Efficient Trading

[wasp]

jimbo, please be quiet & let Soc speak, you've more than made your point.

Soc, I've often had difficulty following threads in which you've been heavily involved as they invariably become very lengthy & time doesn't always permit. However, I've persisted on this one & found your input to be extremely interesting & (hopefully) ultimately very helpful. I'm sure there are plenty of members like myself, who may not actively participate in these discussions, but still gain a lot from them. If you feel able to continue publically I'm sure we'd all appreciate it.

Simon

Ditto.

 

[tunnel1x1]

jimbo, please be quiet & let Soc speak, you've more than made your point.

Soc, I've often had difficulty following threads in which you've been heavily involved as they invariably become very lengthy & time doesn't always permit. However, I've persisted on this one & found your input to be extremely interesting & (hopefully) ultimately very helpful. I'm sure there are plenty of members like myself, who may not actively participate in these discussions, but still gain a lot from them. If you feel able to continue publically I'm sure we'd all appreciate it.

Simon

The motion has been made and seconded. Call for the vote. All those in favor say Aye.

Aye.

 

[jimbo57]

The motion has been made and seconded. Call for the vote. All those in favor say Aye.

Aye.

Aye!

Sheep

 

[wasp]

You don't have to read the thread Jimbo

 

[TheMoneyMachine]

I concur..........

Please continue Socrates, your input on this thread has been outside the boundary's of conventional wisdom, and will therefore always generate unwanted attention from those unwilling to think outside the box . Try your best to ignore for the benefit of others who are willing to broaden there horizon.

Regards

TMM

 

[DepthTangent]

LOL TMM you sound remarkably familiar

 

[TheMoneyMachine]

LOL TMM you sound remarkably familiar

Enlighten me if you would DT!

 

[OpenMind]

jimbo, please be quiet & let Soc speak, you've more than made your point.

Soc, I've often had difficulty following threads in which you've been heavily involved as they invariably become very lengthy & time doesn't always permit. However, I've persisted on this one & found your input to be extremely interesting & (hopefully) ultimately very helpful. I'm sure there are plenty of members like myself, who may not actively participate in these discussions, but still gain a lot from them. If you feel able to continue publically I'm sure we'd all appreciate it.

Simon

Agree 110%.

 

[superfly]

recognize, execute and manage

(intra-day) adequate tight stop opportunity's in my target market
to perfection

 

[sp1]

Originally Posted by jimbo57 enlighten us on 'volatility'

if I choose to give explanations of matters that perplex you I shall do so by PM,

I will add, to everyone else but you as a reward for your nasty attitude.

If you do or have done please include me. Kind regards and many thanks.

 

[Lightning McQueen]

GET ON WITH IT

 

[Kunal]

This is all interesting stuff. Is there some link here between this work and Soc. I am sorry if this questions is naive but I find simple is best (serves me well for my trading) so could somebody do me the service to spell it out for me. Cheers.

I think BB has provided a link to a pdf you need to read about CW.

 

[JumpOff]

I could at a push even be tempted to argue that there's an inverse relationship between volatility and random noise. When the market starts moving decisively, and volatility is increasing Id argue that the “noise” in the signal is actually diminishing

I agree zup, and compare it to riding a bicycle. Think how wobbly and unstable they are at low speed.
JO

 

[Profitaker]

I thought Id post as I'm getting a little confused as to what certain contributors actually mean by volatility.

The frequency and magnitude of stock price changes. Some stocks are inherently more volatile than others, and for good reason. Take a pharmaceutical stock where the SP swings wildly as new wonder drugs are announced, followed by dashed hopes as regulatory approvals fail. Compare this to a boring utility stock where not much (good or bad) ever happens.

If you were to trade both such stocks using a tight stop-loss policy, and even where both such stocks trade at the same SP, the numerical value of the “tight stop” should be different, due to the differing volatility characteristics of each stock.

This is a basic trading principle, but accepted by only one or two of the more enlightened posters on this thread. The rest it seems prefer the mystique of a very questionable fruit cake.

Does this make sense to anyone ?

Yes it does. My suggestion would be to think in terms of Standard Deviation (StDev) when setting stops, and limit orders for that matter too. For example when planning a day trade;

A stock which has a Volatility of 15.7% gives a daily StDev equal to 1% of the SP. So a stop-loss set at 0.5 x StDev has a statistical probability of 31% of being hit. You would vary the actual StDev used according to how you perceive the risk / reward.

Hope this helps.

 

[Profitaker]

Right that's far enough. Jimbo "it is apparent to me" (i.e it is my opinion only) that the only reason you post is to stir up trouble, under the convenient guise of "protecting" new readers from the "facts".

Your views are as valid as anybodies, but you really shouldn’t be moderating IMHO.

Can I suggest you start a new thread dedicated to and exclusively for the followers of Soc, a sort of “Soc appreciation Society”. Then you can all wallow in wisdom till your hearts content. The rest of us can discuss Cognitive thinking, stop-loss applications, and any other interesting trading ideas. For my part, if you decide to do something along those lines I promise never to post there. How’s that for a deal ?

 

[DepthTangent]

Hows about creating a winners thread and a losers thread ? Then we can all sit in our respective camps happily engaging with like minded associates. Maybe this is the logical answer to an existence governed by polarities ? If the logical answer is of no practical use for the all knowing totality, then maybe a continuation of interaction between opposite camps will extend the flux of combative interaction, which may even lead to additional aquirements of useful and practical information for those that would otherwise be chatting as a loser to other losers.

 

[dbphoenix]

Your views are as valid as anybodies, but you really shouldn’t be moderating IMHO.

Can I suggest you start a new thread dedicated to and exclusively for the followers of Soc, a sort of “Soc appreciation Society”. Then you can all wallow in wisdom till your hearts content. The rest of us can discuss Cognitive thinking, stop-loss applications, and any other interesting trading ideas. For my part, if you decide to do something along those lines I promise never to post there. How’s that for a deal ?

Already done, though the first one is closed:

http://www.trade2win.com/boards/showthread.php?t=10672

http://www.trade2win.com/boards/showthread.php?t=11515

 

[wasp]

tight stops

OK, I will explain.

The single most important thing you have to concentrate on is limiting losses.
You do this by using stops.

As you become more procicient at picking winning moves you have to tighten your stop loss policy.

Limiting losses to the absolute minimum is the key. All else is peripheral.

Now that is a simple statement.

If everyone did this, everyone would survive long enough to eventually become proficient.

But very few have the self discipline to persist in this way.

It'll be interesting to see how many of those who buy into the tight stop thing without qualification will be around in a year.

Considering the suggestion of tightening stops runs in conjunction with the timing of entries to justify having the tightest feasible stop, I am intrigued why this would lead more to the road of ruin rather than looser stops (larger losses).

Anyone who reduces there stops, or makes changes in any aspect of their trading without due process to ensure volitility is incorporated and accounted for, deserves the dire repurcussions it may bring.

Surely, if one has done their homework and taken into consideration the volitility and nature of the chosen market/stock, placing the stop as the tightest possible point should only be encouraged.

 

[dbphoenix]

Surely, if one has done their homework and taken into consideration the volitility and nature of the chosen market/stock, placing the stop as the tightest possible point should only be encouraged.

Note my remark about qualification. You provide at least two of the qualifications.

But, again, this all has to do with stops. There are many other threads which are devoted to this subject. No one has as yet explained why it is necessary to go into this again from scratch. Is something new being provided? No. So . . .

 

[charliechan]

Considering the suggestion of tightening stops runs in conjunction with the timing of entries to justify having the tightest feasible stop, I am intrigued why this would lead more to the road of ruin rather than looser stops (larger losses).

Anyone who reduces there stops, or makes changes in any aspect of their trading without due process to ensure volitility is incorporated and accounted for, deserves the dire repurcussions it may bring.

Surely, if one has done their homework and taken into consideration the volitility and nature of the chosen market/stock, placing the stop as the tightest possible point should only be encouraged.

full marks for trying to bring the thread round to a more constructive purpose, other than banging on about the same tired old accusations that just bore everybody.

the point is, that in order to use such a tight stop with pinpoint timing is a skill few have. in a way, this tight stop + timing IS taking volatility into consideration , but in a way few will understand because most people on this thread it would seem would rather try and **** someone off rather than take the time to improve themselves, their technique and understanding.

could this also be the answer to another lengthy thread where the same person was criticised personally rather than discuss the issues at hand? (why do so many people lose thread). there, i tried to point out that most lose because of their negative attitudes, usually borne of inferior self-image. those same reasons seem to be why this thread is so rapidly deteriorating from what started as a promising theory.

thank god everybody isnt this stupid - otherwise we would all still believe the world to be flat.