My three trading rules

[beerwm]

Your mindset of cutting 0.5% capital losses on down days, and gambling higher* on up days, cant really improve your bottom line over the long run.

really just saving yourself from those 2%+ down days that make you

 

[Trembling Hand]

Your mindset of cutting 0.5% capital losses on down days, and gambling higher* on up days, cant really improve your bottom line over the long run.

really just saving yourself from those 2%+ down days that make you

Sorry don't follow?

 

[beerwm]

thats under the impression that your next trade isnt dependant/influenced by your last

 

[Cartman]

gambling higher* on up days, cant really improve your bottom line over the long run.

----- no offence Beer, but do u know what TH actually does ??? -----

its not gambling when u know when to attack and when to retreat ----

out of curiousity TH --- how many days out of, say 30, do u have to retreat

 

[MRC & Co]

Therefore MY point is that skills are the start and end.

But perhaps people need a certain mindset, to attain those skills?

I.e. A dash of ego and the ability to take a beating! I know this is a factor trading firms look for at interviews.

 

[pilbara]

where each trade is exclusive of one another,

i cant see how trading more would not deliver more positive results, unless your expectancy is wrong.

one reason to cut your losses early for the day is because you are "out of form", reading the signals wrong or just a bit too late in your decisions. Then you can go to a demo account to practice and see if it's something new in the market that you haven't seen before, or whether you aren't up to your best on that day.

 

[beerwm]

----- no offence Beer, but do u know what TH actually does ??? -----

its not gambling when u know when to attack and when to retreat ----

out of curiousity TH --- how many days out of, say 30, do u have to retreat

not particularly,
please excuse a newbie,

i just assumed each trade was separate

 

[awg]

I see that people are saying both are important. My point is skills must come before the mindset, Infact mindset can only come from the skills otherwise its not the correct mindset, its fantasy.

Therefore MY point is that skills are the start and end.

One thing is you will not be able to obtain the skills, without the needed mindset, as they are not so easy to acquire:frown:

Your mindset of cutting 0.5% capital losses on down days, and gambling higher* on up days, cant really improve your bottom line over the long run.

really just saving yourself from those 2%+ down days that make you

Think this reply is ironic?

 

[Trembling Hand]

-- how many days out of, say 30, do u have to retreat

As an average about 4 times in 20 trading days I hit drop dead.

 

[MS+Tradesim]

Your mindset of cutting 0.5% capital losses on down days, and gambling higher* on up days, cant really improve your bottom line over the long run.

really just saving yourself from those 2%+ down days that make you

Sit down with a spreadsheet. Put in a heap of different percentages, positive and negative symbolising up days and down days. Apply each "day's" return against a nominal account starting balance.

Then limit all the negative ones to 0.5%. Process again. You'll find the difference is substantial.

 

[MRC & Co]

As an average about 4 times in 20 trading days I hit drop dead.

I reckon it's worse giving back all your open profits! I've done it 3 days in a row now!!!!! Could walk away with a handy profit, but always push my luck with my daily trailing stop near B/E!

Either way, childlike tantrums are always funny to watch!

 

[cuttlefish]

Your mindset of cutting 0.5% capital losses on down days, and gambling higher* on up days, cant really improve your bottom line over the long run.

really just saving yourself from those 2%+ down days that make you

I think beerwm's point is that if each trade you take is an independant event, and the outcome is not influenced by mindset, and they all form within the same positive expectancy strategy, then by taking the down days off you are not actually saving yourself money and by aggressively trading the winner days you are not making yourself more money. (i.e. in theory these decisions have zero effect, positive or negative, on your overall results in the long term - you will have the losses anyway and you will have the wins anyway).

But by adjusting your trading timeframes in this way what you are achieving is that you are feeling like a winner more often than you are feeling like a loser.

This doesn't mean to imply that there isn't positive expectancy in your system or that you are not profitable - more that it is possible you are subconsciously adjusting your trading timeframes to aid your state of mind/mental approach under the misimpression that it is actually aiding your physical results.

The other alternative is that the down days are caused by a skill deficiency - that there is some type of market that you simply don't have the skill to trade as effectively as others - or even that there is some physical factor on these days (tiredness, distractedness) that contributes to them being down days - and that by pulling the pin on those days you are acknowledging you don't have the skill or conditions to trade those types of days - and thus it IS having a positive impact financially on your results.

Or the third alternative is that your trading results are influenced by your mindset and that a positive mindset is a key factor in the positive expectency of your particular system.

(just throwing around ideas related to what beerwm is bringing up, not drawing any conclusions).

 

[Cartman]

I think beerwm's point is that if each trade you take is an independant event, and the outcome is not influenced by mindset, and they all form within the same positive expectancy strategy, then by taking the down days off you are not actually saving yourself money and by aggressively trading the winner days you are not making yourself more money. (i.e. in theory these decisions have zero effect, positive or negative, on your overall results in the long term - you will have the losses anyway and you will have the wins anyway).

But by adjusting your trading timeframes in this way what you are achieving is that you are feeling like a winner more often than you are feeling like a loser.

This doesn't mean to imply that there isn't positive expectancy in your system or that you are not profitable - more that it is possible you are subconsciously adjusting your trading timeframes to aid your state of mind/mental approach under the misimpression that it is actually aiding your physical results.

The other alternative is that the down days are caused by a skill deficiency - that there is some type of market that you simply don't have the skill to trade as effectively as others - or even that there is some physical factor on these days (tiredness, distractedness) that contributes to them being down days - and that by pulling the pin on those days you are acknowledging you don't have the skill or conditions to trade those types of days - and thus it IS having a positive impact financially on your results.

Or the third alternative is that your trading results are influenced by your mindset and that a positive mindset is a key factor in the positive expectency of your particular system.

(just throwing around ideas related to what beerwm is bringing up, not drawing any conclusions).

C/F --- I am constantly impressed by the way u think ---- people should read yr posts with great attention (i thunk !! ..... where the hell is Kauri ??

 

[beerwm]

I think beerwm's point is that if each trade you take is an independant event, and the outcome is not influenced by mindset, and they all form within the same positive expectancy strategy, then by taking the down days off you are not actually saving yourself money and by aggressively trading the winner days you are not making yourself more money. (i.e. in theory these decisions have zero effect, positive or negative, on your overall results in the long term - you will have the losses anyway and you will have the wins anyway).

But by adjusting your trading timeframes in this way what you are achieving is that you are feeling like a winner more often than you are feeling like a loser.

This doesn't mean to imply that there isn't positive expectancy in your system or that you are not profitable - more that it is possible you are subconsciously adjusting your trading timeframes to aid your state of mind/mental approach under the misimpression that it is actually aiding your physical results.

The other alternative is that the down days are caused by a skill deficiency - that there is some type of market that you simply don't have the skill to trade as effectively as others - or even that there is some physical factor on these days (tiredness, distractedness) that contributes to them being down days - and that by pulling the pin on those days you are acknowledging you don't have the skill or conditions to trade those types of days - and thus it IS having a positive impact financially on your results.

Or the third alternative is that your trading results are influenced by your mindset and that a positive mindset is a key factor in the positive expectency of your particular system.

(just throwing around ideas related to what beerwm is bringing up, not drawing any conclusions).

thanks cuttlefish, exactly what i was getting at.

 

[Trembling Hand]

Either way, childlike tantrums are always funny to watch!

MRC you sit in a room full of big swing D***s. Tell me who seems the less emotional. The ones struggling on 2 contracts a trade or the loud pissed off 10-20 contract trader?

From my experance the quiet ones are the ones that are about to be kiicked out the door.

I think beerwm's point is that if each trade you take is an independant event, and the outcome is not influenced by mindset, and they all form within the same positive expectancy strategy, then by taking the down days off you are not actually saving yourself money and by aggressively trading the winner days you are not making yourself more money. (i.e. in theory these decisions have zero effect, positive or negative, on your overall results in the long term - you will have the losses anyway and you will have the wins anyway)

No this is absolutely wrong.

You are missing the point completely. Rule 3 is very important. It has a F'in huge diff to your account. HUGE.

Whats going to be the result at the end of the day trading the last 2 hours on 10 contracts rather than 3 if you take 40 points? $7,000 just on the last 2 hours. Do that a couple of times a week and there is no questions about "in theory". :

 

[cuttlefish]

C/F --- I am constantly impressed by the way u think ---- people should read yr posts with great attention

Cheers! (I thunk!) - and when I'm generating the same sort of results as TH does I'm sure they will! . (and I'm really just rephrasing beerwm's ideas anyway)

..... where the hell is Kauri ??

Actually I was wondering that very same thing when gold did its cliff jump last night - haven't seen a coily thingy or a wedgy thingy for a while now.

 

[cuttlefish]

MRC you sit in a room full of big swing D***s. Tell me who seems the less emotional. The ones struggling on 2 contracts a trade or the loud pissed off 10-20 contract trader?

From my experance the quite ones are the ones that are about to be kiicked out the door.

No this is absolutely wrong.

You are missing the point completely. Rule 3 is very important. It has a F'in huge diff to your account. HUGE.

Whats going to be the result at the end of the day trading the last 2 hours on 10 contracts rather than 3 if you take 40 points? $7,000 just on the last 2 hours. Do that a couple of times a week and there is no questions about "in theory". :

TH's - thats fair enough - and I believe that it is true - but then what I'd say, based on everything you are implying here, is that your mindset is a signficant factor in your positive expectancy (so the third option I described in my post is the one that applies to your situation).

This makes sense too because since you are a skilled trader - with a lot of rules becoming ingrained into your subconscious with time and experience and manifesting as 'intuition' - so your trading style is probably more similar to a sports person than a chess player - and sports people have times when they are 'in the zone' (in the right mental state) and excel - and they have times when they can't win a trick.

This would also tie up with the shorter timeframes that you trade and why you prefer those shorter timeframes to longer timeframe, strategic types of trading strategies.

 

[beerwm]

No this is absolutely wrong.

You are missing the point completely. Rule 3 is very important. It has a F'in huge diff to your account. HUGE.

Whats going to be the result at the end of the day trading the last 2 hours on 10 contracts rather than 3 if you take 40 points? $7,000 just on the last 2 hours. Do that a couple of times a week and there is no questions about "in theory". :

ok i get it now,

each trade's result has a dependancy in relation to the day.

is that in relation to your skill[on the day], mindset[on the day] or price movements[on the day.]

PS; i know this topic has been beaten to death

 

[Cartman]

(and I'm really just rephrasing beerwm's ideas anyway)

i totally appreciate that u were just paraphrasing Beer's idea -----

my point was ----- whether people agree or disagree with yr comments, u always put forward a pov with great thought and content ----

whether or not punters agree with u is irrespective ---- yr posts have content --- and that is a good thing !! ---- always food for thought

 

[cuttlefish]

yr posts have content --- and that is a good thing !! ---- always food for thought

thanks mate I'll take any complements I can get!