1 SPI Tick Per Day? Per Half Day? Per Hour?

[moXJO]

If you have a properly verified backtested system with a positive expectancy isn't it more appropriate to describe the outcome as certain as opposed to uncertain?

You mean like counting cards:

 

[jersey10]

But the outcome of each trade is not certain. We don't know what each trade will do when we take it.

Just because a system has been backtested and has a positive expectancy it doesn't guarantee anything moving forward.

Obviously each trade can do anything it likes. My point is it is more accurate to describe a trading methodology / system with a positive expectancy as certain to make money rather than uncertain to make money.
To put it another way traders with good systems are more certain than uncertain that they are going to make money. Semantics, but thats the mood i'm in after a conversation with someone on the weekend that 'trading is just gambling'.

You mean like counting cards:

if you're good at it, yes, exactly like counting cards

 

[jonojpsg]

But the outcome of each trade is not certain. We don't know what each trade will do when we take it.

Just because a system has been backtested and has a positive expectancy it doesn't guarantee anything moving forward.

Agree completely nomore, if the outcome were certain one would simply put everything on a trade, compound it to the nth degree and walk away a gazillionaire

 

[jonojpsg]

Obviously each trade can do anything it likes. My point is it is more accurate to describe a trading methodology / system with a positive expectancy as certain to make money rather than uncertain to make money.
To put it another way traders with good systems are more certain than uncertain that they are going to make money. Semantics, but thats the mood i'm in after a conversation with someone on the weekend that 'trading is just gambling'.



if you're good at it, yes, exactly like counting cards

Thinking more about it though jersey, I would have to agree with you here. Not a certain outcome, but definitely on the positive side of 50% probability. Take for instance my current trade on oil futures - I am 90% certain that over the next six months oil is going to rise, so my trades going forward are going to reflect that and I am more than less certain that I will make money on it.

 

[nomore4s]

Thinking more about it though jersey, I would have to agree with you here. Not a certain outcome, but definitely on the positive side of 50% probability. Take for instance my current trade on oil futures - I am 90% certain that over the next six months oil is going to rise, so my trades going forward are going to reflect that and I am more than less certain that I will make money on it.

There is a difference between high probability and certainty.

 

[Naked shorts]

If you have no edge over a casino, the casino always has the edge.
You may get an edge in the market. You can also see when that edge is gone which allows you to keep profits intact.

 

[Mr J]

But the outcome of each trade is not certain. We don't know what each trade will do when we take it.

Just because a system has been backtested and has a positive expectancy it doesn't guarantee anything moving forward.

Not only that, but the overall outcome is less than certain, because it is made up of many uncertain trades. There is never any certainty, we just minimise risk. In the case of a long and fruitful trading career, there was always a chance of failure, it just may have been very small.

Semantics, but thats the mood i'm in after a conversation with someone on the weekend that 'trading is just gambling'.

It's not semantics. The problem wasn't with you gambling, but the other person seemingly not realising that you can gamble with +ev.

If you have no edge over a casino, the casino always has the edge.
You may get an edge in the market. You can also see when that edge is gone which allows you to keep profits intact.

Your first sentence - yes? If you don't have an edge, of course the casino has the edge. They don't always have it though, as even a fool can luck into betting in a deck with a positive count. You can see your edge just as clearly counting cards. If you're good at it, your count will be quite accurate, and you will actually have a better idea of whether or not you have an edge than with trading.

I imagine the "trade" versus "gamble" debate comes from society's views on what is commonly perceived as gambling. Traders will want to think they're above that, and they'll want people to take them seriously, so it's natural that a trader will want to avoid that image and reject that they're gambling. It certainly doesn't help that the term is widely misunderstood, as many people assume to gamble means to leave it purely to chance.

 

[nunthewiser]

hmmmmmmmmmm

intrestingto see ones thoughts on there methods

i personally am not a gambler but hey i hold no malice or unkind words to those that are

the more undisiplined and undirected cash in the market the better i say


as you were

 

[Naked shorts]

I imagine the "trade" versus "gamble" debate comes from society's views on what is commonly perceived as gambling. Traders will want to think they're above that, and they'll want people to take them seriously, so it's natural that a trader will want to avoid that image and reject that they're gambling. It certainly doesn't help that the term is widely misunderstood, as many people assume to gamble means to leave it purely to chance.

I imagine the "trade" vs "gamble" debate comes from people who consistently lose to the market, give up, and to make themselves feel better they belittle the whole system and label it as gambling.

 

[Naked shorts]

the more undisiplined and undirected cash in the market the better i say

amen.

 

[nunthewiser]

amen.

that,ll be $129.95 for the use of that copyrighted catchphrase

or i,ll flip ya for it

 

[Mr J]

I imagine the "trade" vs "gamble" debate comes from people who consistently lose to the market, give up, and to make themselves feel better they belittle the whole system and label it as gambling.

That too, but they couldn't do that if society understood the proper definition of gambling, and how markets work. These people would be labelled as unsuccessful, rather than being able to use "it's just gambling" as an excuse. Humans will make any excuse though.

i personally am not a gambler

Wanna bet?

 

[beamstas]

Thinking more about it though jersey, I would have to agree with you here. Not a certain outcome, but definitely on the positive side of 50% probability. Take for instance my current trade on oil futures - I am 90% certain that over the next six months oil is going to rise, so my trades going forward are going to reflect that and I am more than less certain that I will make money on it.

Why are you 90% certain oil will rise?

What happens if next week a car comes out that takes 5minutes to charge through an electric power point, and has the same speed and handling capabilites as a regular car, and only costs a third of the price of a regular car

Would oil still rise?

Im not saying an electic car like this will come out, but you shouldn't buy on an expectation. If oil was 90% certain to rise, wouldn't the price be higher? Wouldn't everyone be pouring funds into oil?

 

[Mr J]

I am 99.99999999999999999% certain that oil will rise at some point this year.

 

[moXJO]

I am 99.99999999999999999% certain that oil will rise at some point this year.

That .00000000000000001 in case the world ends

 

[tech/a]

Oil will rise at some point I'm 100% sure. It will also fall 100% sure of that as well.

Question.
Is it easier to anticipate a move in Ticks,Pips/Minutes/Hrs/Days/Weeks/Years?

Often asked when determining trading timeframe.
Why does T/H trade in Pips/Ticks and others Daily-Weekly or longer?
I think I know the answer (Why)---my why anyway.

 

[Mr J]

Something like that .