Porper
Ralph Nelson Elliott
- Joined
- 11 August 2004
- Posts
- 1,413
- Reactions
- 274
chemist said:If you've lost more than you've won, then you've lost.
"cut your losses small and let your wins ride" -- a worthless cliche. How do you know you were cutting a loss and not a win until after the event? how do you know your win is riding not about to crash, until after the event?
You should attend to reality, not cliches.
cheers,
Chemist
chemist said:If you've lost more than you've won, then you've lost.
"cut your losses small and let your wins ride" -- a worthless cliche. How do you know you were cutting a loss and not a win until after the event? how do you know your win is riding not about to crash, until after the event?
You should attend to reality, not cliches.
cheers,
Chemist
chemist said:"cut your losses small and let your wins ride" -- a worthless cliche. How do you know you were cutting a loss and not a win until after the event? how do you know your win is riding not about to crash, until after the event?
Chemist
wayneL said:Chemist,
cliche'? Nope!
Truism? Yep! for the technical trader it is.
The expectancy equation confirms this.
Expectancy = (( 1 + risk/reward ratio) x win/loss ratio) - 1
Cheers
Porper said:Ok, let's turn this around then.You say how do you know you were cutting a loss and not a win.If the stock is going down and you don't take a loss how do you know it won't keep going down ?
Porper said:Your next comment you say how do you know your win is not going to crash.You don't but if it's rising why not let it ride ?
Porper said:I don't think it is reality to have a fantastic win percentage and make great profits unless you are the worlds best trader.
Porper said:Also, losing more often than winning does not make you a loser as you state.The worlds great traders often lose more often than they win.Difference is their average win is a lot higher than their average loss.
All this "must win" attitude will kill you mentally and will not allow you to be profitable.In my opinion of course.
chemist said:Your equation means nothing to me because you have not defined the terms.
That is by the by because no arithmetic recasting of the profit-loss calculation alters the facts I raised. No "staking plan" turns a negative expectation system into a positive expectation system. Trading rules that initiate transactions for reasons unrelated to future market direction (e.g. stop loss) decrease your expectation because every transaction costs you money.
I'd be happy to see references to published research which shows otherwise.
cheers,
Chemist
wayneL said:Also, you might like to enlighten us with "the world according to chemist" instead of carping negativity from the sidelines.
How would you suggest folks trade
profitably?
wayneL said:I agree no staking plan will overcome negative expectancy. But you seem to be confused between expectancy and money management. Expectancy has nothing whatever to do with staking plans. That is a separate issue. The expectancy equation is about creating positive expectancy. You should perhaps do some reading in this area... with an open mind of course.
Also, you might like to enlighten us with "the world according to chemist" instead of carping negativity from the sidelines.
How would you suggest folks trade profitably?
As with staking plans, many gamblers, uh traders, think that adopting some arbitrary policy towards terminating their positions will make their losing system profitable. It almost certainly will not.
If your trading method has value then it has a component that is telling you something non-trivial about the market. This is your edge over the market. The stop-loss rule tells you to ignore your edge and get out of the market. Therefore a stop-loss can only reduce your expectation, per dollar position size, because it reduces the amount of time you are trading your edge over the market and increases the number of fear trades (and commission and bid-ask spreads you have to cover).
professor_frink said:that's a better post chemist!
I see where you are coming from in regards to stop losses, but I disagree, especially when it comes to technical analysis. When a trader enters a trade based on a chart pattern or indicator, it won't work all the time. Nothing does.
For example, if you're basing your trading around buying areas of support, and that support fails to hold, then you sell,as the reason for entering the trade is no longer valid. You take a small loss and move on to the next one .Or if you base your buy signal around a moving average crossover, and after it happens, the stock turns down and the averages cross back, you sell. Nothing can be done to stop this type of thing happening whilst trading.
professor_frink said:This is completely different to setting a random stop loss point to attempt to preserve capital whilst waiting for the big win to come along.
professor_frink said:Onto the next question- what is wrong with positive expectancy?
professor_frink said:edit: What are the names of some gambling forums I could look at? I think it would be an interesting read
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?