Calling all "Senior Members T2W" Experienced traders! Help Newbies?

[SOCRATES]

Kevin: What do you mean? Who's this SOCRATES chap?

I thought you where listening to me????

Yes Gardan, but to be fair, you started this thread with a question, not an answer.
You have to be patient because all the correct answers that you seek will be given in due course, so you don't have to bark up the wrong tree repeatedly, and expecting members to reply to questions with questions.

 

[Gardan]

Yes Gardan, but to be fair, you started this thread with a question, not an answer.
You have to be patient because all the correct answers that you seek will be given in due course, so you don't have to bark up the wrong tree repeatedly, and expecting members to reply to questions with questions.

Sorry Socrates I did not realise I was being impatient and I also did not realise I was barking up the wrong tree. I thought it was quite obvious that this thread would not have achieved more than three pages without your presence.I am more than happy to follow your most interesting thread.
I was mearly trying to be witty in between the more serious parts of this thread. I do not wish to be honoured as the court jester so I will keep my perceived wit to myself in future on this thread.

Apologies for any misunderstanding.

 

[SOCRATES]

You want the answers, don't you Gardan ? Well, I am going to give them all to you and for everybody elses' benefit as well and to my satisfaction. But it is a long complication and you have to be patient, because this can run and run, you understand ?

 

[DaveJB]

Socrates,
I think 'welcome back' is in order, as you appear to be staging a return - I had thought you'd just popped in to tell us all off again but it would appear not (that is not meant in any unpleasant way - I am trying to avoid misunderstanding, as email comms are dreadful for that). Gardan - sorry, I think you just go hijacked... at least the Highwayman gave you a peck on the cheek in passing <g>

Two points really (one split)- Quercus ( Ithink?) I've 4000 flying hrs military and never wore a chute, generally speaking on the odd occasion it works before impact question 2 fairly quickly formalises as 'do I want to land down there?' - down there being angry tribesmen with AK47's, or the Atlantic with **** all for 2000 miles in any given direction. (Q1 was usually 'did the pilot mean to do that?')
My 'favourite' middle eastern (I think) cross cockpit gradient problem was the one where the two pilots were asking the engineer how to fix a rapidly decaying situation, unware that his checklist reading skills were unduly hampered by his dyslexia - the guy had shunted from one job to another until somebody didn't care when they found out....

Soc - do you not think that, having spotted this 'amateur hour', there is an opportunity for those with shears? I'd consider this to be a chance for the astute to manipulate the less aware for an hour or two - or is the market too random, or just too big, to do this do you think?

Dave

 

[SOCRATES]

Part 4A .....to follow Post No 83.
########################

Dave JB, I accept what you say about tuition in the sciences. I accept your posture with regard to different students progressing at a different rate within a class. I will come back to this later.

Fotunately for you the topic of Physics is not a topic that carries CHARGE.

I will explain to you what this means. It is as follows : ~

Physics does not carry charge because the reason that people wish to embrace the topic you teach is different to the reason that people show or have an interest in trading.It is a matter of extremes.

Whereas in your topic most probalbly the attraction may in large measure be the intellectual challenge that it presents in its own right, it is certain that in trading the attraction is the possibility of acquiring serious wealth.

The concept of wealth to ordinary people and the "concept" that anyone can "have a go" at acquiring it "and succeeding" carries charge. This charge is emotional input, which is not present in a study of the sciences as the "money carrot" is not dangled as blatantly as it is in trading.

You see, the moment anyone allows emotion to enter his or her consciousness, it has a disabling effect of the most crippling nature. Emotion disables logical deduction and reasoning. People are apt to study Physics for a totally different reason to that which would attract them to take an interest in trading.

People take an interest iin trading because they view it as a route to the acquisition of well being, which is equated with money. The acquisition of money carries charge. Unfortuanately it is true and is the case.

In another thread I proceeded to explain how the main purpose of our own humanity is to preserve life.
Everything we do is orientated towards preserving life, everything. In humanistic terms there are two responses, one to enhancement of life and the other being a threat to life. In human terms nothing else matters and everything is a consequence of these two drives.

The acquisition of wealth is viewed as a very important contribution to the enhancement of life. Either threats to life or potential threats to life create emotions.Enhancement of life and potential enhancement to life also create emotions.There is an emotional graded scale within which these are contained. The emotion is proportional in some measure to the degree of importance or priority given either consciously or subconciously to the stimulant. In the case of money the stimulant has the potential to be very strong, therefore the emotion that evolves and develops around the acquisition of money or the potential acquisition of money can also be very strong. The strength of the response is also dependent upon the amount of stimulation that engenders the emotion.

In a previous thread I explained how it is that emotion has the abilty to disable reason, how emotion is able to switch off the ability to logically deduce and what is worse, the ability to act in accordance with that reason. The presence and the appearance of emotion and its disabling faculties with regard to logical deduction, reasoning and the ability to act in accordance with these in trading,, is disastrous.

Now what happens is that in ordinary life people are stimulated to have emotions all the time. We could say that in ordinary life, emotion is a luxury we are free to indulge in and enjoy (if pleasant) or not enjoy (if unpleasant). In trading we ought not to be subject to these stimuli because they defeat the very object we are trying to achieve, which is not to gamble and do silly things, but to do our best to act in accordance with our reasoning. Here is where people first come face to face with a problem they do not know how to solve because it is part of the life preservation mechanism that gets in the way of trading.

People who are taught to become traders have to learn to deal with a lot of problems, not just this one, although it is a major problem and cannot be sorted until the student begins to have realisations of the quadrant of the universe he or she has chosen to inhabit by deciding to take up trading, so before this can be dealt with a process has to be put in place to help the aspirant REALISE the magnitude of what it is that the obstacle course presents.

The aspirant has to be started off at a mechanical level, in which everything has to be laid out and explained, like trainee mechanics learning all the components of a car and what each one does and why and how an where it fits and why it was designed in that way and for what reason and how to get at it and diagnose and dismantle and reasssemble and check and so on and so on.This we call STRUCTURE.

All markets have structure. All market structures are similar. This is because all markets operate according to supply and demand. But each market is different because the operators in each occupy different clusters of interest. Therefore each instrument has certain characteristics, a certain def ining rythm, a certain "personality" if you like. This is because the same groups of people are specialised in it, and participate continously.

And so the basic construction of how markets are made to operate has to be explained first, in a structured manner, in ascending rafts of complexity, like trainee mechanics learning all the parts of a car and how and where they fit and what they do. None of it is random. All of it has order. It appears random. It is not and cannot be. If it were the future of Democracy and Capaitalism would be at risk from minute to minute. Stop and think of this for a moment........Could the basis of the Modern World be so insecure it could vanish in the next few second ? The answer must be negative, otherwise if alternatively subject to randomness it would have happened already. Therefore all of this is structured. Back shortly. Now followed on Post 132

 

[SOCRATES]

Socrates,
I think 'welcome back' is in order, as you appear to be staging a return - I had thought you'd just popped in to tell us all off again but it would appear not (that is not meant in any unpleasant way - I am trying to avoid misunderstanding, as email comms are dreadful for that). Gardan - sorry, I think you just go hijacked... at least the Highwayman gave you a peck on the cheek in passing <g>

Two points really (one split)- Quercus ( Ithink?) I've 4000 flying hrs military and never wore a chute, generally speaking on the odd occasion it works before impact question 2 fairly quickly formalises as 'do I want to land down there?' - down there being angry tribesmen with AK47's, or the Atlantic with **** all for 2000 miles in any given direction. (Q1 was usually 'did the pilot mean to do that?')
My 'favourite' middle eastern (I think) cross cockpit gradient problem was the one where the two pilots were asking the engineer how to fix a rapidly decaying situation, unware that his checklist reading skills were unduly hampered by his dyslexia - the guy had shunted from one job to another until somebody didn't care when they found out....

Soc - do you not think that, having spotted this 'amateur hour', there is an opportunity for those with shears? I'd consider this to be a chance for the astute to manipulate the less aware for an hour or two - or is the market too random, or just too big, to do this do you think?

Dave

Hello Dave, I only tell off the pillocks that deserve to be told off, either because they are rude or disrespectful or impertinent or malicious. I do not tell people off for the sake of it. When I tell people off it is because I have very good reasons for it.. Several of them see fit to argue for the sake of arguing. This time, the chain of delivery is armoured. This time I am not going to tolerate nonsense. If you follow what I post in this thread you will learn how it is that this is going to be very intereresting and meaningful to the audience, for their benefit and to my satisfaction.

With regard to the Amateur Hour, I understand perfectly what you mean. But you see there is risk, much more risk than is normally acceptable. I will explain why. No single participant can move the market in one direction on his or her own, because the market is too large, too liquid, and linked. When I say move, I mean changing the direction in a meaningful way, for long enough to profit from it with minimum of risk. Notwithstanding this I have myself experienced the effect of a largish(150) buy order moving the S&P Big Board by I full point at a quiet time , in the opposite direction and then being absorbed and carrying on as expected, trickle trickle, very boring. This is also boring because in contradistinction to the people in the market, we, are able to choose the moment. We do not have to be there all the time. If we have this advantage of being able to choose, we should not misuse it, and select worthwhile opportunities when presented to us.

This brings me to the topic of forcing. One must never force. It is not necessary. When there is a real opportunity there is one ready made for us. Why try to force ? It's no good. All we have to do is choose. We have to choose wisely. Think about this: the ability to choose, to be free, places upon the beneficiary the responsibility to act with Wisdom, and not Whizzdom...
then all we have to do is to act correctly at the right time, to do this we must not try to be pouncing on everything that appears in the hope it will be the one.....No, hand sitting is also very important.

Kind Regards.

 

[Gardan]

Socrates

You want the answers, don't you Gardan ? Well, I am going to give them all to you and for everybody elses' benefit as well and to my satisfaction. But it is a long complication and you have to be patient, because this can run and run, you understand ?

Yes I want the answers but not for the reasons you may think? I also appreciate that if anything that is worth while learning can not be learnt in very short time.

Regards

 

[chump]

"anything that is worth while learning can not be learnt in very short time."...when I fell off a ladder it took just (approx) 3 seconds for me to learn that I had not taken long enough to secure that ladder..I'd say that was worth learning and was pretty quick 😉 ...the problem is people just have to box themselves instead of reacting to the facts as they exist...it should be pretty obvious that what it takes one person years to master might take months for another person and perhaps even days for another... instead of building a concrete wall in front of you as to how difficult something is going to be why not just apply yourself to the process and let it take whatever it will take and that will be governed by you and your motivation.....
Cheers

 

[SOCRATES]

Yes I want the answers but not for the reasons you may think? I also appreciate that if anything that is worth while learning can not be learnt in very short time.

Regards

Good, if you want the answers for whatever reason that is OK provided it is not your intention to misuse them, as the answers you will be given will be the correct ones. And having said that, part of the process is not just for you to have the answers to enable you to do what is correct, you will also learn what it is you must not do, so that you do not end up doing what is not correct.

In addition, in this profession there are a lot of OPINIONS. Here we are not interested in opinions, we are interested in facts. These facts have to be laid out in sequence, in a structured manner, pertinent to the matter in hand for you to get the correct handle on the topic.

This constitutes a lot of effort. It is not as easy as falling off a ladder and arriving at a conclusion thereof. It requires the application of thought, sustained, focused, intensive thought, and not scattergun observation.

 

[SOCRATES]

"anything that is worth while learning can not be learnt in very short time."...when I fell off a ladder it took just (approx) 3 seconds for me to learn that I had not taken long enough to secure that ladder..I'd say that was worth learning and was pretty quick 😉 ...the problem is people just have to box themselves instead of reacting to the facts as they exist...it should be pretty obvious that what it takes one person years to master might take months for another person and perhaps even days for another... instead of building a concrete wall in front of you as to how difficult something is going to be why not just apply yourself to the process and let it take whatever it will take and that will be governed by you and your motivation.....
Cheers

Poor Chumpy, we hope you did not hurt yourself in the process.
When you say people have to box themselves, can you clearly explain the meaning, that is the context within which you use the the verb "to box" in your reply, please Chumpy.

 

[SOCRATES]

In addition to my Post above No111, I forgot to mention that the object of the excercise is to get the correct handle on the topic and keep a grip on it and not to wander off with fanciful ideas that may or may not yield results because of an element of luck or chance playing its part, because there is such an anomaly as beginners luck to be considered. This again is potentially very dangerous, as it tends to lull the newbie into a sense of false security that is not justified, and with hindsight will be seen to be just so.

 

[chump]

To 'box in' in this context means simply to close one's mind to what lies before you by simply regurgitating 'ideas' planted ,but not tested by fact.... hence , my example which unfortunately was tested in the hardest possible manner....

 

[SOCRATES]

OK Chumpy, I now understand. I wil expand on this on a post that will follow. I cannot give it the attention it deserves because I am busy with something else, but it is an important detail and I will come back to you later on this.

 

[kevin546]

Socrates

A question.

If we are shown what is the correct way is there a danger of learning what not to do in the context of mixed messages or to much data. For example if you are shown the correct way then to deviate from this you know you will be trading the wrong way. Knowing the correct way only; does that act as a safeguard to ensure you do not wander off into the incorrect practise but refuse to deviate from the way shown all other factors being declined. By limiting knowledge or narrowing the focus to this extent does it not assist in the development of discipline or is this simply to narrow a view.

Kevin

 

[SOCRATES]

Wait a minute Kevin, let me deal with Chumpy first....

Chumpy, you are almost going the right way about it but not quite....
What is needed instead, is to collect clusters. These clusters are groups of information (and it has to be absolutely correct information backed by irrefutable supportable evidence that the information is correct and that there is no other possible explanation or reason). For example, on bottoms it will be seen that the volume be be very low or very high. Tthis is because there no supply, meaning there are no willing sellers willing to cut their loss and give up to willing buyers at that level, therefore there is little activity recorded there. Or conversely, the volume is very high because suddenly all the stale bulls give up, take the loss, and willing buyers who have a contrary view, jump in and buy the lot. Both of these scenarios are apt to creat higher prices from then on. The above is a cluster. Now you can put this cluster in your box, and regurgitate it when you need it. The information cannot be put into the box until it is known to be absolutely correct. If you put into the box other ideas that aren't necessarily correct because they have not been verified, you will end up with a box full of jumbled information, some of which is not reliable. This is dangerous. Sod's law it will be that when you need to access the box you will draw imperfect information and your action in consequence will be the wrong one. Do you now understand ?

In addition to the above you can create an "ideas box" in which you keep ideas that you may want to explore or test. But the Ideas Box and the Cluster Box must not be muddled or contaminated, because this leads to confusion, and potential catastrophe, OK ?

 

[SOCRATES]

Socrates

A question.

If we are shown what is the correct way is there a danger of learning what not to do in the context of mixed messages or to much data. For example if you are shown the correct way then to deviate from this you know you will be trading the wrong way. Knowing the correct way only; does that act as a safeguard to ensure you do not wander off into the incorrect practise but refuse to deviate from the way shown all other factors being declined. By limiting knowledge or narrowing the focus to this extent does it not assist in the development of discipline or is this simply to narrow a view.

Kevin

Hello Kevin,

Your first sentence should read:# If we are shown what is the correct way and we accept it ,and are disciplined, then there NO DANGER of being corrupted into doing what we ought not to be doing, or looking at what we ought not to be looking at, or of putting our attention on what it is we ought to avoid, in the context of mixed messages or too much data or otherwise.

Your second sentence is absolutely correct.

Your third sentence is correct also.

Your fourth sentence should read # By expanding knowledge in a structured manner, but limiting your focus only on that which is relevant , only then can a correct view be attained
such that the appropriate focus should then be put on self discipline, because then the self discipline becomes relevant as a result of knowing WHY it is essential instead of just GUESSING and being prepared in case the guess is wrong. You could then add :~

We are not interested in guessing, those of you who are interested in guessing can go and become members of a casino where you can play Roulette, Chemin De Fer, Blackjack, etc.,
and not treat trading as if it were a Casino type of scenario, but we are interested in being able to recognise certainties and near certainties as and when they develop, and of course putting in precautions just in case the outcome we expect is not the one we get, by always using STOP LOSSES, it is there for us to use. We must be disciplined and use it, not put it in and then muck about with it and change it and hope and all that nonsense.

I will be expanding on all this extensively much later in my replies to Dave JB which are still in the process of being given, in serialised and detailed form on this thread, all of them are numbered, with Post References to make it easy for all of you to follow as well.

Kind Regards.

 

[SOCRATES]

Chumpy, do you want to fire the cannonball, or shall I do it ?

 

[SOCRATES]

Chumpy , he's gone, it's alright.

 

[Gardan]

Socrates

Good, if you want the answers for whatever reason that is OK provided it is not your intention to misuse them, as the answers you will be given will be the correct ones. And having said that, part of the process is not just for you to have the answers to enable you to do what is correct, you will also learn what it is you must not do, so that you do not end up doing what is not correct.

.

If I may be so bold to ask that you except my assurances,I assure you my intentions are honourable.

Regards

 

[SOCRATES]

If I may be so bold to ask that you except my assurances,I assure you my intentions are honourable.

Regards

I am proceeding on the basis that your intentions are honourable.
However will you please clarify whether you expect me to except your assurances or accept them? See above, your post.