Must-have trading book...

[frugi]

As for repetitive attacks and complaints, I notice that Bertie's attacks on me -- such as his characterizing my posts as "stupid" -- continue to stand. There seems, therefore, to be a certain lack of consistency with regard to applying the guidelines.

And as always, feel free to delete whatever of my posts you wish.

It seemed to me that, in the case of this thread at least, there was no inconsistency as the 'attacks' from you both were evenly matched and sufficiently inoffensive (bar one) to their respective victims to let them stand, but on reflection I've decided to remove all traces of both, which will go some way to decluttering the thread. Perhaps I should have done this earlier, but, as ever, the qualification of an 'attack' as contravening the guidelines is a matter of some discretion as well a matter of absolute law.

 

[Quenkish]

Talking about books, while we are at it, the only book I rate is "The Remininscences". It is absolutely required reading in my circle above everything else.

I have an early edition in hard copy.

On the back flap I have, in pencil, annotated interesting paragraphs with their page numbers.

I treat it as a textbook, because every time I pick it up I find a chord that strikes.

it is a most wonderful work, and the thing is, the more experienced you become, the more it reveals to you in terms of what can best be described as "associated inferences". This is because although it is written in conversational style, it is an alladin's cave of very meaningful concepts untainted by the passage of time.

I have 8 copies apart from the master copy. I have them lying around all over the house and pick one up from time to time at random to have a look. Invariably I never succeed in shutting it without having derived a meaningful realisation of some sort or other.

I will add that a realisation is something you probably already know, but is suddenly consciously revealed as the consequence of having a meaningful recognition of it.

It is and remains, a true masterpiece, and has everything for everyone whatever their level of proficiency.

I agree with you here socrates remininscences of a stock operator is a classic, highly recommended to anyone. I have only one copy however. Market Wizards 1 and 2 are also classics.

 

[sp1]

I treat it as a textbook, because every time I pick it up I find a chord that strikes.

it is a most wonderful work, and the thing is, the more experienced you become, the more it reveals to you in terms of what can best be described as "associated inferences". This is because although it is written in conversational style, it is an alladin's cave of very meaningful concepts untainted by the passage of time.

Yes. Like the meaning of "the GAME" And when he says there is not enough money in America for use to bring about the printing of the Cotton corner story that let him put his line out. He doesn't say this money doesn't exist in Europe. Can it mean the power over the press had more money than America? This relates to when a senior person of the exchange met the banker of one of the biggest American banks and instead they go to Mr Morgan who history in my reality reveals to be a kind of right hand man of the Rothschild Dynasty.

 

[SOCRATES]

I agree with you here socrates remininscences of a stock operator is a classic, highly recommended to anyone. I have only one copy however. Market Wizards 1 and 2 are also classics.

Yes, Marlet Wizards 1 and 2 are also classics of their genre, I agree.

But to many individuals they represent useless reading.

This is because, tantalisingly, teasingly, proddingly, tauntingly, nudgeingly, noddingly, prudently, circumspectly, frustratingly, and stoically, none of the interviewees ultimately reveal their methods, in any detail whatsoever.

They skirt around what they are able to do but don't tell the readers how to copy them which is what everyone wants, or alt least, what nearly everyone is after. :cheesy:

But from the point of view of understanding how they manage to not let cats ot of bags, they provide the most entertaining reading imaginable.

 

[SOCRATES]

Yes. Like the meaning of "the GAME" And when he says there is not enough money in America for use to bring about the printing of the Cotton corner story that let him put his line out. He doesn't say this money doesn't exist in Europe. Can it mean the power over the press had more money than America? This relates to when a senior person of the exchange met the banker of one of the biggest American banks and instead they go to Mr Morgan who history in my reality reveals to be a kind of right hand man of the Rothschild Dynasty.

No, not quite. It is a tongue in cheek explanation of what was possible then, in those days, and under those conditions, before markets became regulated.

 

[FXSCALPER2]

Yes, Marlet Wizards 1 and 2 are also classics of their genre, I agree.

But to many individuals they represent useless reading.

This is because, tantalisingly, teasingly, proddingly, tauntingly, nudgeingly, noddingly, prudently, circumspectly, frustratingly, and stoically, none of the interviewees ultimately reveal their methods, in any detail whatsoever.

They skirt around what they are able to do but don't tell the readers how to copy them which is what everyone wants, or alt least, what nearly everyone is after. :cheesy:

But from the point of view of understanding how they manage to not let cats ot of bags, they provide the most entertaining reading imaginable.

Richard Dennis shared his system with others and gave them money to trade. Linda Bradford Raschke will let you trade with her if you become a member of her group. These are both in the Wizard books. You may not want to, but at least get your facts right. There is no big mystry about it: some share and some don't, like everywhere else in life. You write posts that are too long and inaccurate. You say 'anyone who knows anything about trading' wouldn't share. Please buddy...

 

[SOCRATES]

Richard Dennis shared his system with others and gave them money to trade. Linda Bradford Raschke will let you trade with her if you become a member of her group. These are both in the Wizard books. You may not want to, but at least get your facts right. There is no big mystry about it: some share and some don't, like everywhere else in life. You write posts that are too long and inaccurate. You say 'anyone who knows anything about trading' wouldn't share. Please buddy...

Yes buddy, you are right. But I am more right than you are. Some choose to share and some don't. You share if you like, but I am not sharing, least of all with you, as I don't know you from Adam and have no interest in you whatsoever anyway. But just as an aside, you are new here and the first thing you did was to be very rude to me for no reason indirectly in another thread without ever having met me, so, as you sow so you shall reap ? OK ? It seems to me a lot of people here take refuge in having nicks behind which they can hide. In real life face to face it would have to be seen if they would venture to make the ill considered and ill judged comments they are apt to make on websites, just an observation, that's all.

 

[Quenkish]

What books do you have in you library Socrates out of interest?
Also what news sources do you read WSJ, FT Bloomberg, Reuters etc?

 

[frugi]

Come on folks, please ... we don't mind a spot of banter but this is becoming silly and my deletion finger is sore.

 

[SOCRATES]

What books do you have in you library Socrates out of interest?
Also what news sources do you read WSJ, FT Bloomberg, Reuters etc?

Reply:~ none in both cases. Not needed at all.

 

[Quenkish]

Reply:~ none in both cases. Not needed at all.

It is interesting that you trade without reading the news and knowing whats going on.

 

[SOCRATES]

And I don't bother to read the newpapers either, or watch the news on TV. Not interested.

I view it all as gossip and not related to what markets really do. Misleading nonsense, all of it.

 

[superfly]

The membership is surely aware by now that the two of you do not see eye to eye and it would make a glorious change if you could both please agree to disagree and leave the petty insults untyped.

Thank you.

100% especially since both of you can easily contribute VALUE CONTENT

 

[Chicken Curry]

I agree with Soc.

I only have 2 books in my library, neither of which has been instrumental in making me a successful trader.

I also ignore the news. Just follow the price action for stocks that are known to be liquid and fairly volatile.

 

[jezza888]

I've never read a single trading related book in my life. I'm not by any means professing they are a waste of time but I found the best way to educate myself was by watching the markets perform. Nothing teaches like experience IMO. It took me a while but I earn a healthy living from trading and like Soc, pay little attention to news etc.

I found the best books for me were always a good novel or autobiography so I would trade my plan and not get bored and do something I'd soon regret.

Just my experience....

 

[Chicken Curry]

I've never read a single trading related book in my life. I'm not by any means professing they are a waste of time but I found the best way to educate myself was by watching the markets perform. Nothing teaches like experience IMO. It took me a while but I earn a healthy living from trading and like Soc, pay little attention to news etc.

I found the best books for me were always a good novel or autobiography so I would trade my plan and not get bored and do something I'd soon regret.

Just my experience....

Agree, agree agree.........

 

[SOCRATES]

I agree with Soc.

I only have 2 books in my library, neither of which has been instrumental in making me a successful trader.

I also ignore the news. Just follow the price action for stocks that are known to be liquid and fairly volatile.

Quite right too. Just don't have the news. It can be a frightful nuisance.

I remember several years ago, before electronic execution, all dealings were done by voice.

It made keeping up with developments in a fast or whippy market very tricky.

On one occasion I happened to listen to...I think it was Bloomberg or CNBC, can't remember.

They were talking up the market...saying this and that was bullish...and this and that figure was a good one and so on.

Without consciously tuning in to market direction I went long 64 cars, S + P Big Board.

To my absolute consternation and horror, no sooner am I filled that the price begins to slide.

Fortunately I gathered my wits very quicky and double reveresed and turned my position.

I caught it in the nick of time, the initial damage was minimal but now it began to fall seriously, increasingly in my favour.

I was very calm and held it for more than two hours and netted 22 pointsor thereabouts, closing it at the bottom when I saw heavy buyers coming in.

If I had not done this, my losses would have been enormous.

From that day onwards, no more news ! I have a TV screen in the room but never use it.

 

[Chicken Curry]

Not sure where you're going with that Mr Chump :!:

 

[FXSCALPER2]

I will say this again although I doubt it be will be anymore acceptable this time ....perspective passing itself off as a general law of applicability is not the mast to nail your colours to.

One persons personal ordeal for want of a better expression is just that ..one perspective.

Long and torturous are simply ill defined terms....a search for "perfection" that may say take a decade may simply be nothing more than an exciting apprenticeship period to some other people...whilst for others it is 'felt' to be "long"

torturous experience of having to learn about oneself may for another person be an highly satisfying process if that process is in harmony with that persons view of life....

this is much to do with the old viewpoint, is the semi filled glass of water half full or half empty...you see there is no right or wrong perspective as it all highly subjective .

However what is wrong is to take a single perspective and try to make it fit as being soley 'right' thereby imbuing it with some sense of being a Law fit for general applicability...it is not so .

Moreover it is highly possible to 'manufacture' a perspective to pursue a goal,. At the bottom line we are despite our complexity quite simple aniimals in other ways. We have the ability to create perpsectives that perform for us as a best 'fit' to apply to goals. Hence , my reference above to "harmony". I won't go on as there is more than enough clinical research on this topic that I do not have to defend it.

Very good chump. My thoughts exactly. I try to tell this to my girl, not, as you say, it makes any difference.

 

[SOCRATES]

I will say this again although I doubt it be will be anymore acceptable this time ....perspective passing itself off as a general law of applicability is not the mast to nail your colours to.

One persons personal ordeal for want of a better expression is just that ..one perspective.

Long and torturous are simply ill defined terms....a search for "perfection" that may say take a decade may simply be nothing more than an exciting apprenticeship period to some other people...whilst for others it is 'felt' to be "long"

torturous experience of having to learn about oneself may for another person be an highly satisfying process if that process is in harmony with that persons view of life....

this is much to do with the old viewpoint, is the semi filled glass of water half full or half empty...you see there is no right or wrong perspective as it all highly subjective .

However what is wrong is to take a single perspective and try to make it fit as being soley 'right' thereby imbuing it with some sense of being a Law fit for general applicability...it is not so .

Moreover it is highly possible to 'manufacture' a perspective to pursue a goal,. At the bottom line we are despite our complexity quite simple aniimals in other ways. We have the ability to create perpsectives that perform for us as a best 'fit' to apply to goals. Hence , my reference above to "harmony". I won't go on as there is more than enough clinical research on this topic that I do not have to defend it.

Chumpy, what you are describing to perfection is the norm. It is the best and most succint description of the norm I have ever seen on any board. Very well explained.