How do I maximize profits from being right 80%+ of the time?

[brettus]

Get a loan off a loan shark and scale up.

 

[TheBramble]

I have been able to consistently predict stock and currency movements with an 80% - 90%+ accuracy for several years now.

Here's a tip if you're going to scam...

When anyone quotes a range (as in your 80-90%) it means they don't have a specific figure. Ooops.

If you really had 'accuracy for several years' you would obviously have come up with a single figure, and preferably apparently random such as 83.43% or 86.57% - nothing too round if you get my gist.

Otherwise it's fairly obvious it's total BS.

Thanks so much right back at you.

 

[wackypete2]

I am able to predict both intraday and multi-day price movements for any high volume stock (i.e. goog, aapl, c, etc) or currency simply by looking at the chart and visualizing where the chart is going to move in my head. I don't use any technical indicators or studies as I find that just creates more noise in my head and distracts me from seeing what is next.

Are you related to ScepterMT?

Peter

 

[DionysusToast]

Let's presume for a minute this isn't a scam.

80-90% without actually trading is quite possible. Confirmation bias can boost anybodies numbers but the key is

"Do the 80-90% winners make more than the 10-20% losers?"

So -first thing to do in my opinion.

1 - For all winners - figure out the maximum adverse excursion as well as the actual target you would have taken.
2 - For all losers - figure out the point at which you'd have gotten out.

If at this point winners < losers -well, you just learnt that 90% doesn't equal profit.

If not - half the winners & double the losers. This will show you the likely results when you trade with real money for the first time.

 

[new_trader]

I am able to predict both intraday and multi-day price movements for any high volume stock (i.e. goog, aapl, c, etc) or currency simply by looking at the chart and visualizing where the chart is going to move in my head.

What an amazing coincidence. I can do the same thing with every attractive woman I see. The way she moves, the way she pleases me, her obedience...:cheesy:

Trading with real money isn't what you imagine it to be.

 

[6am]

When anyone quotes a range (as in your 80-90%) it means they don't have a specific figure. Ooops.

If you really had 'accuracy for several years' you would obviously have come up with a single figure, and preferably apparently random such as 83.43% or 86.57% - nothing too round if you get my gist.

Why? We do not have information about the number of predictions. The average number will change with each next prediction. I believe it is OK to specify the range.

 

[anley]

If you're making 3% a day then why do you need to 'maximise' your gains? Just keep compounding the 3%.

As ever though, watch out for the big loss, because it's coming.......

 

[new_trader]

Why? We do not have information about the number of predictions. The average number will change with each next prediction. I believe it is OK to specify the range.

The % is an academic issue because anybody who has traded real money knows there is a massive chasm between knowing what to do and actually doing it. Imagining what the market will do next and being right 80% of the time isn't a big deal when you have lost no money on the 20% of times you were wrong.

Being wrong 3 or 4 times in a row and still having the courage to bet money on your figuring is a different ball game.

 

[TheBramble]

When anyone quotes a range (as in your 80-90%) it means they don't have a specific figure. Ooops.

If you really had 'accuracy for several years' you would obviously have come up with a single figure, and preferably apparently random such as 83.43% or 86.57% - nothing too round if you get my gist.

Why? We do not have information about the number of predictions. The average number will change with each next prediction. I believe it is OK to specify the range.

What are you talking about?

If someone says they have been running s system for X period of time they have specific empirical data. Number of trades taken. Number of winners. Number of losers. Average profit from winning trades. Average loss on losing trades. Drawdown. There’s nothing grey about historical performance data – it’s THERE (or it isn’t).

As for numbers changing with each prediction – words almost fail me. Let’s take a view that predictions actually result in an action of some form being taken i.e. a trade. The numbers WILL change with each trade taken (albeit change rather more slowly as the size of the dataset increases), but you’re still left after every trade with the an immutable set of data. You don’t sum up all your wining and losing trades and say “It’s somewhere between 80-90% successful” unless you’re a complete BS-er. You’d say something like “86,34% of my trades are profitable”. Precision.

So, thank you for sharing your belief that it’s OK to be imprecise, but I’ll stick to the real world of accuracy and specificity.

 

[robster970]

This guys doesn't understand the law of large numbers TB otherwise it would be 83.76% based upon a sample size of yada yada, etc

Just more horsesh1t IMO

 

[leonice]

Hello All,
I
Lately I have been focusing on forex trading because of the 50:1 leverage (I'm in the US). I am consistently making 7 to 25 pips per trade on the EUR/USD. I typically hold a position anywhere from a few minutes to several hours.


-nbalance

What is your stop loss? hope you have one, and what is the factor that decides how long you you hold your position - hope it's not lack of profit or rather existence of a loss.

 

[maxima]

What is your stop loss?

stop losses r for wimps

 

[BeginnerJoe]

stop losses r for wimps

That's what I believe. Exiting trades should depend on the price condition and not a specific percentage or point loss. But I suppose it is OK for noobs to follow random stops, as they don't know better.

 

[the hare]

This guys doesn't understand the law of large numbers TB otherwise it would be 83.76% based upon a sample size of yada yada, etc

Just more horsesh1t IMO

I do track win rate, on a trade by trade basis, and of course that figure converges to a long term average. But I also track win rate on a weeky and monthly basis, and it most definately fluctuates within a range

Lets not forget, The Bramble is a pedant (and thats why we like him)

 

[6am]

You don’t sum up all your wining and losing trades and say “It’s somewhere between 80-90% successful” unless you’re a complete BS-er. You’d say something like “86,34% of my trades are profitable”. Precision.

Is it not a BS to specify a precision upto 0.01% without an information about the number of trials? Why not specify a precision upto 0.0001%?

How is it accurate to give a figure if it changes the next time the prediction is made? I could understand if this figure was a theoretical success rate, but it is not. You only get an estimate. What he omitted is a confidence interval. I.e. something like this "Based on current data I am 95% confident that my successfull prediction rate will be between 80% and 90%"

 

[robster970]

I do track win rate, on a trade by trade basis, and of course that figure converges to a long term average. But I also track win rate on a weeky and monthly basis, and it most definately fluctuates within a range

Lets not forget, The Bramble is a pedant (and thats why we like him)

Just out of curiosity, does your fluctuation remain stable within say 1SD of the long term average?

There is nothing to say about TB's pedantry. I bet he keeps lists of things. Endless lists.

 

[new_trader]

That's what I believe. Exiting trades should depend on the price condition and not a specific percentage or point loss. But I suppose it is OK for noobs to follow random stops, as they don't know better.

Piffle.

 

[TheBramble]

I do track win rate, on a trade by trade basis, and of course that figure converges to a long term average. But I also track win rate on a weeky and monthly basis, and it most definately fluctuates within a range

Lets not forget, The Bramble is a pedant (and thats why we like him)

I have no problem with being called a pedant. Its usage is generally deemed pejorative, but beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I only ever assume the positive connotations.

(If I were a genuinely pointless pedant, I’d point out the two spelling mistakes in your post, but that’s not where I’m at.)

Taking just your win rate, over any time range you choose to use, (all time, weekly, monthly etc.) it can only at any one given time have a single value. Your win rate so far this week is a single value based on all the trades you have taken. It isn’t a range of values. Your win rate over this current month currently has a single value – not a range of values.

Your daily win rate may well fluctuate within the weekly or monthly range and so forth, but for any given period of time there is just one value which is correct and therefore all other values incorrect, which makes ranges a bit of a no-no.

I’m not surprised you can’t see the wood for the trees, but being a hare was your choice.

 

[TheBramble]

Is it not a BS to specify a precision upto 0.01% without an information about the number of trials? Why not specify a precision upto 0.0001%?

How is it accurate to give a figure if it changes the next time the prediction is made? I could understand if this figure was a theoretical success rate, but it is not. You only get an estimate. What he omitted is a confidence interval. I.e. something like this "Based on current data I am 95% confident that my successfull prediction rate will be between 80% and 90%"

Not only do I know I do not know what you are talking about, I'm quite convinced you have not a shread of an idea yourself.

 

[TheBramble]

Just out of curiosity, does your fluctuation remain stable within say 1SD of the long term average?

There is nothing to say about TB's pedantry. I bet he keeps lists of things. Endless lists.

That's the 3rd time you've used the word 'list' in the last 437 posts and the 4th time in 6 months.