of trading as a profession takes the same effort as an elite sports person or musician or artist. Don't kill the dream. Doesn't it just take a couple of chart set ups and some balls and in no time your driving around in a Ferrari :car: :brille:


----------



## Trembling Hand (18 April 2008)

jersey10 said:


> My immediate plan is this: I have $40 000 trading capital and I plan to follow one recommendation from The Chartist at a time using the full $40 000 or as much of the $40 000 as position sizing allows.  I will select one trade I believe is most likely to be profitable.




This is a hair brain idea. :silly:

Ya need to start the plan again. This isn't going to get you anywhere. You can not bet your full kitty on one stock at a time.


----------



## tech/a (18 April 2008)

> Doesn't it just take a couple of chart set ups and some balls and in no time your driving around in a Ferrari




Yeh--my Ferrari is a BA Falcon!


----------



## Nick Radge (18 April 2008)

> My immediate plan is this: I have $40 000 trading capital and I plan to follow one recommendation from The Chartist at a time using the full $40 000 or as much of the $40 000 as position sizing allows. I will select one trade I believe is most likely to be profitable.




Jeez, I didn't see that.  I'm afraid that's not the answer because I can gladly tell you that I have no idea which trade is going to be the next winner! 

You will not be successful doing this. You'll join the 95% club very very quickly.


----------



## professor_frink (18 April 2008)

jersey10 said:


> If i could make 50% on that $40 000 over a twelve month period (i.e. $20 000) that would enable me to take the next step down to work 3 days per week and concentrate on trading for an extra day of the week.
> 
> Most certainly it is a discretionary approach at this stage.




Don't worry about making 50%, be more concerned with defending the $40K you have.

I'd try and stay working as many days a week as I could if I was at your stage. You will trade so much better if you aren't relying on making an income off it. Unless you work 70-80 hours a week now, you should be able to find time to work on your trading at night, or on weekends, etc.


----------



## metric (18 April 2008)

the little bit ive learned in the few weeks ive traded...

1] decide what sort of trader you want to be.
2] dont lose money...its very difficult to make it back in the market.
3] if you do lose money you will find that you will put it back in through another source; savings, etc. which will quickly make trading into gambling, and you will lose money..so dont lose money.
4] if you sell and the price goes up, dont chase, wait.
5] dont lose money...


----------



## nomore4s (18 April 2008)

Trembling Hand said:


> Funny that. *To get to the top of trading as a profession takes the same effort as an elite sports person or musician or artist.* Don't kill the dream. Doesn't it just take a couple of chart set ups and some balls and in no time your driving around in a Ferrari :car: :brille:




Vary valid point. To be successful at anything requires alot of time, effort and hardwork, it also requires a certain amount of talent & ability.



jersey10 said:


> I will continue to learn and develop my own trading plan (however I'm not even sure if this is necessary if Nick Radge is doing it for me, will I develop a better trading plan than him? *What is the point?* I may as well follow his analyses and just modify the trades [position size etc.] to my own circumstances).
> Jersey10.




The point would be to become a successful full time trader.

As good as Nick is, imo you can't be a full time trader purely living off Nicks trade recommendations from the chartist. You need to be able to find, plan & execute your own trades. No offence Nick.

You are at least heading down the right path by studyng hard and asking questions, everyone started somewhere, even the gurus.

Good luck with your goals.


----------



## Porper (18 April 2008)

jersey10 said:


> My immediate plan is this: I have $40 000 trading capital and I plan to follow one recommendation from The Chartist at a time using the full $40 000 or as much of the $40 000 as position sizing allows.




I can't see the point in this.Why trade only one, presumably you are going to risk 2% or whatever the figure you decide on for all trades.What if you pick the duff ones?

Going by memory Nicks power set ups have a win rate of 40-45%, don't know what this equates to in potential no. of losses in a row, but I not too long ago had 14 losses in a row (not the Chartist picks) how will this effect you and your plan? 

You may be better adjusting your position size and trading more, at least this way you will know quicker whether you have a positive expectancy or not.Picking one trade at a time you could trade with luck (good or bad) and still have no clue as to your expectancy.



jersey10 said:


> I will continue to learn and develop my own trading plan (however I'm not even sure if this is necessary if Nick Radge is doing it for me, will I develop a better trading plan than him? What is the point?




You need to know what you want to do.

Either you join the Chartist to learn because you are interested and passionate or you want a tip sheet.I have already given my opinion that the Chartist wouldn't be good just purely as a tip sheet although I know people join just for this reason so this is only my personal opinion.


----------



## Temjin (18 April 2008)

Hey Jersey, the biggest "psychological drawback" for most traders is trying to "make" an income for living from trading. That will one day, make you very flustrated and force you to take risks that you normally wouldn't.

Understand the power of compounding. 

My advise for you is to start learning with minimum position sizing first. Once you are comfortable with trading, then build up your capital and continue to compound it for at least 5 years. In the meantime, try to avoid taking ANY income out of it. 

It's better to live off from a passive income than an active income. And yes, trading is an active income, even if it is fully automated.


----------



## Sir Burr (18 April 2008)

Trembling Hand said:


> I would think trading stocks you simply will not be able to produce the returns to get any way near producing $ to live on.




Why are stocks unable to produce the returns to live on?

Is it because the volitility and volume is not available on stocks or because of the margin available with other instruments?


----------



## Trembling Hand (18 April 2008)

Sir Burr said:


> Why are stocks unable to produce the returns to live on?
> 
> Is it because the volitility and volume is not available on stocks or because of the margin available with other instruments?




I'm talking about a $40,000 dollar account trading EOD stuff like Jersey has stated.


----------



## julius (18 April 2008)

Making MORE time to look at charts when your new is an absolute trap... one of the first things I was told when I started was _"don't spend too much time looking at the charts, it will send you nuts"_

Of course I paid no attention at the time and probably spent atleast 5-6 hours a day trawling through charts for months looking for one thing or another...sounds like you'll end up doing much the same thing and I can say from experience it really gets you nowhere. You might end up with a bit of paralysis by analysis if your lucky.

The Chartist subscription service is a damn good place to start...watch the analysis each night, take a look at the charts yourself, put your orders in (all of them, not 1 as you suggested), read a few chapters of whatever your reading. 60 mins tops. Too easy.


----------



## Trembling Hand (18 April 2008)

julius said:


> Making MORE time to look at charts when your new is an absolute trap...




That is not a bad bit of info.

The way to make it work is to make it like play rather than a job. You don't get superior skills making yourself do something. You need to start it as a hobby and let yourself fall into it. Sitting down in front of the screen every Monday morning knowing you have to take $1000 this week is not going to be fun.


----------



## njc.corp (19 April 2008)

jersey10 said:


> I am 29.  I live in Brisbane.  This is my story so far.  I am looking for feedback / opinions of what you think may happen based on my plan to become a full time trader.
> 
> I have always been interested in the sharemarket and property investing.  I purchased my first shares when i was 18 or 19 via managed funds and also purchased Telstra 2 shares which i still have.  I bought my first property in 2005 and my second in 2007.  Over the last 3 or 4 years i have become particularly interested in share trading and moreso in the last 4 months in trading full-time (some would say obsessed).  I have done a share trading course 2 or 3 years ago which taught me about trends, stop losses, position sizing, brokers, chart patterns, support & resistance, moving averages, etc.  I have read a lot on this forum, am currently reading Reminiscences of a Stock Operator and plan to read Trade Your Way To Financial Freedom and Nick Radge's book next (or the at least the first 50 pages everyone is going on about).  I have recently become a monthly subscriber to The Chartist and also learn a lot there from the nightly analyses.  I have changed from working 5 days per week to 4 days per week and plan to reduce my working hours more as I progress with my trading ability.  The extra day I have I spend studying trading as much as I can.
> 
> ...




Jersey- good luck to u -hope u do well-

u have the right idea-u want to make money- and from what u have  $40,000 is more then enough to cause big profit-and don't forget huge downfall when it goes wrong-

u must stick with the basics and listen to the basic's

Coming from me- a owner and operator of a business-the basic's of anything is the winning edge-

My story-i started my business while working my normal  job-it took 2-3 years to get going and make a wage-thats when i lefted my normal job i had for  5 years-but but---it did not go to well for my partner because he  left his job as soon as we open up the doors for our business-he forgot that the money we were making was not for a wage it was for investments that the shop needed-

the reason i said 2-3 years is that my business sector was slow-so keep that in mind-things dont always go to plan-

i ended buying him up and investing more into the business from my old job wage's-(the power of the orginal income---)

the business has done better and better every year has i live by the basic's-it also opens up other area's to invest in-

so my story is-theirs no worries and stress in waiting if the basic's are their-

$40,000 is a lot of money-so in  1 postive u must use that money or some of it to get ahead-

not many people have $40,000 and i am sure u don't want to loose it-

The ? is do u want to invest the whole amount -if it were me i would invest 20 k-so that way u can learn from the mistakes-mistakes will happen-everyone is not perfect-thats fact and we all know it-

who here has won on every trade they have done????

i am just starting to trade and want to trade full time-but i know i must treat it like my business-this will take more time for me i say 3-5 years because this is a new ball game-but the my basic's are still the same-i won't change it-

Nick--


----------



## jersey10 (19 April 2008)

brty said:


> Hi,
> 
> I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest that you need to forget about trading for quite a while Jersey.
> 
> ...





Thanks to everyone for all the feedback it is very helpful and educational.

brty,
Obviously I bought T2 thinking they would increase in value.  I only bought the minimum amount at the time which i think was 150 shares because that is all i could afford.  The reason i haven't sold them has nothing to do with not being able to accept a loss.

Conversely, i believe one of my great strengths will be my discipline and ability to adhere to a particular system.  For example, if i trade using a system where i expect 5 out of 10 winning trades and through the use of stop losses am able to minimise big losses then for every 10 trades i might expect to see 5 small losses, 2 or 3 small wins, 2 or 3 big wins.
If i know i am using a system that is expected to do what i have described above i would have absolutely no issue with exiting a trade that has hit a stop loss.

Jersey10


----------



## jersey10 (19 April 2008)

stevo said:


> 50% profit is achievable... as is a 50% loss. Since only one stock is traded at a time the possible outcomes over a year will vary considerably depending on stock selection. One or two big winners could make the difference, as could one or 2 big disasters.
> 
> The problem is most people begin counting the winners before they even start and tend to downplay the just as strong possibility of losses. So you visualise yourself sitting on $60,000 at the end of one year, but think about only having $20,000 left as well.
> 
> ...




If using stop losses effectively isn't a 50% loss very unlikely?  Wouldn't using stop losses make the likelihood of 'big disasters' much much lower than 'big winners'?


----------



## jersey10 (19 April 2008)

Trembling Hand said:


> This is a hair brain idea. :silly:
> 
> Ya need to start the plan again. This isn't going to get you anywhere. You can not bet your full kitty on one stock at a time.





this has got me thinking, i have just tried to do some calculations of what would happen if i took 1 trade at a time using full $40 000 or if i took 4 trades at a time using $10 000 per trade.  Can you explain to me succinctly why it is better to take the 4 X $10000 trades as opposed to the 1 $40 000 trade.  Do you know any threads where this has been discussed previously?  I think the problem taking just one trade using all trading capital is if you get all of your losers first up your account gets drawn down to the extent that it is hard to make the money back. Is this correct?


----------



## Trembling Hand (19 April 2008)

jersey10 said:


> If using stop losses effectively isn't a 50% loss very unlikely?  Wouldn't using stop losses make the likelihood of 'big disasters' much much lower than 'big winners'?





No. Your method sucks. Let's say you where holding Bramble two days ago. You would be down 10%-15% on one trade before any costs. Three more normal losses of 5% and you are down 30% in 4 trades. 

Your method Sucks. How are you going to stick to money management rules trading "all in" on one stock. please post about an example of your last paper trade with your targets & Stops. You will get better advice than the general suggestions and hypothetical "can dos".



jersey10 said:


> i believe one of my great strengths will be my discipline and ability to adhere to a particular system.




This, I believe, is not the most important part of trading. It will not stop you from losing money. It will only stop a fast blow up. If you have no edge or a market not suited to that edge you will still blow up.


----------



## Trembling Hand (19 April 2008)

jersey10 said:


> this has got me thinking, i have just tried to do some calculations of what would happen if i took 1 trade at a time using full $40 000 or if i took 4 trades at a time using $10 000 per trade.  Can you explain to me succinctly why it is better to take the 4 X $10000 trades as opposed to the 1 $40 000 trade.  Do you know any threads where this has been discussed previously?  I think the problem taking just one trade using all trading capital is if you get all of your losers first up your account gets drawn down to the extent that it is hard to make the money back. Is this correct?




What is your maximum loss per trade? You will see that you can't trade 1 stock at a time.

Try looking at this
https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=10621


----------



## jersey10 (19 April 2008)

Porper said:


> I can't see the point in this.Why trade only one, presumably you are going to risk 2% or whatever the figure you decide on for all trades.What if you pick the duff ones?
> 
> Going by memory Nicks power set ups have a win rate of 40-45%, don't know what this equates to in potential no. of losses in a row, but I not too long ago had 14 losses in a row (not the Chartist picks) how will this effect you and your plan?
> 
> ...







40% - 45% winning trades seems low, is this the norm for most pro traders?  So the way people make money is not from getting the trades correct in the first place but moreso getting big returns when they are right and getting out with minimal losses (e.g. 2% when they are wrong).  Are there any systems that win more than 60% of the time?


----------



## Trembling Hand (19 April 2008)

jersey10 said:


> Are there any systems that win more than 60% of the time?




Yeah the ones Newbies sign up for that cost them $10,000


----------



## tech/a (19 April 2008)

TH

If your trading say the SPI or the HSI
Thats equivalent to one stock.

I dont think Jerseys idea "sucks".
But I do think he has a long way to go and an un realistic capital base.
Selectively trading Radges "power setups" well Nick answered that.

There are good traders who trade very limited number of stocks.
Mind you I dont know of anyone trading 1.
To say you'd go broke doing so could be wrong and could be right.

If you had the capacity to trade it short as well then I'd say traded in a professional manner he could be profitable.


----------



## Trembling Hand (19 April 2008)

tech/a said:


> If your trading say the SPI or the HSI
> Thats equivalent to one stock.
> 
> I dont think Jerseys idea "sucks".
> ...




Jersey is saying that he will have ALL his capital on 1 stock. How the hell is that going to work with correct money management rules. That is what I am saying is wrong. 1 at a time with 20% of your capital would be fine. But 1 at a time ALL in is wrong.


----------



## jersey10 (19 April 2008)

Trembling Hand said:


> Yeah the ones Newbies sign up for that cost them $10,000




max loss per trade would be 2% i.e $800

so 6 /10 winning trades over the long term is not realistic is that what you are saying?

current paper trade bought 250 BHP on 8th April for $41.08


----------



## professor_frink (19 April 2008)

jersey10 said:


> max loss per trade would be 2% i.e $800
> 
> so 6 /10 winning trades over the long term is not realistic is that what you are saying?
> 
> current paper trade bought 250 BHP on 8th April for $41.08




I'm pretty well a rank amateur, but have been punting for a few years now and don't come close to 60% winners. My trading is pretty well a 50/50 proposition. I don't think there would be too many traders out there that will have generated much over 60% winners over a number of years of trading


----------



## Nick Radge (19 April 2008)

My personal trading is currently running at 39% winners. My account is +22% over the last 3 weeks. My job is to be a manager of bad trades. Nothing more. Manage the bad ones swiftly and the good ones will look after you if you make yourself available for it.


----------



## njc.corp (19 April 2008)

jersey10 said:


> max loss per trade would be 2% i.e $800
> 
> so 6 /10 winning trades over the long term is not realistic is that what you are saying?
> 
> current paper trade bought 250 BHP on 8th April for $41.08




Jersey-lets take it back to basics has it all comes to u in what ever u do-

If u invested 10 k  for example-what return would put a smile on your face-

be honest-

Nick--


----------



## Magdoran (19 April 2008)

julius said:


> Making MORE time to look at charts when your new is an absolute trap... one of the first things I was told when I started was _"don't spend too much time looking at the charts, it will send you nuts"_
> 
> Of course I paid no attention at the time and probably spent atleast 5-6 hours a day trawling through charts for months looking for one thing or another...sounds like you'll end up doing much the same thing and I can say from experience it really gets you nowhere.




I take issue with the concept that looking at lots of charts is necessarily a waste of time.  This is potentially a misleading perspective.  While I agree that moving immediately into full time trading as a newbie using charts as the primary analysis is problematic, the idea that spending as much time as possible studying charts (effectively) “really gets you nowhere” has to be challenged.  I know the author may or may not have had this idea in mind at the time, but it could be construed this way.

The point I'm making is that if you determine that charting is going to be your main source of analysis for trading (as opposed to fundamental analysis for example), I'd strongly argue that many traders have benefited from applying themselves to effective study of markets using a charting style (there are numerous approaches in the world, not to mention on ASF – just look through the various debates on charting interpretations and the different approaches and schools over the past few years on this site).

What I've found is the McLaren approach to trading is to study those charts day in day out.  This is the only way you can truly learn how markets move.  Essentially you really need years of effective study to master key aspects of how to interpret markets to improve your chances of success.  This means studying charts every day for as many hours as you can, consistently.  But you need to be studying the right things.  Watching ticks is not what I'm talking about.  I'm talking about really studying markets (I've posted numerous times on this subject on this site to support this assertion).

But to go full time and trade as a newbie isn't what is being suggested here.  A full time trader really should be well versed in all the  key things I've talked about over the years on this site, hence newbies really should consider getting the understanding under their belt first, or accept you aren't going to trade major capital while you learn.  $40 K is problematic to start from, but if the individual really has a gift in the minority of cases, then fine this can be the make or break moment – but you really need to have your eyes open to make this kind of decision.

Of course just because you study something doesn't mean you're going to succeed at it.  Trembling Hand's concept is worthwhile – essentially people thinking they can automatically become a Wimbledon champion because they practice with a coach.

However, remember some people do have a gift and succeed at their chosen vocation, but it's often the minority.  A thing to remember is that if you don't try, you will never know – the other side of the “wisdom coin” is that you need to know when you don't have it – not an easy area to draw simple conclusions from because you're dealing with people, and some people you least suspect can do extraordinary things, and then there are the nutters you see on Idol that will never get there.

So I'd agree with the notion that charging at the cannons is probably suicidal, but I'd also say “study those charts” (effectively).


Regards

Magdoran
(The “long lost”)
P.S. Hi Guys - hope everyone is well!  I found a modicum of time to quickly scan the ASF and found the "Gem" above and had to comment! Mag


----------



## jersey10 (19 April 2008)

njc.corp said:


> Jersey-lets take it back to basics has it all comes to u in what ever u do-
> 
> If u invested 10 k  for example-what return would put a smile on your face-
> 
> ...




Don't really understand the question.

I would like to make 50% over 12 months on $40 000 while i continue to learn.  Some people have said this is unrealistic.  I have stated i am following the recommendations on the chartist.  Nick has just replied that his account is up 22% in 3 weeks and i believe he trades what he recommends on the chartist.

Jersey10


----------



## Timmy (19 April 2008)

jersey, you have started a couple of great threads, this being one of them.  There is a lot of information on the threads you have started, and a lot of information on other threads also.

Trembling Hand has been pretty blunt with his replies ... I believe this a good thing as he has honed in on some core issues that if you do not understand and address you will lose your money very, very quickly in the market, and also severely restrict your opportunities for making money.  Please forgive me as I am about to be blunt as well.  You do not seem to have much of a grasp on the basics of what it is you want to get into.  

By basics I mean risk management.  You seem to have no idea about risk management.  It is not just about setting stops (though this is very important).  Before you do another thing you need to read _Trade Your Way to Financial Freedom_ by Van Tharp, or at the very least the first few chapters (I will dig it out and point you to what chapters to read if you are interested).  Contrary to the title it is not a claptrap self-help book.  The first 50-odd pages of _Adaptive Analysis_ by Nick Radge is also essential.  I know you said these are on your list to read, but you need to read them now, before doing another thing.


----------



## jersey10 (19 April 2008)

Timmy said:


> jersey, you have started a couple of great threads, this being one of them.  There is a lot of information on the threads you have started, and a lot of information on other threads also.
> 
> Trembling Hand has been pretty blunt with his replies ... I believe this a good thing as he has honed in on some core issues that if you do not understand and address you will lose your money very, very quickly in the market, and also severely restrict your opportunities for making money.  Please forgive me as I am about to be blunt as well.  You do not seem to have much of a grasp on the basics of what it is you want to get into.
> 
> By basics I mean risk management.  You seem to have no idea about risk management.  It is not just about setting stops (though this is very important).  Before you do another thing you need to read _Trade Your Way to Financial Freedom_ by Van Tharp, or at the very least the first few chapters (I will dig it out and point you to what chapters to read if you are interested).  Contrary to the title it is not a claptrap self-help book.  The first 50-odd pages of _Adaptive Analysis_ by Nick Radge is also essential.





Hi Timmy,

I don't mind blunt criticism or kindly-worded criticism as long as it helps me to become more educated and ultimately increases the chance that i will be successful in achieving my long term goal of becoming a full time trader.  TH has been very helpful in this regard as have many others in this thread and previous threads.  I just hope these guys continue to respond to my threads as i continue to post.  Thanks for your comment, i am looking at Van Tharp's book on my bookshelf now. I started reading it over Christmas but only got about 20 or so pages in.  I might put Reminiscences of a Stock Operator on hold and read Van Tharp this afternoon.  What section in particular are you referring to?

Jersey10


----------



## Timmy (19 April 2008)

The most important parts of the book (IMHO) are his ideas and models on risk control.  The parts of the book about designing entry triggers, exit triggers etc., are, in my opinion, not so useful, & can be read later.  Also, some of the book is complex and can be safely left for later.

Read chapter 7 first (Six Keys to a Great Trading System)
Chapter 10: Knowing When to Fold'em...

Then chapters 2, 3 and 4.

This is all presupposing that you will, eventually, read the whole thing.


Reading _Adaptive Analysis_ (first 50 pages) is going to shed a lot of light onto the subject too.


----------



## RichKid (19 April 2008)

Hello Jersey

Thank you for being so forthright in your posts. I'm sure many newbies see something of themselves in you. They will benefit from the responses of the more experienced traders to your queries.

This is one of the many threads discussing Van Tharp, remember to use the 'search' tool to locate other threads of interest https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?p=6030#post6030 

The Admin Forum has some threads on making the best of ASF's tools. 

There is a thread dedicated to Radge's Adaptive Analysis as well.


----------



## njc.corp (19 April 2008)

jersey10 said:


> don't really understand the question.
> 
> I would like to make 50% over 12 months on $40 000 while i continue to learn.  Some people have said this is unrealistic.  I have stated i am following the recommendations on the chartist.  Nick has just replied that his account is up 22% in 3 weeks and i believe he trades what he recommends on the chartist.
> 
> Jersey10




your right that was  ? so 50% is what u want-fair enough-

some people have said thats unrealistic and some say thats easy-its just people's views-

i have happy  with 15-25 % but thats me-

Nick--


----------



## julius (19 April 2008)

Magdoran said:


> I take issue with the concept that looking at lots of charts is necessarily a waste of time.  This is potentially a misleading perspective.  While I agree that moving immediately into full time trading as a newbie using charts as the primary analysis is problematic, the idea that spending as much time as possible studying charts (effectively) “really gets you nowhere” has to be challenged.  I know the author may or may not have had this idea in mind at the time, but it could be construed this way.
> 
> The point I'm making is that if you determine that charting is going to be your main source of analysis for trading (as opposed to fundamental analysis for example), I'd strongly argue that many traders have benefited from applying themselves to effective study of markets using a charting style (there are numerous approaches in the world, not to mention on ASF – just look through the various debates on charting interpretations and the different approaches and schools over the past few years on this site).
> 
> ...




So what does someone like Jersey do? He takes the extra day off work and starts by devoting himself to perfecting Radge's power setups, applying every kind of technical tool in the hope that he can increase his winning percentage... You could lecture the beginner about risk:reward etc. until your blue in the face but it wont make the slightest difference because 'accuracy' is naturally attractive, it's the bad habit almost everyone starts with.

Becoming a good trader isn't about the hours under the belt, it's about conditioning over time - weeks, months, years etc. Whats the best thing a novice can do after a successful trade? Get the hell off the computer right away because the chances are you'll give your profits right back.

Theory has rapidly diminishing returns, in my opinion your best off knowing only enough to understand your trades and not much more. ie. principle of parsimony

I don't think it's 'knowledge' that lets people down when they start trading, it's the self sabotage - putting all the account into one of the setups for example... Jersey has started with a proven method and a reasonable amount of capital to implement it, at this point the only thing left to do is not f*ck it up! :


----------



## Whiskers (19 April 2008)

Magdoran said:


> I take issue with the concept that looking at lots of charts is necessarily a waste of time.  This is potentially a misleading perspective.  While I agree that moving immediately into full time trading as a newbie using charts as the primary analysis is problematic, the idea that spending as much time as possible *studying charts (effectively)* “really gets you nowhere” has to be challenged.




The point I highlighted in magdorans post... studying charts effectively, is so important not just to save huge amounts of time pondering over them, but to be quickly able (more intuitively) to interpret what they are saying.

It seems to be a pretty common failing of people reading charts not to look at the longer trend/position before pondering too much over the short term daily/hourly/minutes charts.

I have adapted a style that suits my personality, better referred to as social style. I essentially base my strategy on fundamental analysis, but I use chart analysis to time entry and exits of my trades.

I typically glance at hourly/daily charts to see where my trade/potential trade is right now, then revert to weekly and ocassionally monthly charts to determine the medium and longer term trend/prospects before I revert back to hourly/daily for a more thorough analysis before making a move. 

I think regardless of which charting you use, the key point is to know (understand thoroughly) exactly what you are looking for, then it becomes more intuitive in so far as you get an instant mental picture of what is most likely going to happen based on strong correlations of the data in the charts with fundamental analysis.


----------



## Magdoran (19 April 2008)

julius said:


> So what does someone like Jersey do? He takes the extra day off work and starts by devoting himself to perfecting Radge's power setups, applying every kind of technical tool in the hope that he can increase his winning percentage... You could lecture the beginner about risk:reward etc. until your blue in the face but it wont make the slightest difference because 'accuracy' is naturally attractive, it's the bad habit almost everyone starts with.
> 
> Becoming a good trader isn't about the hours under the belt, it's about conditioning over time - weeks, months, years etc. Whats the best thing a novice can do after a successful trade? Get the hell off the computer right away because the chances are you'll give your profits right back.
> 
> ...



julius:

Indeed, and this is the crux of where you and I differ.  While I can see the merit in the concept of occam's razor in some situations, there are alternative ways of thinking about anything, and in particular markets.  I do not agree that simplicity is the panacea.  It has it's place, but trading markets in my view is a very involved area.  In fact I'd say it's one of the hardest games anyone can attempt.

So, I patently do not agree with your perspectives at all, but I respect your right to think as you do.  What I will do is to take issue with sweeping statements like the ones you have asserted as if they are absolute truths.  They are not, and I'm saying they are not.  I'm also saying now that you need to be more careful about making statements that influence others.

Here's where you and I have polar opposite perspectives:  I do think that acquiring and applying the right theory can yield significant returns, and that it usually takes many hours to achieve the depth of understanding to succeed consistently.  I do think that consistent accuracy is achievable, and have both done it and see it done by others in real markets.

I also don't think you fully understand my perspective.  I clearly said that watching ticks was not what I'm talking about, and your comment put this straw man up anyway.  I was talking about studying markets.  Studying the way markets trend through charts, a very different proposition which you conveniently omit to address. 

You ask what should jersey do?  Simple, he's asking questions to try to work out how to proceed.  You've made an assumption that he will not succeed by becoming a full time trader, and have assumed that spending time looking at charts and studying them “is a waste of time”.  That may well be true, but what if it isn't?  What if Jersey is the next Robert Prechter or George Soros?  I think jersey should continue to ask questions and think his future moves through very carefully, and leverage the significant body of knowledge that is available, especially from the ASF repository of knowledge.

How do you know what he's really capable of?  Maybe by spending focused time his learning will be accelerated, and even though he doesn't succeed the first time, he comes back later in life leveraging those experiences to succeed in the end at a later point.  How do you know what's going to happen?  While this may seem unlikely from his comments, it is not our place to rule out choices for him, or mislead him, as you are doing intellectually without acknowledging your bias.  If however you took the time to give a balanced appraisal, we wouldn't be having this polemic.

Also, you are obviously ignorant of the body of the work I have posted for you to again make such sweeping statements as this “gem”:  “...'accuracy' is naturally attractive, it's the bad habit almost everyone starts with.”  Oh really?  Respectfully, I think this is more a testimony to your capabilities and abilities to read charts than it is an absolute truth.  I beg to differ, and I cite the body of my work on this site as evidence of the opposite conclusion.



julius said:


> I don't think it's 'knowledge' that lets people down when they start trading, it's the self sabotage




And again a sweeping statement of pure ignorance of my long running commentary about psychology being the number one aspect to successful trading.  I don't know how many times I have answered the kind of questions jersey is raising.  Julius, I have no problem with you raising cautionary notes.  I applaud that.  What I have a problem with is you making sweeping and potentially misleading statements, and I take seriously tearing down this kind of sophistry wherever I see it.


----------



## Timmy (19 April 2008)

Whiskers said:


> It seems to be a pretty common failing of people reading charts not to look at the longer trend/position before pondering too much over the short term daily/hourly/minutes charts.




Are you stalking me?


----------



## Porper (19 April 2008)

jersey10 said:


> 40% - 45% winning trades seems low




Your winning amount of trades has little impact on profits on its own.40-45% win rate would be very low for somebody with a strategy of buy and hold, conversely for somebody like myself who operates with very tight stops 40-45% would be great.It all depends on your preference, most people feel more comfortable with a higher win rate, however this means that your win/loss ratio will be lower.



jersey10 said:


> So the way people make money is not from getting the trades correct in the first place but moreso getting big returns when they are right and getting out with minimal losses (e.g. 2% when they are wrong).




You have the right idea here, let the winners run and cut your losses.


----------



## prawn_86 (19 April 2008)

Personally i think it is hugely niave to think that you will make anywhere 50% if it is your first attempt at trading, especially if you are still learning as you say you are.

If you are still at a learning stage I would be prepared not to make anything for AT LEAST a year and maybe even go backwards a little as you learn.

In fact i will create another thread with a poll to see how long it took most traders to be constantly profitable...


----------



## njc.corp (19 April 2008)

prawn_86 said:


> Personally i think it is hugely niave to think that you will make anywhere 50% if it is your first attempt at trading, especially if you are still learning as you say you are.
> 
> If you are still at a learning stage I would be prepared not to make anything for AT LEAST a year and maybe even go backwards a little as you learn.
> 
> In fact i will create another thread with a poll to see how long it took most traders to be constantly profitable...




a poll would be good-

Thanks

Nick--


----------



## jersey10 (19 April 2008)

Timmy said:


> The most important parts of the book (IMHO) are his ideas and models on risk control.  The parts of the book about designing entry triggers, exit triggers etc., are, in my opinion, not so useful, & can be read later.  Also, some of the book is complex and can be safely left for later.
> 
> Read chapter 7 first (Six Keys to a Great Trading System)
> Chapter 10: Knowing When to Fold'em...
> ...




Have just finished reading chapter 7.  I was aware of much of what was being said but reading that put it all together in a logical way and showed the links between each of the variables relating to expectancy.  Definitely shows how being right is not as important as i and i suspect many other inexperienced traders suspect it would be in achieving positive expectancy.


----------



## julius (19 April 2008)

Dear Lost One,

It seems somewhere along the way you missed my point.



> Here's where you and I have polar opposite perspectives: I do think that acquiring and applying the right theory can yield significant returns, and that it usually takes many hours to achieve the depth of understanding to succeed consistently. I do think that consistent accuracy is achievable, and have both done it and see it done by others in real markets.




I agree, but that's irrelevent because what I said is that theory has rapidly diminishing returns. If our goal is to make money from the markets then continuing to read more and more technical analysis theory is going to have a diminishing effect on performance. In my opinion, at this point in Jersey's trading career creating more time to look at charts has more downside than up - there's enough hours in the day to spend an adequate amount of time reading and analysing charts without having to take time off work.

I don't neccesarily agree that it takes 'many hours' to achieve 'the depth of understanding to succeed consistently'. In my experience, it's more about spending weeks and months thinking in a certain way, slowly conditioning the way we think about a situation, rather than the sum of the hours we spend 'learning'. ie. 1 hour a day for 6 months is worth more than 8 hours a day for 3 weeks.

I'm not advocating a 'simple' approach to analysing the markets as you state - I think 'complex' analysis could definetly form part of a valid trading plan, but ideally you want any method to be as simple as possible without sacrificing performance - which is what parsimony refers to. Unless of course you like analysis for the sake of it...

Jersey's got a valid method in the 'power setups' but has already eluded to the fact that he'd like a higher winning percentage, which is pretty natural if you ask me. Then we've got Nick Radge who publishes the setups stating on a number of occasions that even he can't predict the outcome of the signals. So I'm going to go out on a limb and say that it's probably not going to be the most effecient use of Jerseys time to look for ways to improve the accuracy.

Where did I say I don't think he will succeed? Actually I think he's got a much better chance of succeeding than 90% of the other 'starting-to-trade' posters. If his aim really is to trade full time, then I think 1. he is going to need more cash to be adequately capitalised, and 2. should start with a bread & butter method to fall back on.



> Also, you are obviously ignorant of the body of the work I have posted for you to again make such sweeping statements as this “gem”: “...'accuracy' is naturally attractive, it's the bad habit almost everyone starts with.” Oh really? Respectfully, I think this is more a testimony to your capabilities and abilities to read charts than it is an absolute truth. I beg to differ, and I cite the body of my work on this site as evidence of the opposite conclusion.




You've taken almost everything I've said completely out of context. I'm talking about the best approach for a beginner, not trading as a whole. Although, if you want to start another thread about 'predictive' methodologies, I'd be happy to argue the topic into the ground.



> I'm also saying now that you need to be more careful about making statements that influence others.




So in effect what I'm saying is, stick with a proven method provided by a legally qualified advisor. What your saying is, I disagree, go out and explore the world of T/A, you might lose your capital but it will be worth it for the experience. Actually Magdoran, _you_ need to be more careful about making statements that influence others.


----------



## Whiskers (19 April 2008)

Timmy said:


> Whiskers said:
> 
> 
> > It seems to be a pretty common failing of people reading charts not to look at the longer trend/position before pondering too much over the short term daily/hourly/minutes charts.
> ...




Ha ha. I think most of us probably started out like this. I know I did, until I stumbled across a note in some charting information somewhere. It hit me like the proverbial kick in the head when I finally got it.


----------



## njc.corp (19 April 2008)

julius-

i agree in the 1 hour a day x 6 months- rather then 8 hours x 3 weeks-

that to me is so true- i have a mate who just walk into it with 1- month knowledge only to sook and complain that he  has no money or running out of money-

Nick--


----------



## tech/a (19 April 2008)

Without correct application of analysis and correct application of trade management,dont care how you analyse your trades,consistent profit will elude you.


----------



## Pager (19 April 2008)

I traded full time for 8 months and know i work part time as to be honest trading is boring and if your at home pretty lonely and for me almost soul destroying.

I found myself spending hours at the Gym or at the local park whacking golf balls just for something less monotonous to do, these days with hand held devices i can see whats happening in the market when ever or were ever iam, also i found i made no more money by staring at a screen all day than by sending my broker all my orders with entry's, exits, stops, profit targets, break even stops etc etc. 

Maybe i should have persevered with very short term day trading but its not all that its cracked up to be, doing for a day or a few hours is one thing, day in day quite another.


----------



## jersey10 (19 April 2008)

Pager said:


> I traded full time for 8 months and know i work part time as to be honest trading is boring and if your at home pretty lonely and for me almost soul destroying.
> 
> I found myself spending hours at the Gym or at the local park whacking golf balls just for something less monotonous to do, these days with hand held devices i can see whats happening in the market when ever or were ever iam, also i found i made no more money by staring at a screen all day than by sending my broker all my orders with entry's, exits, stops, profit targets, break even stops etc etc.
> 
> Maybe i should have persevered with very short term day trading but its not all that its cracked up to be, doing for a day or a few hours is one thing, day in day quite another.





I suppose this is another consideration when planning to trade for your income eventually.  Personally, i believe i am the type of person who could spend 5 - 6 hours per day in front of my laptop trading or researching.  The ultimate would be to work towards a system where you can spend less time trading which still pays your income giving you time for other things.

I was interested in what Trembling Hand said in an earlier post about trading more not for the money but for the challenge of trading.

I wonder how many people start trading purely to make money and without much interest in the actual subject of share trading.  I am sure these people would not last long doing it.


----------



## nahman (19 April 2008)

Consider CFD's with guaranteed stop loss orders, do lots of research, I recommend Benjamin Graham's book on value investing, its the basics of how to be  a Buffett since he was a student of Graham.


----------



## IFocus (19 April 2008)

jersey10 said:


> I was interested in what Trembling Hand said in an earlier post about trading more not for the money but for the challenge of trading.




Yes thinking about trading process's and enjoying that aspect and not thinking about money or getting excited about how much you will make is the key, one makes money the other creates bad habits and empty accounts.

To start in this game and if you have to put money into the market at this point spreading your risk across 5 or more positions is recommended as you will likely make mistakes along the way.

Market risk comes from many angles its not just about your stoploss position.

Lets say you go short 1 stock with your $40K and your stock is a take over target thats normally 30% ish price jump $12K ish loss. Lets say you go long 1 stock with $40K and its has a surprise profit warning bad news.............. get the picture.

Jersey as RH has already said you have asked some good questions and engaged some very experienced people on this forum well done.

Good luck in your trading


----------



## Magdoran (20 April 2008)

julius said:


> Dear Lost One,
> 
> It seems somewhere along the way you missed my point.
> 
> ...



julius:

Let's spell this out clearly, one more time for everyone who missed it in a nutshell.  My best shot guess is that there are four key pillars to successful trading – Psychology, Analysis, System and Strategy (please see all my posts for a full explanation of what these are in depth).  Mastering all of these and meshing them together effectively is part of the challenge to improve the chances of success (but never a guarantee).

So, I did not miss your primary point about system approaches and aiming for a positive expectancy (even though you didn't elucidate this very well). I understand and fully agree with the whole line of thinking that having a system which is designed to deliver a positive expectancy is one of the four cornerstones to success (which comes mainly under the “System” category).  I was taking issue with your biased viewpoint about one aspect of the four pillars – analysis, and your “advice”.

The primary issue is about technical analysis.  Your view is that “Making MORE time to look at charts when your [sic] new is an absolute trap”.  My view is that it takes years to fully master trading, especially technical analysis, and fully embrace McLaren's line of thinking that “the more you study markets, the better off you'll be”.  Which means really studying markets.  Going through indexes, commodities, FOREX, equities, studying different epochs, bear markets, bull markets, consolidating markets, etc.  

The core idea is that you have to study markets in depth, and spending an hour a week for 6 months respectfully won't cut it unless you are truly gifted.  The same goes for 8 hours a day for 3 weeks, but I'd argue, that for some, learning effectively in a focused way like this can be very beneficial, especially if you are starting off in the right direction.  It may not get you there, but if it establishes a solid framework for the future it can make a significant impact early on, so I do disagree with you here.  

The people I have helped who have focused heavily on learning and invested the majority of their time and effort really studying markets, have on average from my experience way outperformed the path you are suggesting.  Now this is not a proof that this is universally so, and is not scientifically conducted, but from a practical standpoint I have known many people who became full time traders who succeeded and did so because they made a 100% commitment to study all aspects of trading and to develop effective methods.  

*Predictive Methodologies:*
The other core polemic is that I fully support the validity and effectiveness of “predictive” methodologies and you don't.   I have demonstrated enough to give the wiser readers food for thought on this issue without revisiting this here.  Some of my calls have been made a month in advance for example.  Let's see you call pivot points say at least 2 weeks in advance. You won't do this of course because you are closed to this possibility. Interestingly Nick's approach is based on a Elliott Wave, a “predictive methodology” which Jersey is looking to subscribe to, but we don't see you taking issue with this.

Your comments for example are biased against Elliott Wave for example, aren't they?  Your contention is that this school of thinking is a waste of time, and that knowledge of this theory has “rapidly diminishing returns” necessarily for a new player, correct?  My view is that it may, or may not be true.  It depends on the individual, and their ability to absorb a theory, and also to effectively use it, and select the best theory available that they can utilize.  The innate quality of any theory is difficult to measure.  But again, from experience, people like wavepicker for example stress the importance of dedicated study to a discipline, as I think Nick would also agree with.

Atomic theory for example is very powerful for a physicist, but probably not very useful for a painter wishing to learn how to paint.  But theories on perspective may be highly beneficial, and studying these in a determined and focused way may provide the foundations for becoming a master painter.  Does this point make sense to you?  If so, what you are doing is saying to the novice student, “awww don't waste too much time on perspective, or on types of pigments, just get a brush and splash a dab of paint for an hour once a week”, “theory has rapidly diminishing returns”.  Really?  This is just nonsense.



julius said:


> If our goal is to make money from the markets then continuing to read more and more technical analysis theory is going to have a diminishing effect on performance. In my opinion, at this point in Jersey's trading career creating more time to look at charts has more downside than up - there's enough hours in the day to spend an adequate amount of time reading and analysing charts without having to take time off work




How do you know for sure?  Studying technical analysis may or may not effect performance in any number of ways.  This statement draws a conclusion from a false premise.  It may be the case that spending 3 weeks intense study from the right source for the individual's aptitude may be highly beneficial. It's up to the individual to decide, not you.  You may be right, but forcing the issue is what I'm having a problem with.

This is once again your cavalier “I know best” unqualified sweeping approach purporting to be the absolute truth.  People like you worry me when “advising” others, who espouse such arrogant certainty about one of the most challenging and complex areas anyone can attempt.  

I agree that there are many facets to trading, and analysis is just one of them.  But who are you to determine the best path with such limited knowledge about the individual in question?  If you're a qualified advisor you really should know better, especially if you know the ASIC rules on this.  But I somehow don't think you are, are you?

I'm suggesting that if people like Jersey are going to use technical analysis as their method to analyse, they really should master it.  I would also say though that they should master the other three pillars too before even contemplating trading critical capital.  How they should break their time into each facet, and how much time they are going to allocate is highly variable depending on the individual.  You just don't seem to see this, hence you keep making sweeping statements that can be misleading.

I find it astounding that you draw this twisted interpretation of my comments: “go out and explore the world of T/A, you might lose your capital but it will be worth it for the experience” (which is just not true at all) and then have the audacity to say I'm misleading people by taking issue with your dangerous and ill thought out personal opinions as if they were indisputable facts.  This comment alone clearly displays your quality as a commentator.


----------



## sails (20 April 2008)

Magdoran said:


> julius:
> 
> Let's spell this out clearly, one more time for everyone who missed it in a nutshell.  My best shot guess is that there are four key pillars to successful trading – Psychology, Analysis, System and Strategy (please see all my posts for a full explanation of what these are in depth).  Mastering all of these and meshing them together effectively is part of the challenge to improve the chances of success (but never a guarantee)...




Good to see you posting again, Magdoran!  Hope the weather is warming up a little over there?

Interesting that psychology is first on your list.  In hindsight, I can now see that the methods I was initially using to trade did not suit my personality at all.   With an inbuilt risk aversion, trying to “short term” trade potential reversal points in the market was way too stressful.  While many of the trade setups were correct, the ones that didn't meant a resumption of the trend where one risked a lot of slippage when getting out.  So the fear of being wrong was a huge obstacle to successful trading and led to freezing at taking all trade setups and also closing winners too early to lock in a little profit.

Eventually, I did go to a psychologist which helped with techniques to reduce stress while trading.  Interestingly as time passed, my style of trading began to change and found other methods that are much less stressful and leaves the brain far more “emotion free” for better decision making.  Also, understanding and utilizing risk management techniques has been another factor in reducing trading stresses.

I understand some of the red flags of trading outside of one’s risk tolerance are:
1.  Letting losses run in the “hope” the market will recover.
2.  Cutting winners short in the “fear” of losing that little profit.
3.  Freezing at pulling the trigger at trade entry set-ups for “fear” it might be wrong only to watch in disgust as it powers off in your direction.  When one does pluck up the courage to pull the trigger, good chance it will be a loser!

Sharing this in all honesty should it help anyone else recognise these symptoms in their trading and realise that trading against one’s personality is something that needs to be addressed.


----------



## barney (20 April 2008)

Trembling Hand said:


> Jersey is saying that he will have ALL his capital on 1 stock. How the hell is that going to work with correct money management rules. That is what I am saying is wrong. 1 at a time with 20% of your capital would be fine. But 1 at a time ALL in is wrong.




Hi J,  What TH is saying here is of paramount importance. Others have also commented that this is the wrong way to trade, but without explaining what can happen if you do this .............. I'll try and keep it brief ...........

1) You bet your total capital (40 grand) on your "winner" stock
2) You wake up to find your stock in trading halt/trading suspension
3) Your stock re-opens a few days later and gaps down past your stop loss
4) You are now minus 40% of your capital "on paper" ........ believe me it does happen !!

Enter "Trading Psychology" stage left ......

5) How do you cope with this situation ........ Big decision ......... If you sell, you have just lost $16,000
6) You panick ........... you hang on "hoping" the stock will improve
7) The stock continues to slide and is now worth 20% of your original buy price ................ You have now lost $32,000 ............ 

I'm sure you get the picture .............. and this can theoretically happen to any stock (unlikely on BHP or CBA etc etc .......... thats why I suggested earlier that you stay way from spec's)

Simple ........... Don't put all your money on one stock .......... quick way to the poor house if it goes wrong ........... Good luck with it.


----------



## jersey10 (20 April 2008)

Thanks Barney, i absolutely understand this point now.  I think was underestimating the likelihood of getting a number of losing trades in a row as well as underestimating the risk of a stock gapping me out well beyond my stop loss -  both of which are definitely possible and not worth risking your total capital on.

Jersey10


----------



## julius (20 April 2008)

Magdoran,

I've already had several PM's telling me not to bother replying...

You've gone off on an 1100 word quasi-philosophical rant (read: sermon) about the tenants of technical analysis - and quite frankly this isn't a discussion I want to be a part of.

Clearly you're emotional about the topic. I can only assume you must find the idea of trading successfully (making $money consistently, not being 'right) using a simple method quite insulting.

Your obviously clueless to the concept of 'diminishing returns' - of course theory isn't useless, but the benefits of gaining extra theory diminish with the more theory that you already know. It's the same for any field of study.
If you get it then great. If you can't grasp the idea, I can't help you there.

Why do I think this is particuarly relevent to someone who is new to trading (as per the original post? It doesn't matter if Jersey decides to trade full time or part time, I'll bet he's still going to find many hours to read about something new, review the charts, play around with a new system idea, etc, etc. ; it's just one of those things everyone seems to go through when they start trading, call it 'un-directed learning' - 'you don't know what you don't know'. After a while you start to develop a critical eye (also a nose for bullsh*t) for particular topics and then you start to direct you're own learning - consciously incompetent, hoorah!

Jersey has a great opportunity to 'fake it till he makes it' using Nick Radge's subscription service - give himself a damn good chance of making some dosh while he finds his feet at trading. The last thing I would be doing is putting extra pressure on myself by taking time off work. But that's just me, I want to trade well and end up with $coin in the bank, maybe Jersey wants to become learned in all the schools of technical analysis...

My understanding of the 'power setups' is they are pattern based, while Radge's own discretionary analysis includes E.W. - which from what I've seen uses E.W. to establish the context of the market rather than for primary trading decisions. I don't want to put words in someone else's mouth, so Nick can comment on that or else you can have the debate with someone who enjoys this type of banter.

You've accused me of making all these 'sweeping' statements as if I think I'm some kind of authority on the subject ? Not the case, nor do I have any 'pride' about it - I'm the first to approach others much more knowledgable than myself ; Frank D, motorway, Howard Bandy, Trembling H, tech/a, et al. Apologies to everyone if my posts read this way, it was unintended.

Over to you Moggi, I won't post anything else on this thread.


----------



## barney (20 April 2008)

jersey10 said:


> Thanks Barney, i absolutely understand this point now.  I think was underestimating the likelihood of getting a number of losing trades in a row as well as underestimating the risk of a stock gapping me out well beyond my stop loss -  both of which are definitely possible and not worth risking your total capital on.
> 
> Jersey10




Thats good J,  Its a tougher game than it looks. The fact that you are doing your reseach prior to entering the market will hopefully get you started on the right foot. (Wish I'd done that ..... )

There are a lot of knowledgeable people on this Forum, (I'm not one of them, lol  )   Some have already posted on this thread .......... so I'd recommend you check out their posts on other threads ...... sometimes you have to read between the lines, but there are many pearls of wisdom ...

Julius and Mag,....  From my point of view, you are both correct. Tech analysis is the basis from which most of us choose our entry/exit points etc, and if J is to become a successful stand alone trader, he will need to be proficient at it, but, if he is content at this point to follow Nick's selections (and more importantly Nick's Money Mangement rules), then T/A is of less importance at the moment ........... 

Sound money management is the key to eliminating the psychological roller coaster of making poor trading decisions, and for that reason I think it is THE most important ingredient of the three ............ I should know cause up till recently, I was pretty bludy awful at the whole three :bonk:


----------



## Magdoran (20 April 2008)

sails said:


> Good to see you posting again, Magdoran!  Hope the weather is warming up a little over there?
> 
> Interesting that psychology is first on your list.  In hindsight, I can now see that the methods I was initially using to trade did not suit my personality at all.   With an inbuilt risk aversion, trying to “short term” trade potential reversal points in the market was way too stressful.  While many of the trade setups were correct, the ones that didn't meant a resumption of the trend where one risked a lot of slippage when getting out.  So the fear of being wrong was a huge obstacle to successful trading and led to freezing at taking all trade setups and also closing winners too early to lock in a little profit.
> 
> ...



Hey Margaret,

Nice to hear from you too.  Yes it is getting warmer here now thankfully, and some friends from Australia are looking to visit during the summer here.

Completely agree with your comments, and can relate to your experiences too.  I still draw a lot on Mark Douglas.

As for my posting, this is probably more of a guest appearance.  A friend had sent an email on a post on ASF, and while having a quick look around came across this thread.

All the Best

Mag


----------



## Magdoran (20 April 2008)

julius said:


> Magdoran,
> 
> I've already had several PM's telling me not to bother replying...
> 
> ...







julius said:


> I've already had several PM's telling me not to bother replying...



- nice!  And did you take their advice?



julius said:


> You've gone off on an 1100 word quasi-philosophical rant (read: sermon) about the tenants of technical analysis



Yup, I have a tendency to do that sometimes... but with good intentions.  But I know I can be bloody annoying sometimes – but you can still learn something from someone even though you disagree with them.  I also have the moral spine to raise question marks over questionable “advice”.



julius said:


> I can only assume you must find the idea of trading successfully (making $money consistently, not being 'right) using a simple method quite insulting.



  Ahhh... No.  No problem with people who find what works for them.  What I do want is for people to get the full story and choose for themselves from an informed position.



julius said:


> Your obviously clueless to the concept of 'diminishing returns'



No, I get the diminishing returns concept.  But the way you conveyed your viewpoint was subjective, and I think people should know there is a choice here each with benefits and drawbacks.



julius said:


> I'm the first to approach others much more knowledgable [sic] than myself ; Frank D, motorway, Howard Bandy, Trembling H, tech/a, et al.



Some of the posters you list I'm on excellent terms with, some I don't know, and some of the others somewhat less so, so I wouldn't be surprised if there were some comments from the PM peanut gallery given we have been debating each other fervently for quite a few years now.  

Respectfully, julius, my original intention was a one off brief comment to bring balance. I agree, I think we've both presented our cases sufficiently to move on now.

Mag


----------



## njc.corp (20 April 2008)

since i feeling the topic has gone from helping jersey-its come down to what he wants to do-

what ever road he takes is a gamble-

1.trade for a living=might make heaps vs might have nothing left-(boring)
2.works a normal job=working at his normal job for the rest of his life vs getting the sacked soon-(also boring doing the same thing everyday)

they are just basic examples but they are facts that we all know-

jersey get some basic info under your belt and see what u want to do-at least u know and understand some rule's--

its your money-others including i can only tell u what to do and what not to do-_*what we can't do  for u is to do the work for u---*_


jersey dont get me wrong - i am in the same boat has u i got 40-75 k lying around-so i am just kicking back making note's asking questions and when i am ready i will go in-_*when i am ready*_

i am not worried about making money -i just dont want to have nothing  because i have worked hard to save the  ^^ above figure and will do anything  in my power to retain it--

p.s.-- u got to spend money to make money-

Nick--


----------



## Sir Burr (20 April 2008)

Magdoran said:


> comments from the PM peanut gallery




Ducati??? :


----------



## wavepicker (20 April 2008)

julius said:


> Magdoran,
> 
> 
> My understanding of the 'power setups' is they are pattern based, while Radge's own discretionary analysis includes E.W. - which from what I've seen uses E.W. to establish the context of the market rather than for primary trading decisions.




Isn't EW pattern based??


----------



## Porper (20 April 2008)

julius said:


> My understanding of the 'power setups' is they are pattern based.




This is correct, pattern based which doesn't include  Elliot Wave as far as I know, certainly not for the target prices anyway,although Wavepicker is correct, Elliot Wave is a pattern based of course.


----------



## tech/a (20 April 2008)

You know,seems all or most using these setups are looking at purely that the setup and trade.

When the most valuable thing Ive found is the way a professional trader manages his trades.
Not just the setting of a buy/stop and target price* but the continual adjustment of these where and when required DURING the trade*,and the massive difference it can/does make to your portfolio.

An invaluable insight.Once learnt can be applied to any way you choose to trade.

Most everyone can see the forest but have a very careful look at the quality of the trees!


----------



## MRC & Co (20 April 2008)

tech/a said:


> Not just the setting of a buy/stop and target price* but the continual adjustment of these where and when required DURING the trade*,and the massive difference it can/does make to your portfolio.




Absolutely PARAMOUNT!

The hardest and most elusive of everything in trading for me so far!  Trialing a few different methods now on my position trades.  

Does Nick provide updated information on such adjustments nightly on current recommended power set-up positions?  

I've got his book (adaptive analysis) and am signing upto the chartist in 2 weeks (when I return from spending 9 days in a bungalow over the water in Vanuatu ) for information on position trades (as I will still be dedicating 60% of my portfolio to these, on daily charts, for Australian equities), whilst using a smaller portion to trade intra-day futures through TradeStation.  

Cheers


----------



## nomore4s (20 April 2008)

MRC & Co said:


> Does Nick provide updated information on such adjustments nightly on current recommended power set-up positions?




Yes he does.


----------



## MRC & Co (20 April 2008)

nomore4s said:


> Yes he does.




Yep, its a wrap! 

Now eager to get back and let the 16 hours a day learning continue!


----------



## sleepy (20 April 2008)

tech/a said:


> Not just the setting of a buy/stop and target price* but the continual adjustment of these where and when required DURING the trade*,and the massive difference it can/does make to your portfolio.




As John has rightly pointed out the KEY is how the *trade is managed* once a position is taken.



MRC & Co said:


> Does Nick provide updated information on such adjustments nightly on current recommended power set-up positions?




Matt ... Heres an example of a current SHORT Power SetUp Trade with Nicks comments ...

Apr 10: Amend the profit target down to $??
Apr 9: Drop the stop to $?? after todays high close. If we trade lower again tomorrow I will revise the target lower.
Apr 2: Looks like a few were waiting the dividend and have now decided that they've had enough. Move the stop to $??. If start trending lower I will revise the target lower as well.
Apr 1: ?? dividend paid today which will be reflected in the weekly scorecard. Holding this stock is like pulling teeth, so drop the stop down to $??
Mar 20: Its taken its time in coming but finally we're getting some movement with this ??% decline. Adjust the stop down to $??
Mar 17: Move stop to $?? now
Mar 11: If $?? can be breached we could see a quick run lower.
Mar 6: This stock could be being accumulated here. I have no doubt we'll be stopped out any day.
Feb 21: We'll just cut that risk back a little more. Amend the stop down to $??
Feb 20: Pattern triggered today. We have a small pivot high just above so we'll move the stop down now to $1.49
Feb: 7: A large basing support is coming under pressure. Any breach could see a follow through decline and hopefully have enough momentum to carry prices below the 2007 lows.

sleepy


----------



## Magdoran (20 April 2008)

Sir Burr said:


> Ducati??? :



Haha - Sir Burr!

Funny you should mention him.  He's actually a really nice guy, but can be quite tenacious at times - some people finding him infuriating.  

I don't really intend to assume his mantle though.  But I did think of him when I wrote that oddly enough.  Too Funny!

Mag


----------



## MRC & Co (20 April 2008)

Thanks Sleepy,

Yeh, I had a chat to Tech about it already.

Looks 100% what I am after at this stage of my trading "career".  Got most things downpat and it appears Nicks power set-ups are similar to the way I have been doing things myself, as far as position trading equities.  However, will be fantastic to refine my techniques through the use of real time practical examples from a successful trader himself (I avoid any other vendor at all costs, call it paranoia if you will, but only beleive in learning from successful traders and those who keep it simple)!  And the moving of stops on an existing trade is my biggest downfall so far by a country mile!!


----------



## alwaysLearning (26 April 2008)

jersey10 said:


> Planning on trading equities at this stage, but after reading about forex a bit particularly on this forum I would like to trade that at some stage. Know next to nothing about it at the moment however.
> 
> I would be interested in knowing why you believe a masters would be such a waste of time.
> 
> ...




oh gosh. I did only a tiny bit of research into foreign exchange trading and even signed up to one of those broker free accounts. It felt like I was gambling lol.

There is a good website you should check out called babypips.com That website spells out a lot of risks etc.

Basically in my limited knowlege of forex trading, I'd say that it's not worth the trouble. I read a stat that 96% of people to get into forex fail badly. Of the 4% that succeed, 2% will break even. And only about 2% do well in forex. 

Now I don't know where they got those stats from but it is pretty damning. Also when I was playing with the brokers software, everytime I thought that it was a sure thing that the dollar would go up on a particular currency, then the broker made it so that my gain from that transaction was hardly anything and yet if the dollar went down I'd lose pretty much everything I put in.

Anyway I'm a total newbie to finance and the economy etc so I don't know much. Maybe you can make a LOT of money from forex but based on a few weeks of research I found forex trading to be way too risky for me. Felt worse than gambling for me lol.


----------



## alwaysLearning (26 April 2008)

Trembling Hand said:


> Funny that. To get to the top of trading as a profession takes the same effort as an elite sports person or musician or artist. Don't kill the dream. Doesn't it just take a couple of chart set ups and some balls and in no time your driving around in a Ferrari :car: :brille:




lol, I love this post. 

It's so easy to image the big bucks though. Maybe if I think like "The Secret" then I'll be driving in a Ferrai and rich beyond my wildest dreams...haha *cough*


----------



## pilbara (27 April 2008)

hey Jersey, I'm doing something similar to what you describe.

I started out trading at the start of this year.  I've got a part time job which leaves me with plenty of days off when I can learn trading.

In January I began with a bank of $25,000 USD using a standard Interactive Brokers margin trading account.  I trade and invest in equities in the major markets.

For three months straight I lost $1000 per month!! But honestly I was willing to lose a total maximum of $5000 before giving up on this.  Five grand isn't that much really.

However this month I've started see postive results, mainly due to favorable market conditions but also from learning from my many many expensive mistakes. 

Now I've got a firm trading and investment plan which I completely understand and can follow.  There's less that surprises me now compared to when I started 4 months ago. 

I measure results weekly, and for the last 4 weeks I've gained 18.2% in total (6.1%, 0.2%, 7.8% and 3.2%) raising my balance to $28,000 USD.  This is starting to get consistent but I have a long way to go before I have confidence in the long term success of my methods.

Overall aim to grow this investment over a number of years, while living off separate income.  I will review my progress at the end of June and decide whether I have the confidence to add further capital to my trading account.

Some lessons learned:

1. Never trade when drunk!!
2. Shouting at the screen doesn't help.
3. American optimism is the most valuable commodity in the world.


----------



## tayser (28 April 2008)

pilbara said:


> 2. Shouting at the screen doesn't help.




you're not shouting loud enough hah


----------



## Timmy (28 April 2008)

tayser said:


> you're not shouting loud enough hah




LOL!


----------



## pilbara (28 April 2008)

tayser said:


> you're not shouting loud enough hah




ok i get it now ... SHOW ME THE MONEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEYY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D7ir_6Hip1E


----------



## whitey1982 (26 June 2008)

Interested to see how long jersey10 lasted with his strategy. sorry, but reading his initial post made me laugh out loud.


----------



## Trembling Hand (26 June 2008)

whitey1982 said:


> Interested to see how long jersey10 lasted with his strategy. sorry, but reading his initial post made me laugh out loud.





He is still here posting so maybe he can give us an update. Would be interesting.


----------



## jersey10 (26 June 2008)

Trembling Hand said:


> He is still here posting so maybe he can give us an update. Would be interesting.




I haven't lost a cent!


----------



## Trembling Hand (26 June 2008)

jersey10 said:


> I haven't lost a cent!




So you are yet to trade.


----------



## jersey10 (26 June 2008)

Trembling Hand said:


> So you are yet to trade.




Correct.  I decided to invest my $40 000 elsewhere (investment property renovation).  I have continued to learn quite a bit over the last couple of months.  Decided not to start the Masters degree (maybe end of year or mid next year).  Am still a subscriber to The Chartist and study it every night trying to predict what he is going to say before i watch / read the reports on each stock.  Have read Nick Radge's book Adaptive Analysis.  Am about to fund my new IB account in the near future.  Have downloaded the trial version of Amibroker and premium data and think i will end up subscribing to these over my current charting package.  I still have every intention of making serious money from trading.  I am also becoming more and more interested in buying / starting a business and have been looking into residential property management rights recently.


----------



## MRC & Co (26 June 2008)

Good to hear from you jersey.

IMHO don't waste your time, nor money on a Masters.  They are only useful if you are working and specialising in an area.  

Sounds like you are more into the practical application, so no need for theory.  

Cheers


----------



## jersey10 (26 June 2008)

MRC & Co said:


> Good to hear from you jersey.
> 
> IMHO don't waste your time, nor money on a Masters.  They are only useful if you are working and specialising in an area.
> 
> ...




G'day MRC,

This is partly why i decided not to do it - i felt my studying time would be better spent on actually studying trading and not generic finance / economics type stuff.  However, two reasons as to why it is still on my radar: 
1) i may like to work in this field some time in the future
2) i believe a base knowledge in finance / economics can be very beneficial even if you are a pure technical analyst.  As you would know from The Chartist's analyses - yes it is technical analysis but comment is often made by Nick that relate to fundamental analysis / sectors / interest rates / oil etc.

Jersey


----------



## MRC & Co (26 June 2008)

Yeh, it is useful, one of my degrees is in Economics, however, you can probably learn most of the basics by just picking up a basic micro and macro textbook and reading it yourself.  

Masters, generally focus on one specific area, so you will not really get a base understanding from what I am aware.  

The entire process of Uni is more just for the paper so you can 'proove' you can research and present information at a University level.  So definately helpful if you may want to work in the field one day, but other than that, I would say the things even someone like Radge states in his analysis are very very simple if you just learn the basics.


----------

