ESSENTIAL READING FOR NEWBIES ~ This author is a must

[Rhody Trader]

I agree about his second book (Enhancing Trader Performance) being good but disagree with your interpretation of his view.

It's not my interpretation. I've actually heard/read (can't remember which - maybe it's both) him say exactly that. He takes the view that without a good system/method you can be the most psychologically stable trader in the world, but you won't make a penny.

 

[nine]

You would be hard put to find anyone who didn't agree that "without a good system/method you can be the most psychologically stable trader in the world, but you won't make a penny." Many a discussion on trader psychology suffers people who leap in to argue that you need an edge/plan only to discover, once the fire cools, that everyone else agrees on that particular point.

Mark Douglas is also a strong advocate of that perspective. Interestingly I think that neither Mark nor Brett would argue that most psychological issues in trading have much to do with "psychological stability" although Brett's first book had more of that flavour.

 

[Rhody Trader]

Many a discussion on trader psychology suffers people who leap in to argue that you need an edge/plan only to discover, once the fire cools, that everyone else agrees on that particular point.

I would restate that a bit. Everyone eventually comes to agree on that point.

The problem is that new traders keep getting told to read Douglas or Steenbarger or Kiev or (insert trading psychology author/book here) to the point where they become convinced that if they can just get their heads sorted out they can become successful traders. Eventually, if they stick around long enough, they'll come to realize that they need a system that actually works.

 

[nkruger]

I would restate that a bit. Everyone eventually comes to agree on that point.

The problem is that new traders keep getting told to read Douglas or Steenbarger or Kiev or (insert trading psychology author/book here) to the point where they become convinced that if they can just get their heads sorted out they can become successful traders. Eventually, if they stick around long enough, they'll come to realize that they need a system that actually works.

Agree.

An anonymous paragraph in TITZ does say that "now you need an edge/strategy to get the whole thing off the ground". Many newbies may miss that point. I think a whole chapter should be devoted to that one subject.

Maybe that's the next book from M. Douglas.......

Nick.

 

[zupcon]

Agree.

An anonymous paragraph in TITZ does say that "now you need an edge/strategy to get the whole thing off the ground". Many newbies may miss that point. I think a whole chapter should be devoted to that one subject.

Maybe that's the next book from M. Douglas.......

Nick.

I guess thats what really worries me about both of Douglas's books, the guy waffles on and on about irrelevant nonsense such as the importance of "developing a winning attitude", that in itself is bad enough, but worse still the repetition devoted to such pointless drivel is absolutely relentless. He'll find 99 ways of reitterating the same useless information whilst the actual meat of the book is contained in half a dozen throwaway lines.

 

[black bear]

I guess thats what really worries me about both of Douglas's books, the guy waffles on and on about irrelevant nonsense such as the importance of "developing a winning attitude", that in itself is bad enough, but worse still the repetition devoted to such pointless drivel is absolutely relentless. He'll find 99 ways of reitterating the same useless information whilst the actual meat of the book is contained in half a dozen throwaway lines.

which in your opinion are....................

 

[belflan]

He'll find 99 ways of reitterating the same useless information whilst the actual meat of the book is contained in half a dozen throwaway lines.

maybe all you need is in the attachment at the start of this thread (and newbies (including me) could save some money)

belflan

 

[black bear]

which in your opinion are....................

no have read the book and just seeing if we agree

 

[FXSCALPER2]

Do you not think there is a certain amount of psychology involved trading for a living ?

The large banks and investment houses spend millions on the subject.

And there does seem to be a big market in it for home~based traders

Large bank and investment houses like Bear Sterns and Soc Gen? What makes you think they know something?

 

[new_trader]

A forum with over 90,000 "real" traders and we still need to read McDonnell Douglaseseseses book!? I won't be a hypocrite and say that I have not read any trading books, I have. Good ones too, written by real traders who know what’s what and what’s not and they have been very helpful. But I can say, with confidence, that everything you need to know to be come a successful and profitable trader has already been posted in this forum.

 

[black bear]

I would go further than that ~

it could be wrote on the back of a match box

But still no answer which speaks volumes in its self imho

 

[nkruger]

Large bank and investment houses like Bear Sterns and Soc Gen? What makes you think they know something?

ok FXS. Very good !

When I was writing that post, I was thinking of (but didn't mention) Deutsche Bank, Shearson Lehman (as was then) and Barclays as I know traders who worked in those companies in the 90's and a large part of their training was with their minds.

(One's a teacher now, one a gentleman farmer and one a lap~dancing club owner.... )

 

[rathcoole_exile]

He'll find 99 ways of reitterating the same useless information whilst the actual meat of the book is contained in half a dozen throwaway lines.

have you ever read the Kyosaki Rich Dad guff ?
Now there is one genius who can regurgitate the same 4 section diagram and spin it into a dozen books. Masterful, you could almost admire him, if it wasn't all sh*te !

 

[zupcon]

which in your opinion are....................

Sorry for the delay...

Been a while since I read it (thank god), but here goes

a) Anything can happen
b) Every moment is unique
c) There is a RANDOM distribution of wins or lossses for any set of variables that define an edge.
d) Dont get bitten by dogs or savaged by a turbot as a child

I've even managed to get prominent members of the "all is known in advance" crowd to acknowlege these truths, although they would never do so publically

 

[Paul71]

Sorry for the delay...

Been a while since I read it (thank god), but here goes

a) Anything can happen
b) Every moment is unique
c) There is a RANDOM distribution of wins or lossses for any set of variables that define an edge.
d) Dont get bitten by dogs or savaged by a turbot as a child

I've even managed to get prominent members of the "all is known in advance" crowd to acknowlege these truths, although they would never do so publically

'Everything is known in advance', would be a good name for a trading book. I think the 'catch phrase' holds within it, the 'key' for successful trading and 'trading thought' (psychology).

 

[Trader333]

'Everything is known in advance', would be a good name for a trading book

The only author that could publish such a book with any credibility would have to be God


Paul

 

[zupcon]

The only author that could publish such a book with any credibility would have to be God

Paul

Unfortunately I dont have the time or inclination to write such a book at the moment

 

[Paul71]

The only author that could publish such a book with any credibility would have to be God


Paul

If i said that, "everything is known in advance" of a trade being executed, this should give a hint as to what key issues lie within the phrase.:idea:

 

[new_trader]

The only author that could publish such a book with any credibility would have to be God


Paul

And me...and a few others.

 

[TheBramble]

a) Anything can happen

...


I've even managed to get prominent members of the "all is known in advance" crowd to acknowlege these truths

Does that mean they were hedging their bets (although with their own private, invisible exchange, why would they need to?) or, more likely, as consesus here had it at the time, they simply were just full of Tom?

(any non Cockneys, have a word with HarryM if you need it explaining...)