$5000 to $50000 in two years - let the odyssey begin

[Magdoran]

damok

I don't want to rain on your parade, but if you can possibly do it I'd advise returning the Starter Pack for a full refund. Four grand is highway robbery for a system that simply buys dips during uptrends, and shorts rallies during downtrends. Not that there's anything wrong with such a system, it's just that you can learn it for less than 10 bucks.
How? Go to 'Pro Trader' website and purchase Frank Watkins booklet 'Darvis Box Trading'....it'll cost you about $8.
I don't know if SITM's 4 grand deal includes software, but even if it does, it's still a rip off. Good trading software can be bought for prices ranging from about $300 to $900.

Your 40% per year return is unfortunately an unrealistic expectation for a new chum trader. You'll be far above average if you can achieve half that return in your first couple of years.
Once you learn your craft then yes, 40% is achievable, but you have little chance of achieving that sort of return initially.

Bunyip

Hello Bunyip,


While I have agreed strongly with your comments on other threads about respecting other individual’s methods, I hope you don’t mind me raising a few questions about your T/A approach. I am very interested in having a dialogue with other technical analysts about their experiences and approaches, so I do hope you don’t see my comments below as an attack on your personal preference, it is not. But I would like to probe a bit to find out more about your perspective given that you have been quite outspoken as a T/A advocate (an area I identify with along with you).

I would also like to give a critical appraisal from my perspective on what I gleaned after having scanned through the Watkins book you referred to. I read through Watkins book last week in my local Borders book shop. If you’re advocating this as a very basic introductory text for general broad trading concepts, fair enough, it would certainly offer some grounding for trading. But most of this I would have thought is pretty much common sense, but perhaps a complete novice would glean some basic ideas of value if they didn’t have any other source.

The T/A though from Frank Watkins I thought was very light on. Sure, it gives some basic “ABC’s” in technical analysis, but I found myself disagreeing with the majority of the T/A in the book. It is written in my view from an extremely narrow perspective, and totally misses whole rafts of modern T/A thinking. Consequently as a T/A primer I found it pretty threadbare – again, just my opinion.

Just out of interest, have you researched any other T/A styles beyond the “Darvas” approach ventured in Watkins? Are you still using the Darvas approach to trade from currently? I was under the impression you were very accomplished in T/A, but looking at the Darvas system makes me reconsider this view. What exactly have you looked at outside of this T/A approach Bunyip?

Don’t get me wrong, if Darvas works for you great, but consider that it may not be the best approach for many traders, or that there may in fact better approaches to it (I certainly think there are a host of significantly better T/A approaches – many which you may be totally unaware of – but this is just my personal perspective, not gospel). If you have not researched and evaluated a range of approaches, would you accept that this may significantly impair your capacity to be objective?

You’ve questioned SITM (no argument about the price), but have you actually looked at their Gann approach in order to evaluate it? What concerns me is that you’ve totally subverted Damok from gaining a grounding in Gann, and replaced this with a kind of (I’d say threadbare) beginner approach – but a very narrow and not very comprehensive beginner book regarding the T/A.

Why some traders go through the process of evaluating a variety of approaches before developing a set of trading rules is that it is necessary for their development to go through this process to gain perspectives that later become unconscious (but would probably never have existed without going through the learning process).

Certainly some T/A styles are more suited to one individual than another, but by studying a range of approaches can allow you to be more objective, especially if you recognise your own bias (not only in what you see in the market, but also understand your own thought processes – including your own preferences, strengths and weaknesses).

Sure, boiling it all down into a simplified approach is an aspect of developing a consistent trading system, but to achieve this, and in order to obtain the capacity to evolve, you need to be able to critically evaluate your system, and adapt both your own capabilities and your systems as the market throws up new challenges, wouldn’t you agree?

I’d be interested to hear your experiences, Bunyip, and I’m trying to restrained here, but seeing how much you’ve lionised Darvas, makes me wonder just how advanced you really are in T/A to be giving advice to a beginner. It is starting to look to me like you have a very narrow grounding in T/A from what I’ve seen now that I’ve read Watkins, so please feel free to outline any other base of knowledge you’re drawing from. Please understand that my comments stem from a genuine concern for beginners, and that they be given every chance to develop to their maximum potential.


Regards


Magdoran

 

[Magdoran]

I’ve been investigating Frank Watkins, pro trader and the “Darvas” system since it has been touted as such a panacea, only to find a vanilla mechanical offering on a par with a host of other “black box” approaches (and I’ve seen a few).

You cannot tell me that this overly simplistic approach is on a par with Nick Rage’s T/A, Elliott Wave/Fibonacci approach for beginners. From my perspective there is no comparison. What Rage does is to introduce a range of T/A approaches in a effort to give a beginner a solid foundation in charting, not in becoming wedded/addicted to a proprietary “black box”. There is a chasm of difference here.

Then I read comments like this in the thread:

Damok

Bunyips reply is of the highest of quality.

SITM is a complete joke. Paying $4,000 is as bunyip said, highway robbery.

You must realise that the best systems are simple. Frank Watkins perhaps teaches the most simple strategies in the world, and I would place a bet with anyone that his approach makes more money than any other system.

SITM make it all seem too easy and good to be true, a real expert will never come across like this. They simply make their living ripping suckers off who pay ridiculous prices for their software (no offence)

Of course huge returns are possible but it takes years and hard work. I advise you ditch the smarter pack and get the refund, I have seen many people go down your road, it inevitably leads to disaster

Rex

What I find interesting is the conviction of the author, making what they believe to be an unbiased objective statement of truth.

It’s almost like they really believe that everyone knows that Frank Watkins is the foremost trader in the world, and that his system is THE cash machine of the century – We are led to believe that it’s so simple; all you have to do is to buy “pro trader” and you’ll make heaps of money! Right?

And of course SITM is “too easy”, and “too good to be true”, no “real expert would come across like this”.

Does anyone see a glaring contradiction here?

Then we get this follow up testimonial:

My advise is you try protrader, Frank is a no bullS&^% moral man and a good bloke. His service is cheap and he doesn't promise miracles.

Followed by:

There are many kinds of scammers, SITM is just one breed of them.

This advocacy of Frank Watkins and pro trader may be genuine and sincere, but wouldn’t others agree that these comments seem a bit co-ordinated, or at least a little biased?

While I think banamate is a genuine poster, they recently started a thread “Market Analyst/Protrader/Metastock” on 26 July as a beginner trying to locate software, hence has very little experience outside of this area, and only a few weeks experience using pro trader.

I am in the learning phase and want the first important decision (buying the right software) to be a good one. I have finally narrowed my options to these three. Any insights? I plan to trade only ASX stocks at this stage.

Does anyone see a pattern emerging here? I’m concerned that beginners may be swayed by some of the comments on this thread which seem to me to be exaggerated and a little too slick for my liking. While I don’t have a problem with people expressing an opinion, I really do hope that beginners reading this thread research as much as possible, and recognise that all the posters (me included) are just expressing an opinion.


Regards


Magdoran

 

[stink]

HI there,

Good points Mag, I haven't heard of the systems these guys are talking about so dont know what that says about myself lol.

I would say its people looking for that solution because its the easy option, its harder to learn and research yourself.

I must admit before finding this forum i looked at a couple of these systems, none of the above mentioned though. However a bit of searching and a couple of questions on this forum put me on the right track.

I went to a home show actually and there was like three stands all selling these type of things, it was funny you know because the sales pitch they were using in response to questions about difficulty or learning curve etc were e.g "So how much do i need to know about the market?" answer "Oh nothing our system makes all the decisions for you". Scary to think of how many people must go down this track.

Cheers Stink

 

[rex]

Settle down magdoran

I don't care what damok does with his trading, I simply saw a hardworking beginner in need of help and I didn't want him to waste his paypacket on SITM without finding out some facts, I know people who have been burnt by them and I saw a chance to help someone out.

Of course these are just opinions.

I never stated that making money was simple through Frank's methods, I just stated that his method of trading is simple, there is a big difference. Leon wilsons methods are also simple and I would recommend him over Gann, elliott, fib.. star gazing anyday. Guppy is also simple, as is Alan Hull, I think all these guys are better than some elliott wave rubbish, hell don't go to protrader, there is nothing magical about it. This is where people like you miss the point, there is no holy grail. The only reason I even mentioed protrader was because bunyip did above so I though it fair enough to back him up.

I would bet that the majority of people who use protrader still don't make money, this is the same with all systems, it's the trader that makes a system work, not the system. I don't use protrader, never have and never will, but I still recommend it.

If you want to go off and explore elliott wave and gann and the stars and moon then thats fine, but don't claim that you are unbiased, while I am. Of course we are both bias, that is pretty common sense. You get on here and talk up Nick Radge like he is some wizard of trading, so don't be so hypercritical.

I never stated all one had to do was buy protrader or bullcharts etc to make money, don't be an idiot. You left out the bit where I stated it takes years of hardwork. Metastocks or egoli is completely adequate.

I also recommended bullcharts. I was just trying to point out the fact that in my opinion simple methods make more money. I don't doubt that you aren't making money through gann and fibs etc etc but you are the 1 in a hundred. The average trader has a better chance if they just keep it simple.


Regards

 

[Magdoran]

HI there,

Good points Mag, I haven't heard of the systems these guys are talking about so dont know what that says about myself lol.

I would say its people looking for that solution because its the easy option, its harder to learn and research yourself.

I must admit before finding this forum i looked at a couple of these systems, none of the above mentioned though. However a bit of searching and a couple of questions on this forum put me on the right track.

I went to a home show actually and there was like three stands all selling these type of things, it was funny you know because the sales pitch they were using in response to questions about difficulty or learning curve etc were e.g "So how much do i need to know about the market?" answer "Oh nothing our system makes all the decisions for you". Scary to think of how many people must go down this track.

Cheers Stink

Thanks Stink,


You’ve identified an important distinction between people who just want a simple “plug and play” approach, and people who want to learn technical analysis techniques using the “computer between their ears” (as opposed to a PC driven “black Box”).

If an investor/trader really wants a vanilla solution, they’re out there, and this may well be appropriate to their needs. But for someone like Damok who ostensibly has high aims, the black box is unlikely to cut it anywhere near to what developing good charting skills can.

And you’re spot on when you say “its people looking for that solution because its the easy option, its harder to learn and research yourself”, this is the crux of the difference.

In my view though, beginners should be made aware of the difference so they can make their own choice which path is more suitable for them.

Also, a black box is only as good as the programming. If these systems actually made millions then why wouldn’t the developer just do that like the major investment houses and merchant banks do?

I’d like to make a distinction though between software that is designed as a tool to aid the chartist from software that is a proprietary “black box” approach. One is essentially a tool box, the other approach is more like one of those battery operated “decision makers” where the lights flash, and a random answer comes up like “yes”, “n”, etc…


Regards


Magdoran

 

[Magdoran]

Settle down magdoran

I don't care what damok does with his trading, I simply saw a hardworking beginner in need of help and I didn't want him to waste his paypacket on SITM without finding out some facts, I know people who have been burnt by them and I saw a chance to help someone out.

Of course these are just opinions.

I never stated that making money was simple through Frank's methods, I just stated that his method of trading is simple, there is a big difference. Leon wilsons methods are also simple and I would recommend him over Gann, elliott, fib.. star gazing anyday. Guppy is also simple, as is Alan Hull, I think all these guys are better than some elliott wave rubbish, hell don't go to protrader, there is nothing magical about it. This is where people like you miss the point, there is no holy grail. The only reason I even mentioed protrader was because bunyip did above so I though it fair enough to back him up.

I would bet that the majority of people who use protrader still don't make money, this is the same with all systems, it's the trader that makes a system work, not the system. I don't use protrader, never have and never will, but I still recommend it.

If you want to go off and explore elliott wave and gann and the stars and moon then thats fine, but don't claim that you are unbiased, while I am. Of course we are both bias, that is pretty common sense. You get on here and talk up Nick Radge like he is some wizard of trading, so don't be so hypercritical.

I never stated all one had to do was buy protrader or bullcharts etc to make money, don't be an idiot. You left out the bit where I stated it takes years of hardwork. Metastocks or egoli is completely adequate.

I also recommended bullcharts. I was just trying to point out the fact that in my opinion simple methods make more money. I don't doubt that you aren't making money through gann and fibs etc etc but you are the 1 in a hundred. The average trader has a better chance if they just keep it simple.


Regards

Hello Rex,


While I commend anyone genuinely trying to help newer investors/traders as you claim to have, perhaps you would consider how your sweeping comment below may be perceived by others as not conforming to the standard you suggest in post 65?

Does your latest comment mean that you’re not going to stand by your original claim?

“I would place a bet with anyone that his approach makes more money than any other system”?

What I find amazing is your now furious back peddling from the above statement to:

I would bet that the majority of people who use protrader still don't make money,

this is the same with all systems, it's the trader that makes a system work, not the system.

I don't use protrader, never have and never will, but I still recommend it.

So now you tell us you don’t use protrader and never will, and that the majority of people using it still don’t make money?

Yet in the second post you say:

“My advise is you try protrader”

Rex, can you see any inconsistencies here, or do you honestly think that your reasoning is sound? With all due respect, if you re-read your two posts on this thread, would you accept now that the manner in which you approached the subject may have been a little inconsistent and perhaps exaggerated?

I agree that you never said that making money was easy literally, that is true, but by inference many could have interpreted your statement along those lines, it really wasn’t that hard to “join the dots” (please reread the post…). And certainly the part where you said it takes years of hard work I agree with, hence there was no need to address it.

Of course I accept that you have your preferences for Guppy, Hull, Wilson etc, that’s up to you, and I respect that if this works for you, that’s great. This is my core approach with other people; let them find what works for them. But I would argue that your approach seems to be quite close ended when it comes to the advice you gave.

Now, as for Nick Rage’s “Adaptive Analysis”, if you were a novice wanting to gain a foundation in technical analysis and money management, it’s not a bad place to start, but if you read my comments on the threads listed in my earlier post on this thread, you’d get a fuller picture of the fairly well structured approach I’m suggesting to aid different types of traders…

So, you are an expert in Elliott Wave, Fibonacci and Gann too now are you? So you could comment head to head with any of the technical analysts in detail on Elliott Wave principles and why they are inferior to Wilson for instance? If this is so, why aren’t we seeing your book in print like Nick Radge’s book critiquing Elliott Wave theory?

Interestingly I have consistently stated what my bias is, and what exactly my opinions are based on, and have openly conceded some points when appropriate. I have never said there is one correct way to trade or invest. This is false. I have maintained a healthy respect for the diversity of approaches in the market, and acknowledged that there are many valid paths to trading and investing.

Another assumption you have made is that I somehow believe that there is a holy grail. Again, if you read through the years of my posts on various forums and the posts on this forum, you’d know that I patently do not believe this is so. Furthermore, I have openly stated my position with regard to Douglas and his concept of the “probabilistic” mindset – quite the antipathy of the Holy Grail credo.

So, there is something we agree on. There is no holy grail. But let’s try to help other traders by allowing them to look at a variety of alternative approaches and make up their own minds, how does that sound?


Regards


Magdoran

 

[insider]

Hey what's a good book on charting? Rene Rivkin hates chartists (even when his dead) what's your opinion?

 

[wayneL]

Hey what's a good book on charting? Rene Rivkin hates chartists (even when his dead) what's your opinion?

Rene who??

 

[bunyip]

Magdoran

Yes, Watkins book is basic but I don't think that makes it any less relevant.... Like you I don't agree with everything he says, nevertheless, it contains much good advice.
You thought most of this was pretty much common sense? You're right, but common sense methods are not necessarily adopted by the majority of traders. After speaking with hundreds of traders and getting to know dozens of them personally, I've noticed a leaning towards complex methods rather than just sticking to simple, basic concepts like trend identification, price and volume, retracements, support and resistance, money management etc. Seems that many traders think it can't be much good if it's simple.

Have I looked at anything outside the Darvis approach? I've read more than 50 books on TA, not only read them, but studied them in detail, everything from Gann to Elliott Wave to Fibonacci, Guppy, Gartley, Landry, Miner, Nison, Gilmore, Arnold, McLaren, Williams, Elder, Weinstein, Hull - swing trading, trend trading, day trading, breakout trading, candlestick trading, Fibonacci trading, and various other methods as well. Having read 50 books and having done a couple of courses doesn't make me an expert but at least it exposed me to a number of different trading approaches and gave me the opportunity of evaluating their strengths and weaknesses. And I assure you I put considerable time and effort into doing exactly that.
Therefore I believe I'm reasonably well qualified to give an objective viewpoint on trading methods to newbies like Damok.
After years of reading and study I developed my own system that incorporates ideas from a number of different methods, Darvas among them, as well as some ideas of my own.
If at the start of my trading journey someone had given me the Darvas method and said "Here you are, trade this and you won't need anything else", I believe it would have got me trading profitably right from the outset and allowed me to avoid the years of study I put in. Not that I begrudge my time and effort. Such was my interest in trading that all my work seemed more like recreation than work.

I take your point that Darvas might not be the approach that suits some traders. That's why I told Damok that if he finds it's not for him, he has the option of other inexpensive courses such as Nick Radge's.
There's a couple of reasons I suggested he start with Darvas. First, it's a cheap and easy method to learn. Second, it'll give him a good foundation in the basics of trading, such as identifying a trend, finding timely entry points into that trend, showing him how to control losses and let profits run while the trend moves in his favour.
In my view, these are the most important things for a beginner to learn. If he wants to go to higher level technical analysis after mastering the basics, he has the option of doing so.
However, I maintain that the basics are all you need to know, and that higher level, more complex analysis methods are not going to help you achieve anything more than to simply take bites out of trending moves. Since these very same trend-biting objectives can be achieved with the simple, basic, common sense approaches, I see no need to go for the more complex methods that will only achieve the same thing. I tried damn near every method I came across but in the end I kept coming back to simply hitching rides on decent trends, and jumping off when they finished. For me, this always proved to be the simplest and most profitable way to trade.
That's why my posts mention only the simple, basic methods rather than those that are more complex. It's not that I haven't studied other methods, it's just that I and many other traders I correspond with have found that 'simple is best'.

But I can see you disagree with me on this.....your view is that there are a number of significantly better approaches. Perhaps, in the best tradition of 'traders helping traders', you might like to elaborate on some of these approaches so that forum members can make their own assessment.

Have I looked at SITM's Gann approach? No, my Gann work was done with McLaren, who has a far better reputation as a Gann expert than SITM does.
I know many people who studied Gann through both SITM and McLaren, and they tell me that McLaren left SITM for dead, and only charged a fraction of the price that SITM slugged them.

You've stated that I've totally subverted Damok from gaining a grounding in Gann. I disagree......I haven't subverted him from gaining a grounding in anything. I've simply pointed him in the direction of a simple and effective system that will give him a solid grounding in the basics of TA, quickly, and without spending much money.
I've told him that a simple approach of hitching a ride on trends is all he needs to consistently profit from the market. This is 100% correct, and is some of the simplest yet most powerful information that any trader can ever possess.
If Damok wants to go on to further and more detailed study of TA, then he is of course free to do so. In fact that's almost certainly what he'll do if he develops the passion for trading and TA that many traders develop.
To hit a new trader with a barrage of information and trading strategies would be to his disadvantage I believe. Too much information, and next thing he won't know if he's Arthur or Martha. Better to steer him in the direction of a simple approach that covers the basics and can be learnt quickly. Darvas fits the bill nicely. Then he can go on to further studies if he wants.

You talk about adapting your own systems and capabilities as the market throws up new challenges. This tells me you believe that markets are constantly changing, and the strategies that worked in yesteryear no longer work today, hence the need for a trader to be constantly changing/adapting his strategies to stay in front of the curve, so to speak.
I'm sure there are some changes in the market, but let me tell you about one aspect of market behaviour that hasn't changed, and I believe never will.
The aspect of market behaviour I refer to is TRENDS. Look at charts in any month or year you care to name. No matter whether it was 3 years ago, 10 years, 50 or 70 years ago, there were always some strongly trending stocks, either up or down, regardless of overall market conditions.
And those trends exhibited pretty much the same characteristics exhibited by today's trend.....they go for a run, they retrace a little, they go for another run, they may go sideways for a while before taking off again. And so on and so on until the trend comes to an end.
This trending behaviour of stocks is caused by the human nature of traders and investors. If they're overwhelmingly bullish on a stock, they'll buy it and push up the price.
They'll take profits along the way, hence the retracements we see during trends. They'll buy the stock when a retracement makes it cheaper, hence the resumption of the trend after a retracement. If they're overwhelmingly bearish on a stock, they'll cause the stock to exhibit the mirror image of the above pattern.
Given that human nature causes these patterns, and that human nature never changes, it's no surprise that these patterns are the same today as they were decades ago. And it's reasonable to believe that human nature will ensure the same patters will still be evident 20 or 50 or 100 years from now.
Considering that Darvas was exploiting these patters as the basis of his trading system 50 years ago, and further considering that these very same patterns can be found in today's markets, it's not surprising that the Darvas system is proving itself to be a robust system that works as well today as it worked back in the fifties.
This, I believe, is the hallmark of a decent trading system.....one that's simple and profitable but above all robust enough to keep working decade after decade without needing to be constantly changed or adapted.
There are various other systems, Weinstein's and Elder's systems being two of them, that have similarities to Darvas, and are equally robust.

You state your genuine concern for beginners, and that they be given every chance to develop to their maximum potential.
No disagreement from me on that score. However, maybe we disagree on the best way for them to develop their potential. My way is to start them off on a simple system that's easily understood, one that covers simple, basic stuff. Plenty of time and opportunity for them to go on to more advanced TA after that if they want, but for God's sake don't go starting them off on complex methods such as Gann. Not only can such a method be overwhelming in its complexity for a beginner, but it's not going to enable them to do any more than simply take bites out of trending moves.
But as I say, if their leaning is towards those more complex methods a little further down the track, then they're free to study them.

Bunyip

 

[Magdoran]

Hello Bunyip,

Interesting, I’d just been doing a bit of research and found that you actually are an old hand and have spent a lot of time doing T/A over the years. I salute your research and acknowledge your breadth of knowledge.

I hope you understand that when I went and looked at Watkins I was surprised since your previous comments gave me the impression that you had studied T/A in depth. I’m glad to see that my initial estimation was correct.

I take your points on how Watkins may help a beginner to recognise trends, looking at it in the way you outlined makes much more sense, and I can see your point of view here. Interestingly it seems that both you and I recommend Weinstein to beginners, this I thought was a good place to start, and perhaps Schwager (for charting), Radge (for basic Elliott Wave theory), and Bigalow (for candlesticks)…

Now here is where we line right up – McLaren is probably the most influential work I’ve ever encountered. I still study it daily and have done so for years. So I fully concur with your estimation here.

As for the simplicity, I certainly agree with your points, but would add that to get there you have to do what you and I have done – do the hard yards reading everything you can. What I’d argue is that much of your wisdom is probably drawn unconsciously from this bedrock of knowledge. Essentially, to get to the simplicity you have to have gone through all the experiences. It is the journey of the trader, isn’t it?

I also agree with you that to hit a new trader with a barrage of strategies will only serve to confuse the individual. It has certainly been my approach over the years too.

Fully agree with your comments on the nature of trends – I certainly study markets way back in history too… As for adapting, perhaps I should have called it “evolving” since I was referring to the gradual improvement and refinements an individual can make with all aspects of trading – their analysis, instruments, trading rules, etc. If you’re talking McLaren, even his approaches have changed in the last 10-15 years – the square of nine is no longer used much for instance, and he has pioneered a range of new observations of past trends, even this year.

Also, I have slowly pioneered new mixes of instrument approaches over the years (look at the Krieger's, Allen Wheat’s, John Meriwether’s for instance), and looked to improve the style of T/A to suit the instruments and vice versa.

So, the adaptation I’m talking about is multifaceted, looking at the explosion of instruments and how these can be harnessed with the same old trends, but in new and more effective ways. If you’ve studied McLaren’s time factor, the approach I’m working on involves recognising vibrations in key markets, and then determining key time points to trade as well as price. Did you do time cycles with McLaren? I’m still blown away by this, and have spent years looking at markets to understand it (I’m still learning this and discovering new aspects every few days or so – actually had a breakthrough this week!).

You may have read my comment regarding options to you today (and I recognise that you do understand counter trends – hence please disregard that comment), hence just imagine the potential if you can combine the two effectively (time based T/A with structured derivatives). This is what I’m spending the bulk of my time doing currently – and I must admit, it’s really challenging.

Now as for Darvas, I’m not so sure about this approach. I agree that there are robust systems, but the approach outlined seemed to me to be breakout driven. I subscribe to the McLaren approach that this is high risk trading – better like you say to buy the dips in an uptrend, and sell the rallies in a downtrend – essentially look for probable areas for a counter trend and enter there. Add in wave structure, and you can identify probabilities to trade – essentially determine when the trend is at risk (ala McLaren). So no, I just don’t buy Darvas at all from what I’ve seen.

Weinstein is a different matter. I do subscribe to his concept of sectoral analysis and essentially go long the strongest stock in an uptrend, and short the weakest stock in a downtrend. Elder, I’ve got no real time for. If you subscribe to McLaren, you know what his view on momentum is and about moving averages and oscillators, or perhaps you still use stochastics and MACD and moving averages?

Actually, with new traders I definitely do not start with Gann, it’s way too complex and advanced. Just read through all the posts I’ve made on this site, and I am so reluctant with new people to even mention it… only when it is entirely relevant. What I do think is worthwhile is McLaren’s foundations first once someone has gained a sufficient level to understand it…

Ok, seems we’re not so far apart on this issue. It is refreshing to find a fellow traveller in T/A that has studied so widely. Now that you have fleshed out your perspective, I can see where you are coming from. Thankyou for taking the time to give such a comprehensive response, it is much appreciated.


Warm Regards


Magdoran

P.S. I couldn't fit the quote in it hit the word limit!

 

[rex]

Magdoran

you make a few valid points, at times perhaps I am not the best at expressing my views, forums are a bit like that.

But I was simply trying to make the point to Damok that making money doesn't has to be so complicated and overwhelming as what SITM and other complex strategies makes it out to be.

I will stand by my claim. My comments about protrader making more money comes from e-trade, I worked for e-trade for 2 years. Protrader have a broking firm through e-trade and statistically the returns of protrader clients far outperformed/outperform the returns from any other clients. Call e-trade and they will confirm this.

And no I wasn't backpedelling from anything. Very few people make money trading any system, because they lack what it takes in the head. The education that watkins gives would no doubt help rectify this fault better than say SITM whose support network are next to useless. The fact I don't use protrader is irrelevant.

You need to calm down and get some facts before you make stupid claims. I was simply stating my observations and opinions after working for nearly a decade for companies like e-trade, I have seen em all.

You are being very childish. People could also take " inference " from stuff you write about Radge. Just take a step back from this all. I have done nothing different than you have ?

You quoted
" You cannot tell me that this overly simplistic approach is on a par with Nick Rage’s T/A, Elliott Wave/Fibonacci approach for beginners. From my perspective there is no comparison. What Rage does is to introduce a range of T/A approaches in a effort to give a beginner a solid foundation in charting, not in becoming wedded/addicted to a proprietary “black box”. "

Watkins is not into black boxes, he is a pattern trader, get your facts right.

I didn't mean to make any sweeping comment, protrader is not the holy grail, just like Nick Radge is not the holy grail, just like Gann, elliott, fibs, etc etc etc isn't the holy grail. A trader with discipline and a plan is far more important, the strategy is just the start.

Hopefully now this matter is now closed, all I was trying to do was show damok that people always don't have to take the complicated road in life. In future I'll just keep my mouth shut.
Best wishes.

 

[NettAssets]

Hi Rex

I hope you don't keep your mouth shut - or your keyboard.
The different points of view here are what makes the site great.
When the discussion gets a bit charged it also gets more meaningful as peple start expressing what they have left written bet=ween the lines in their previous posts.
Both yours and Bunyips replys to Magdoran have firmed up a lot of areas of discussion.
I hope it continues
Regards
NA

 

[coyotte]

Rex : Magdoran :

Do you guys have any time left over for trading ?

IMHO after you mastered the basics you will gain far more knowledge from the experince of a constant month of " Day Trading " than any book or course seems to be capable of revelling ie: time of day ; different week days, effect of the SP500 on different days, etc etc

The CHART becomes only the "focul point" for the intuition to concerntrate on the only thing that matters : "PRICE ACTION "


Cheers

 

[Magdoran]

Magdoran

you make a few valid points, at times perhaps I am not the best at expressing my views, forums are a bit like that.

But I was simply trying to make the point to Damok that making money doesn't has to be so complicated and overwhelming as what SITM and other complex strategies makes it out to be.

I will stand by my claim. My comments about protrader making more money comes from e-trade, I worked for e-trade for 2 years. Protrader have a broking firm through e-trade and statistically the returns of protrader clients far outperformed/outperform the returns from any other clients. Call e-trade and they will confirm this.

And no I wasn't backpedelling from anything. Very few people make money trading any system, because they lack what it takes in the head. The education that watkins gives would no doubt help rectify this fault better than say SITM whose support network are next to useless. The fact I don't use protrader is irrelevant.

You need to calm down and get some facts before you make stupid claims. I was simply stating my observations and opinions after working for nearly a decade for companies like e-trade, I have seen em all.

You are being very childish. People could also take " inference " from stuff you write about Radge. Just take a step back from this all. I have done nothing different than you have ?

You quoted
" You cannot tell me that this overly simplistic approach is on a par with Nick Rage’s T/A, Elliott Wave/Fibonacci approach for beginners. From my perspective there is no comparison. What Rage does is to introduce a range of T/A approaches in a effort to give a beginner a solid foundation in charting, not in becoming wedded/addicted to a proprietary “black box”. "

Watkins is not into black boxes, he is a pattern trader, get your facts right.

I didn't mean to make any sweeping comment, protrader is not the holy grail, just like Nick Radge is not the holy grail, just like Gann, elliott, fibs, etc etc etc isn't the holy grail. A trader with discipline and a plan is far more important, the strategy is just the start.

Hopefully now this matter is now closed, all I was trying to do was show damok that people always don't have to take the complicated road in life. In future I'll just keep my mouth shut.
Best wishes.

Hello Rex,


My intention was not to silence your voice, oh no not at all, I’m a strong advocate of freedom of speech. I’m sorry if you feel this way, and agree with NettAsset's comment along these lines.

What an interesting story about the experience at e-trade. I wish you’d led with that first…

Now why I was focusing on your comment in detail was because I perceived there may have been a potential spruiking of a product (especially with the claim I focussed on) hence the probing and detailed examination. Now that you’ve outlined where you’re coming from, there are some very valuable points that you’ve raised, thank-you.

As for protrader, what I saw looked like a set system drawing a box from a low to a high with the entry and exit conditions set by the PC – are you saying the Darvas system doesn’t work like this?

Ok, Rex, I accept that you did not intend to make a sweeping comment, and I’m glad you clarified this, this will help readers make up their own mind with the balance you’ve bought to this discussion.

As NettAssets suggests, by having these dialogues it can help to draw out interesting perspectives that may not have been ventured, so I’m glad you have contributed, and I hope you can accept that my comments were made with good intentions, as I am sure yours were too.


Best Regards,


Magdoran

P.S. General observation: I must say that I find it odd when I read comments like “calm down” or “you are being childish” when responding to what is written in a methodical and adult manner. Mag

 

[Magdoran]

Rex : Magdoran :

Do you guys have any time left over for trading ?

IMHO after you mastered the basics you will gain far more knowledge from the experince of a constant month of " Day Trading " than any book or course seems to be capable of revelling ie: time of day ; different week days, effect of the SP500 on different days, etc etc

The CHART becomes only the "focul point" for the intuition to concerntrate on the only thing that matters : "PRICE ACTION "

Hello coyotte,


Interestingly I spent the day charting and researching derivative instruments… while responding to the odd comment (I’m actually looking at Brent crude as we speak!).

Now, as to your comment on “price action”, in my school of T/A, time is sometimes more important than price. Think about it!

Sometimes I’d argue you have to look at the pattern, as well as the price action… Interestingly I day traded warrants for a long time, but found I was a much better position trader, and that sometimes price action didn’t matter at all when there is an arbitrage on… so there are many horses for courses, aren’t there?

Indeed researching charts from the past probably taught me more than trying to day trade ever did… but that’s just what I found…

How about you coyotte?


Regards


Magdoran

 

[rex]

Thanks for that.

Mag. No prob, you make very good points, I will make an effort to be more clear in the future. To answer your question, the protrader clients didn't just trade darvas from what I gathered. Watkins is big on pattern recognition, flags, triangles, saucers. I supose if we are just talking about darvas then yes that is more mechanical, however once again watkins uses filters such as volume patterns, moving aves., on balance volume and volume spikes, it is more than just letting some piece of software pick a stock.

re e-trade, the number of traders who actually made money really was scary, hardly any, even in a bull market. So many just blew it all. I worked for sonray for a few years as well. For the average $10,000 cfd account. 80 percent of these were bust within 10 months. Fx. and futures accounts had the same stats. Once a pilot came along and opened a fx. account with 3 million $$, I watched his account over the next 13 months as he withered that down to $200,000. It was scary and of course has shaped the way I view the business.

Regards
ps: you were not being childish, there was just a better way to sort the thing out without making ludicrous claims before you knew where I was coming from - doesn't matter though, who cares.
Cheers

 

[NettAssets]

Hi Rex,

From your experience has the frequency of trades got any relationship to the return. I think in the "Art of Trading" Tate suggests that whatever your time scale less frequent trading with wider stop losses will win over time.

 

[rex]

Hi NA

Yes. I agree. Successful traders all in all have the ability to do absolutely nothing until a real opporunity comes along. People who feel like they need to take a trade everyday in order to call themselves a trader genuinely don't do well. But of course this is a general statement, there are a few day traders out there who scalp very well, day in day out, but even they have the patience to sit on their behinds and do nothing until a real opportunity presents.
Regards

 

[MichaelD]

re e-trade, the number of traders who actually made money really was scary, hardly any, even in a bull market. So many just blew it all. I worked for sonray for a few years as well. For the average $10,000 cfd account. 80 percent of these were bust within 10 months. Fx. and futures accounts had the same stats. Once a pilot came along and opened a fx. account with 3 million $$, I watched his account over the next 13 months as he withered that down to $200,000. It was scary and of course has shaped the way I view the business.

Now THIS is extraordinarily interesting information, rex. I for one would be INTENSELY interested in hearing more about your observations on WHY this happened.

 

[wayneL]

Once a pilot came along and opened a fx. account with 3 million $$, I watched his account over the next 13 months as he withered that down to $200,000.

Right! I'm gonna find a pilot with a 3 mil a/c and fade every trade he does