The Asymmetric Nature of Entries & Exits

[Purple Brain]

One trade is a package...which consists...the parts make the whole. The best gamblers organise with a view to the longterm...but you have to be organised and structured. You have to believe...otherwise you are really f*cked.

fOR good trading, read about professional gamblers...i like Veitch...you may admire someone else,

Most professional gamblers go through hell at some point. its only the crazy that go through with it.

Are professional gamblers faced with this same asymmetry then? I understand the on-line betting exchanges offer some flexibility over the old fashioned put your bets on and then you either win or lose approach. Are you you saying this applies to all forms of gambling; poker, dogs, horses, roulette - or just a subset and is this asymmetry part of their edge or something they attempt to reconcile, as I am, unsuccessfully so far, trying to do here?

 

[Purple Brain]

yep.......i noticed that ........PB isnt a normal "Newbie" by any means .......

Thanks for the compliment, but I assure you, my experience in the financial markets is green at best - as evidenced by my live calls - even though I've been hacking away at it for a couple of years now.

 

[Pi3141]

Yes it is normal for entries and exits to be asymmetrical. Before entering a trade your PnL is neutral and when you are on a trade your PnL maybe be positive or negative. So of course there ought to be different factors or number of factors that govern when enter or exit a trade.

The behaviour of price rising and falling appear to be asymmetrical too, and that's something traders should bear in mind as well.

 

[kimo'sabby]

Are professional gamblers faced with this same asymmetry then? I understand the on-line betting exchanges offer some flexibility over the old fashioned put your bets on and then you either win or lose approach. Are you you saying this applies to all forms of gambling; poker, dogs, horses, roulette - or just a subset and is this asymmetry part of their edge or something they attempt to reconcile, as I am, unsuccessfully so far, trying to do here?

Firstly, lets not get too deep, theres really no need for that. Secondly, you believe in what YOU do, this is important. eDGE? You run your luck, you cut your bad. Luck, we all need it, some just use it better than others. dYA THINK YOU ARE LUCKY? If not, why bother in a random game of chance?

 

[Purple Brain]

Just looking over the sudden influx of posts and wondering if this is Windup Wednesday? Can any of the more experienced members suggest whether there are pearls of wisdom contained in these last few posts or whether they really are just what they seem? If the latter, what's the point?

 

[kimo'sabby]

Just looking over the sudden influx of posts and wondering if this is Windup Wednesday? Can any of the more experienced members suggest whether there are pearls of wisdom contained in these last few posts or whether they really are just what they seem? If the latter, what's the point?

WAHTS THE POINT? you cant make a donkry sh1T! THATS THE mofo point!


lets get this T2W competition on the road, mofos!!

 

[Purple Brain]

WAHTS THE POINT? you cant make a donkry sh1T! THATS THE mofo point!


lets get this T2W competition on the road, mofos!!

That gave me a really big laugh. Thanks for coming clean.

 

[robster970]

Sh!t, am feelin sick cos of all this f*ckin booze>>>

Where you been hidin' Kimo?

 

[kimo'sabby]

Where you been hidin' Kimo?

Rob, they locked me away!! but i told em, i aint never givin up my T2W.

 

[kimo'sabby]

the few sucessful professional Gamblers would be even more sucessful in other fields of business .........but instead they chose the hardest game in the world....fascinating !

My Grandfather knew and worked with Phil Bull.......amazing and focussed man who transformed racing

N

Exactly. NOTHING ABOUT applying rational thought. NO MONEY is made being rational.

But what is rational, in the mind of a professional gambler?

 

[kimo'sabby]

I find that I require many more factors to agree for confirmation for entry into a trade than I do to exit one. Given the patience required to identify a potential candidate and the effort expended in assessing and assimilating all the necessary data to support an entry and then the emotional energy in making the actual commitment to enter, the exit decision mostly seems to be something of an anti-climax in comparison, regardless of the profitability of the trade or the length of time it has run.

The underlying profitability of my simple trading method isn’t an issue and there are far fewer times where I have been unhappy to have exited where I did compared with those where I have been perfectly happy with the exit decision and timing. But there does seem a substantial skewedness between the two decision events: Entry and Exit.

Is this a ‘normal’ situation that most traders find themselves in or does this highlight an underlying weakness somewhere within my method perhaps? I’d be happiest to have the entries occur as easily as do the exits of course, but probably still be as happy with requiring as much effort to exit as I do to enter. Happier than I am now; it’s the asymmetry with bothers me as I feel each decision ‘should’ carry equal weight and effort.

what you are saying doesnt apply to me. youll have to make yourself clearer. i cant understand. do you understand?

 

[kimo'sabby]

Just looking over the sudden influx of posts and wondering if this is Windup Wednesday? Can any of the more experienced members suggest whether there are pearls of wisdom contained in these last few posts or whether they really are just what they seem? If the latter, what's the point?

Sanity maybe one of the most inhibiting factors you'll ever have to battle against

 

[kimo'sabby]

I find that I require many more factors to agree for confirmation for entry into a trade than I do to exit one. Given the patience required to identify a potential candidate and the effort expended in assessing and assimilating all the necessary data to support an entry and then the emotional energy in making the actual commitment to enter, the exit decision mostly seems to be something of an anti-climax in comparison, regardless of the profitability of the trade or the length of time it has run.

The underlying profitability of my simple trading method isn’t an issue and there are far fewer times where I have been unhappy to have exited where I did compared with those where I have been perfectly happy with the exit decision and timing. But there does seem a substantial skewedness between the two decision events: Entry and Exit.

Is this a ‘normal’ situation that most traders find themselves in or does this highlight an underlying weakness somewhere within my method perhaps? I’d be happiest to have the entries occur as easily as do the exits of course, but probably still be as happy with requiring as much effort to exit as I do to enter. Happier than I am now; it’s the asymmetry with bothers me as I feel each decision ‘should’ carry equal weight and effort.

is trading logical?

 

[cablemonster]

I have just called the police to let them know there has been an escape from rampton hospital. Lol

 

[kimo'sabby]

I have just called the police to let them know there has been an escape from rampton hospital. Lol

'Grassing' on yourself, a sure sign of madness. You're probably a decent trader

 

[Purple Brain]

Ta mate

Now that they've given in to your demands, will you untie me and let me get back to my thread?

 

[rawrschach]

Is this a ‘normal’ situation that most traders find themselves in or does this highlight an underlying weakness somewhere within my method perhaps? ...it’s the asymmetry with bothers me as I feel each decision ‘should’ carry equal weight and effort.

Disregarding what's 'normal': It's always safer to be out of the market than in it, so to have a skew requiring more weight on entries than exit is a good thing imo.

For me asymmetry is highly desirable. My trading is intentionally designed to be asymmetric, both in entry/exit decisions and returns. I get out of a trade for far less than I get into a trade, i.e. I only get in at what seems to me the most optimum areas, but if the market misbehaves at any minor problem area I'll get out.

 

[Purple Brain]

Disregarding what's 'normal': It's always safer to be out of the market than in it, so to have a skew requiring more weight on entries than exit is a good thing imo.

For me asymmetry is highly desirable. My trading is intentionally designed to be asymmetric, both in entry/exit decisions and returns. I get out of a trade for far less than I get into a trade, i.e. I only get in at what seems to me the most optimum areas, but if the market misbehaves at any minor problem area I'll get out.

That gives me some comfort I’m not alone, but I’ll continue with the research until the end of next week as I originally planned for a few weeks to test it. P&L basis currently indicates I’m doing as well with my asymmetric approach as with any other of the flavours possible, and considerably better than one requiring me to be as stringent on exit as entry. From a psychological perspective, relaxing entry criteria to just one or two criteria and keeping the same simple one or more exit criteria does provide an advantage. There are more losing trades (false starts), but I get in earlier on the winning trades which almost cancels out the downside. The real upside is the entry decision event is virtually stress free.

 

[Mr. Charts]

Purple Brain,
You go and buy a car because of several reasons, incl. power, acceleration, road holding, everything feels right etc., and it ticks all your boxes.
Having bought it you read in the paper that the model bursts into flame easily (e.g Ferrari).
Do you get out or stay in it?
Richard

 

[Purple Brain]

Thanks Mr. Charts. I can see consensus building that asymmetric entry/exit is probably not only normal, but derived from necessity rather than any artificial model.