If It's All About making Money?

[DaveJB]

Cynic

 

[TheBramble]

Yes, but not in this case Dave.

I think most on these boards accept that Socco does have enormous experience and possibly even skill as a trader - we'll never know.

What's the point of being the Zeus of all traders when nobody benefits from your presence?

An example, Newtron Bomb's BO strat on FX. A polished and professional video clip with an interesting and useful amount of information that newbies (and not so newbies) can benefit from. They don't have to trade it - but the exposure to another trader's methods and style is worth its weight in gold.

Maybe that's just a personal opinion, but I simply feel Socrates has so much to offer, but he insists and persists in wasting his time - and ours.

 

[SOCRATES]

Bramble please, you must not gallantly champion causes you are not up to date with and then take it personally for no reason. Then you mention a minority who attempt to set themselves up as gurus/experts. In this you are bang on the button, but you are misdirecting your attention on us, I promise you. I am surprised you haven't sussed it either, it is right in front of your nose and you fail to spot it.

As for poor Onelotwonder, you are also being unfair Bramble. He is not a troll, in fact I can tell he really knows his business. I can detect this from the manner in which he expresses his views.

No one is trying to upset you, Bramble please, I promise you, now there's a Good Gentleman.

 

[TheBramble]

Almost like looking in a mirror....

 

[SOCRATES]

Hello Dave, trip delayed until the 25th. I have been off the boards with hardware problems now resolved.
Hope you are completely recovered now.

The problem with censorship is that it would best be administered by really experienced traders who are able to separate what is nonsense from what is sense. What happens is that we are not discussing a plausible charlatan, it is very delicate, we are discussing how it is that people who set themselves up as experts do not like when they are challenged if they do not have the answers (because they don't know) and then resort to delete the post, rather like the ostrich that buries its head in the ground in the false belief that if it can no longer see you you can no longer see it and additionally that you are not there.

Also as an adjunct every question is answered with a question. This is very frustrating to people who hope to learn from what is being discussed.

I suspect that this technique is a sort of cynical information gathering excercise in an attempt to obtain answers.

Whether my approach is liked or not you must agree that I do not go around trying to pick people's brains. This is because I do not need to.

For my part you will find that I am blunt and to the point. If I do not want to answer a question I reply that I do not want to answer it and I may or may not give a reason. (a) not suitable for discussion in a public forum. (b) not suitable for discussion in print. (c) not necessary to disclose what is priviledged information. (e) too advanced (f) confidential (g) only suitable for discussion face to face. (h) only suitable for discussion face to face with illustrations. (i) only suitable for discussion in a live theatre, i.e., in front of a monitor with a position running, and so on.

What I am saying is that when I do not give an an answer to a trading, technical or mindset question it is because I choose not to and not because I cannot. That is very different to what was being discussed earlier.

Kind Regards,

 

[DaveJB]

Indeed Albert,
I have never queried your ability to answer a question, although as you know I have often felt somewhat irritated at what I've perceived as a lack of progress in the discussion. One who has knowledge is perfectly at liberty to withold it! (I merely object to that person doing something I consider 'teasing' - I am still at the early stage of being puppy like in my eagerness to divulge the latest nugget when I find something of use, but I am already learning that this will ultimately be very tiring and less attractive as time goes by... oddly perhaps the better one becomes then the less able one is to impart the goodies without throwing the towel in).

Agreed on censorship issues - but the probelm is that a trading mind allied to a computer mind is not that common... many a decent trader knows enough PC stuff to get by, personally I think it is silly to be less than comfortable with such an important tool, but ability in both fields is rare.... Sharky needs computer savvy, he has hired Daniel to improve (we hope) content, and various longstanding members to police it all.... warts and all we must accept that a plausible charlatan will defeat the current system, and until Sharky can appoint 2-3 other full time staff to police it from position of knowledge thenT2W will be subject to a degree of manipulation, whilst others will be suspicious of collusion in the backgorund, and all sorts of other things.

These are the delights of the BBS/internet system, and not at all unlike the markets I would suggest.
As for Tony - cynics are useful, even if proved wrong on occasion they do serve to alert us, they teach us to look twice and question things.... I would rather suffer 20 cynics that 2 'yes men'.

Yes thanks, by the way - I am indeed now getting better.
Dave

 

[TheBramble]

As for Tony - cynics are useful,

Genuinely not cynical about this issue Dave. Just weary of the BS.

 

[jklondon]

Then why so many arguments?

not necessarily money but utility. i.e. ones objective in life is to maximise their utility.

utlility = x(wealth) + y(happiness) + t(arguing like monkeys on trade2win).

where x , y , t are weights that sum to 1 and are different for everyone.

 

[roguetrader]

they use crutches and illusions like supposed 'support' and 'resistance' - not forgetting my favourites - head & shoulders and of course triangles - hahahaha

Oh if only I were so wise to mock and discount all views but my own then truly I would enjoy wisdom without peer.

 

[DaveJB]

I'd suggest - and I think rogue is ever so slightly in agreement here - that it is unwise to discount anything. By deciding that H&S doesn't work, as one example, it then becomes imperative to ignore a visible H&S as worthless.... even if (a) your brain is telling you this one is going to work out (like any pattern some are nearer a 'perfect shape' than others, with volume more perfectly in line with expectation, and so on), or (b) You are so convinced they don't work that the negative info, if you'd consider using it, is in itself of worth.

I look at lots and lots of ideas, I'm genuinely interested in the attempt to produce automated response systems that show a profit, that is simply a case of producing a set of rules that allow you to quantify the likelihood of profit... best of all to be able to suggest where the move will end. It is incredibly difficult, and very very complex - I doubt anybody has ever thoroughly researched a single pattern to determine when it may or may not work as a means of selecting trades. In fact I would suggest the markets are so chaotic that they are extremely difficult to predict - although some manage it. It is extremely hubristic to decide that because one is unable to make use of a pattern or setup that it does not work - I cannot weld, that does not preclude others I would consider far less intelligent than myself being able to weld given the same tools.

Please don't say 'this does not work' when 'I can't make it work' is the factual version of the statement... if only because then you will be more willing to re-examine an idea later, when your experience level might allow you to profit from something you couldn't benefit from earlier. Burning bridges is not a good thing to do.

For everyone making money from a setup I bet there are 20 losing money when they try it - that doesn't make the setup invalid, it means the 20 need to find a more appropriate tactic they are themselves happiest with. Ducati998 eslewhere is posting what I consider absolute tripe on companies that go bust (to me, I hasten to add) but it makes sense to him and he makes money at it... I could do the same and lose hand over fist. Does that make his method invalid, or is it just that I can't use it? Ditto with H&S, Triangles, and so on - I don't use them but I do tend to spot them, that doesn't make them useless. (Sticking my neck out I still find the 50 MA useful!)

 

[SOCRATES]

i was about to suggest this thread is hilarious - an argument about arguing! but i would have been wrong.

there is no argument, only difference of opinion. so what caused me to originally think there was an argument?

as there is no volume, speed of delivery, tone, etc, it is very difficult indeed to assimilate what is going down, and with what meaning is ment. as i am new to this idea of internet chat sites, i am learning how people can often be mistaken and offended where no offence is ment.

this is exactly like those who chose to do business with someone who does not give sufficient information such as speed, size of ticking, spread vs liquidity often get it wrong. they only have a mysterious price with no real comprehension of why that price is what it is or any other frame of reference. when they do decide to do business in a proper and fair(er) market, they commit the worst crime - they chose to remain ignorant of the very information they believe is beyond them. instead, they use crutches and illusions like supposed 'support' and 'resistance' - not forgetting my favourites - head & shoulders and of course triangles - hahahaha

i love the markets. everything that exists in human nature exists in the markets, and i think it was ed seykota that said something like 'every one gets what they want in the markets'

yours,

troll

I must commend you for your clarity of thought, very refreshing and very unusual, thank you.
Again you have hit it right on the button, I could not have said it better myself had I tried. You are invading an arena in which there exists the illusion that all of this can be measured and forseen via patterns and other misleading shapes. This is why anyone can see in a market what they want to see, but not everyone is able to see what there is, and when it is there or not and when it can be taken or best left alone.

 

[SOCRATES]

Genuinely not cynical about this issue Dave. Just weary of the BS.

What is this "BS" you mention Bramble ? We are not talking "BS" here tonight, to the contrary, a lot of sense is being shown here, but guardedly, because it is a delicate and sensitive topic that is under discussion and a borderline case for public exposure, therefore I sincerely regret if you are bored, but under the circumstances I assure you that it cannot be helped. Sorry Bramble.

 

[SOCRATES]

I'd suggest - and I think rogue is ever so slightly in agreement here - that it is unwise to discount anything. By deciding that H&S doesn't work, as one example, it then becomes imperative to ignore a visible H&S as worthless.... even if (a) your brain is telling you this one is going to work out (like any pattern some are nearer a 'perfect shape' than others, with volume more perfectly in line with expectation, and so on), or (b) You are so convinced they don't work that the negative info, if you'd consider using it, is in itself of worth.

I look at lots and lots of ideas, I'm genuinely interested in the attempt to produce automated response systems that show a profit, that is simply a case of producing a set of rules that allow you to quantify the likelihood of profit... best of all to be able to suggest where the move will end. It is incredibly difficult, and very very complex - I doubt anybody has ever thoroughly researched a single pattern to determine when it may or may not work as a means of selecting trades. In fact I would suggest the markets are so chaotic that they are extremely difficult to predict - although some manage it. It is extremely hubristic to decide that because one is unable to make use of a pattern or setup that it does not work - I cannot weld, that does not preclude others I would consider far less intelligent than myself being able to weld given the same tools.

Please don't say 'this does not work' when 'I can't make it work' is the factual version of the statement... if only because then you will be more willing to re-examine an idea later, when your experience level might allow you to profit from something you couldn't benefit from earlier. Burning bridges is not a good thing to do.

For everyone making money from a setup I bet there are 20 losing money when they try it - that doesn't make the setup invalid, it means the 20 need to find a more appropriate tactic they are themselves happiest with. Ducati998 eslewhere is posting what I consider absolute tripe on companies that go bust (to me, I hasten to add) but it makes sense to him and he makes money at it... I could do the same and lose hand over fist. Does that make his method invalid, or is it just that I can't use it? Ditto with H&S, Triangles, and so on - I don't use them but I do tend to spot them, that doesn't make them useless. (Sticking my neck out I still find the 50 MA useful!)

Bingo ! Now you have pinned it as well !

What you have left partially unsaid is the most important part, and it is this:~

Taking into account that presented with a given scenario in which there are included "patterns", different observers will put different interpretations not on what they see, but what in essence they are presented with.

The seeing comes later.

It follows looking.

And looking at the given scenario in its correct context at the time of seeing is the difficult part. It is the angle and quality of looking that determines the conclusion derived (or no conclusion at all), but this is not a readily transferable faculty.

Why some are able to get it as quick as a rat up a drainpipe and others not baffles me. It must have to do with the perceptions immediately adopted by the viewer that cause a bias to develop. Therefore the ability to remain impartial is crucial. But this appears not to be enough.

There are other problems involving the causes of percptual bias too numerous and complicated to be dealt with adequately with the limited resources that are available in any public forum, but suffice it is to say that to many people it is a very serious problem.

 

[SOCRATES]

right - last post for the day for sure this time....

it is not hard to determine which way prices are going. a 4 year old can often do this better than most traders believe it or not - with or without knowledge of ta.

what is more difficult however is to make money in real time from this. there are many many factors that must be accounted for. interestingly, you yourself (maybe unknowingly) touched on why this is a few posts back on this very thread.

as for the quote in bold, i wouldnt assume this either. ta as most are familiar with it does not feature in my methods much - especially in the ways that most would assume.

i can assure you that i or anyone else can make h&s work given enough time and willingness to assume unacceptable risk - but this is just my opinion. i would imagine many here are willing to accept this unnecessary risk because they cant see other ways, and they are probably too greedy by far with unrealistic expectations - i suffered badly from this when i set out.

ta patterns are pretty much the first thing retail wannabes seem to learn about. most dot make it past this stage do they. if making money was as easy as spotting h&s, flags, pennants, etc wed all be rich. as most arent, then it seems 1 of 2 things is wrong. the method, or the traders perception - perhaps both.

as for your crystal ball method you are working so hard on, i hope this helps you -

EVERY MOMENT IN THE MARKT IS UNIQUE. you are looking so hard you maynot be able to see the wood for the trees - but if it makes sense to you then keep at it. more power to you. what do i know?

This is my last reply as I have to be fresh for tomorrow mornings amusements at the open.

It may be both. It may be that the method applied is incorrect as a result of warped reasoning or perceptual bias or a combination thereof.

This is like watching a powerboat race.

Imagine if you are surrounded by bystanders arguing whether the sea is rushing under the boat and gushing backwards, whilst another lot are arguing that the boat and the sea are stationary but the boat is squirting a wake behind it, whereas another lot are arguing that the spectacle is a trick, an optical illusion.

None of this is the case, of course. But the bystanders insist on arguing, so much so that the only one in the crowd who percieves the truth, that is, that the boat is moving through the water and is creating a wake, becomes so overwhelmed by the collective contradiction against what he truly experiences that the poor fellow ultimately gives in and walks away.

I am off to bed now. Goodnight.

 

[Bigbusiness]

Having read several books about some of the worlds best traders past and present and some written by the traders themselves, one point is clear to me, they all use different methods and have all found their own way of trading the markets. I do prefer reading about how people trade rather than why one method is better than the other. It is quite clear to me that there is more than one way to make money in the markets. That is one of the reasons why I don't take those that think they have all the answers too seriously.

As far as I am concerned, it makes no difference if someone makes money trading the markets using chart patterns, mechanical systems, FA, PV or any other method. They all work well for some people and they are all disastrous for others.

 

[SOCRATES]

This is correct, Bigbusiness. If you put a handful of top traders in a room and give them a scenario, they will all arrive at the same conclusion, the correct one, without dithering.

The routes through which they arrive at these conclusions may differ slightly, but the correct conclusions are the same.

You could compare it to a cartwheel which has several spokes. All spokes lead to the hub. To get to the hub is the object of the excercise. This they are apt to do, coming from slightly different angles, but the result is the same.

They do not dither and argue about the wheel itself, or its diameter or the rim, the hub is what matters.

They are able to get to the hub quickly, decisively because in their mind's eye they know what they are looking for and where it is, and furthermore are able to accept what is laid in front of them and recognise it for what it is instantly, rather than putting a slant on it that would cause them to see what they wanted or hoped to see, which is wrong.

 

[DaveJB]

Odd,
I'm sure I replied last night... 1lot, I'm interested in finding how mechanical it can get, but not trading mechanically... I'm not obsessed with reaching the point of a program you switch on and wait for the money to roll in. I'm happy when I am doing it right just staring intently at the charts... I think the best a program can do for you is point out important facts to include in your consideration of the position, making sure you don't overlook things too often. A PC is a tool - I use a hammer to knock nails in, I don't expect the hammer to decide where to do the nailing.

I ought to explain that when saying you shouldn't mistake 'I can't use this for this can't be used' (paraphrase) I'm not implying anything about your ability here, merely that it is possible to be a good trader via a variety of routes and I would suggest that deciding not to use triangles etc is a step that the majority need to take - I think these 'n patterns that work' books/ideas lead people to believe that there are successful methods, and that locating one is all it takes... in reality there are a fair number of ways to get there, and finding the way that suits yourself is a development stage the trader has to work through.

I'm largely in agreement - I'm just being a bit pernickety perhaps in saying that adopting a mindset where you say 'I am not going to be able to use that profitably so I will look elsewhere' is more useful than to say 'that is not a workable method' - the former takes you to pastures new and doesn't involve closing off the possibility that you might revisit the idea later and see if it now has some merit, or is of some use. Psychologically I think we tend to refuse to revisit ideas we have condemned as useless, even if we could now make use of them....if we have publicly castigated something it is even harder to revisit the idea to see if there are bits of it we might now use, with our greater experience, for profit.

I suspect that patterns, interpretation of indicators, differing chart styles and all the other ways we choose to approach the puzzle are mentally treated in similar ways by successful traders - the 'feeling' of bull/bear/how far etc one trader sees from looking at his/her selection of indicators is the same set of estimates/appreciation a trader relying purely on candles and volume sees looking at the same chart.... a bit like viewing the same clues in different languages, they all lead to the same solution, but to the observer it seems that the route there was very different for each.

Rest assured I would be astounded to discover a PC that could mimic the brain of a dog, a very STUPID dog at that... and until there are PCs that can 'think' as well as a brain then a program that trades anything we'd recognise as 'sensibly' or 'well' would be a complete fluke. PC programs are good for doing the maths, drawing lines, and for pointing out that the volume isn't supporting the price move, or the Price and RSI (oops, mentioned an indicator) are diverging. I'd no more trust a PC to trade for me than I'd trust my dog.

Dave

 

[Roberto]

What's Going On Here?

What's going on here? There are some posts missing from this thread, I think.

One of the t2w staff recently told me that t2w's policy is that if posts are removed, the members concerned get a PM explaining why.

That's not happening.

I think there's quite a bit missing here, actually? Nothing argumentative, confrontational or otherwise unwelcome, as far as I'm aware? And certainly not my post, which was simply joking, and not in a way which anyone could have misunderstood, either!

So ... what's going on?

Please can we be told?

 

[SOCRATES]

All of it is good natured, all of it is fun. What happens is that people who are not in it but instead are at it do not necessarily differentiate between what is and what isn't. (That's traderspeak) In consequence of this the wrong handle is got on it (aspiring traderspeak) and then the wrong conclusion is arrived at (psychiatryspeak) and then what ensues is confusion (memberspeak) followed by lack of explanation(moderatornospeak), and I do agree that something is missing and I don't exactly pin it, but I know there is. And if this continues, well, there may well be abstention (membersilence) leading to alternative semaphore ( notexplained) Now let us see what develops next....

 

[TheBramble]

Shenanigans aside for the mo, I agree with you Socrates. One instinctively knows when something is not quite right.