Who can i trust?..

[Skitch]

I wanted to aim some of my thoughts towards the experienced users of this forum.

I, like many others am looking to accumulate a trading skillset during my free time at University. Currently spending alot of time trading demo accounts, watching seminars, reading books and articles.. However i feel the more I'm studying the more controversial its getting.

From EMH to indicator failures and academics telling me technicals are a waste of time.. I'm so lost in difference of opinion it just seems like no one really knows where to look, only to trust their own initiative.

I came to trading as a semi-pro poker player and in the years that i learnt the game you understand there is only 1 truly profitable approach.. the tight-aggressive. This is public knowledge..

I believe the underlining concepts of trading and poker lie hand in hand. However, in combination of so many trying to f**k over the new generation of traders in exchange for a quick profit & the huge amount of speculation, academic research and controversy.. I have absolutely no idea where to look!

Even starting to doubt FXstreet & the live webinars which are all by "CEO of Learntomake$$$trading.com"

No one answer will help, i guess what will is experience.. but in the mean time if you, the more experienced user had to start from scratch..

How would you learn to trade & who would you trust?

 

[Skitch]

I must also add that the most credible (or believable) studies i have found are those by Steve Nison.. So any suggestions that compliment his findings would be well received :]

 

[shadowninja]

At some point in your studies, you will reach the right conclusion. Until then, even if I told you, you don't know if I'm recruiting trainees for a seminar or genuinely care whether you succeed or not.

As for those academics, if they are so good, why the hell are they earning **** all in a uni? They could be doing what they really want (researching?) via wifi on a yacht off the coast of St Tropez if they knew beyond theoretical.

I posted a link to a paper which studied 3000 strategies, but it was a load of bull****. More holes in it than a Swiss cheese.

 

[dealer911]

well i would say your cynicism is a great starting point and should stand you in good stead!!
I have been a trader for 15 years the first 5 of which i spent listening to tipsters and blindly following broker reccomendations.. if someone knows how to trade and make money guess what they do for a living ?!.. yup.. trade.. they dont sell systems and research!.. sounds like your a young gun so time is deffinatley on your side! read books about some of the all time greats like Jesse Livermore and Bernard Baruch and you'll find the world hasnt changed that much. Practice on demmo accounts (capitalspreads does one that alright!) and develop your own ideas. When you start trading with real money make sure its money you can afford to lose (because lose it you will)..you have to view the losses as your tuition fee for the markets!.. best to lose a couple of k trading and learning than spending the same on someone elses system that will teach you nothing!.. find traders to talk to (this forum is a great start!).. and have patience!.. trust nobody but yourself.. hold your convictions lightly and be ready to cut your losses even if you think "the market" has got it wrong.. only way to learn to trade is to trade!.. good luck to you matey!

 

[counter_violent]

Considering you are of university age group...the one big advantage you have is time..a lifetime in fact.

Probably everything you need is right here...but you will need to dig for it...as others have done before you.

good luck on the journey ahead.

 

[tomorton]

Ignore academic studies that rubbish TA. They are not done for the good and advancement of mankind, they are paid for directly or indirectly by the financial industry that likes to promote its FA-based buy-only long-term 'investment' policy, and does not want its clients to see they are just trading off techncial movements, could be regarded as gambling. They also know that TA is accessible to all, it is far more democratic than FA, and what would happen to their jobs and bonuses if we all started managing our own money? Bear in mind that most academic financial research is carried out in or aimed at the US market, where financial spreadbetting is not permitted and the ability to short is a minority practice. I can also say that a high percentage of the academic studies I have looked at that rubbish TA don't actually replicate trading as it would realistically be practiced - they often ignore underlying market and sector action, for example synthesising standard-sized long positions in a bear market, and they can't possibly backtest for the influence of the myriad of subtle warning signals (some TA, some FA) that might cause a trader to exit / scale back a position.

What the negative academic studies are really saying is that they can't replicate an objective model by which TA can be demonstrated to be theoretically possible. Not such a strong argument now is it?

Learn to trade only by trading. Understand the mechanics, practice and backtest, but the only true lessons start when you put real money in. Its like swimming - you can be told the strokes and understand the principles of buoyancy - but you won't be able to swim until you get in the water and do it. Also, like swimming, its great fun and will get you from A to B, but you might have to swallow some a few lungfuls of water along the way.

Finding winning positions is easy, but controlling losses and losers is the key.

 

[virtuos0]

I wanted to aim some of my thoughts towards the experienced users of this forum.

I, like many others am looking to accumulate a trading skillset during my free time at University. Currently spending alot of time trading demo accounts, watching seminars, reading books and articles.. However i feel the more I'm studying the more controversial its getting.

From EMH to indicator failures and academics telling me technicals are a waste of time.. I'm so lost in difference of opinion it just seems like no one really knows where to look, only to trust their own initiative.

I came to trading as a semi-pro poker player and in the years that i learnt the game you understand there is only 1 truly profitable approach.. the tight-aggressive. This is public knowledge..

I believe the underlining concepts of trading and poker lie hand in hand. However, in combination of so many trying to f**k over the new generation of traders in exchange for a quick profit & the huge amount of speculation, academic research and controversy.. I have absolutely no idea where to look!

Even starting to doubt FXstreet & the live webinars which are all by "CEO of Learntomake$$$trading.com"

No one answer will help, i guess what will is experience.. but in the mean time if you, the more experienced user had to start from scratch..

How would you learn to trade & who would you trust?

Learn to trade like you would learn any other profession, study for a great many years, get as much experience as you 'at the coal face', and then pray for the best.

 

[virtuos0]

At some point in your studies, you will reach the right conclusion. Until then, even if I told you, you don't know if I'm recruiting trainees for a seminar or genuinely care whether you succeed or not.

As for those academics, if they are so good, why the hell are they earning **** all in a uni? They could be doing what they really want (researching?) via wifi on a yacht off the coast of St Tropez if they knew beyond theoretical.

I posted a link to a paper which studied 3000 strategies, but it was a load of bull****. More holes in it than a Swiss cheese.

Most academics in the sphere of finance and trading are multi-millionaires and could very easily be on that boat in St Tropez if they wished. What you will find is that many of them will have done at least a couple of years as 'consultants' for investment banks or hedge funds, and earned more in those couple of years than most earn in a lifetime. For example Richard Lyons, professor of Finance at Berkely, who I believe is pretty much the most admired academic in FX research, was at Goldman Sachs for two years during his academic career, and I assume if he wants to he can wipe his ass with money every day.

Take Larry Harris as another example, as well as being professor of FInance at UCLA he is a director at Interactive Brokers, and a consultant for a hedge fund, as well as previously being chief economist for the SEC.

If you think academics can't trade, or couldn't trade if they wanted, you're living in cloud-cuckoo land.

 

[Martinghoul]

You should do what works for you... The only way to establish what that methodology is through trial and error. Nobody will reveal the holy grail to you, because there isn't such a thing. People will always disagree. For example, everything that tomorton said about TA, I have a completely opposite view. You have the time to play with different things, so try to discover what works for you.

As to what ninjatrader mentions about academics, I think it's rather misguided.

 

[shadowninja]

Most? Or some? I only see two examples there, which is, of course, possible. Now you need to go through the rest of the academics in finance/trading/etc...

In any case, TA either works or it doesn't. If it does, why are they saying it doesn't? If it doesn't why is anyone using TA. What do they mean by TA, anyway? Are we talking about Candlesticks? Support and resistance? That's TA, isn't it?

 

[virtuos0]

Most? Or some? I only see two examples there, which is, of course, possible. Now you need to go through the rest of the academics in finance/trading/etc...

I need to go through the rest of the thousands of academics in finance to prove my point? I think you've lost the plot..

Just because I'm bored I decided to do this little test, I Googled the term "professor of finance". The first chap to come up is a "Robert C Merton" who is a Professor at Harvard. A quick glance at his bio shows he was a managing director at JP Morgan, and a consultant at roughly 10 different funds.. so chances are he isn't having to re-use his teabags.

Next guy on the list is a Professor Chris Brooks at the Uni of Reading. It doesn't specify exactly who he has worked for but his bio includes the sentence "He is also a member of the RAE 2008 Accounting and Finance sub-panel has and acts as consultant for various banks and professional bodies in the fields of finance, real estate, and econometrics." What do you think those banks pay him for his services? £5.71 an hour?

Or take Fischer Black, who was most well known for his part in the Black-Scholes option pricing formula. At one stage in his academic career he mentioned to one of his classes that there was an obvious anomaly in the way a certain index was priced, as it was geometric rather than arithmetic This raised an arbitrage opportunity. Goldman Sachs got wind of this and employed Black as a trader/analyst in order to take advantage. He netted $125million for GS from this arbitrage, and I would imagine pocketed a few dimes for his troubles.

 

[Masquerade]

I came to trading as a semi-pro poker player and in the years that i learnt the game you understand there is only 1 truly profitable approach.. the tight-aggressive. This is public knowledge..

That's rubbish! You know it if you're any good and know anything about poker. There are plenty of LAG's playing and winning at the highest stakes games. LAG & TAG can both be profitable/losing styles just one will come with more variance. I'd argue LAG is more profitable as there's more LAGs at high stakes than TAGs. Ivey, Antonius etc.

 

[Skitch]

I'm pleased to see this has caused a very interesting debate and helpful comments.

Would it be right to say that institutions trade a completely different style of TA in comparison to the majority of retail?

I ask because since learning price action I see little benefit in trading MA crossovers after witnessing the bigger picture. Now i wonder... what do institutions see..? Alongside the amount of academic research that is conducted within firms.

To further help myself and any new comers to trading.. As an example;
If I was to fast track poker i would:

Learn
*Emotional control (Tilt)
*Bankroll Management
*ICM & Sage
*Session Analysis
*HUD management
*Player styles
*Hand strength & probabilities

Avoid/Discard
*Short-term success
*Excessive ROI's
*Brag posts
*Headsup SNGs
*Easy money mentality

What would you say the key areas are for trading & what would you ignore?

Thanks for your input! :]

That's rubbish! You know it if you're any good and know anything about poker. There are plenty of LAG's playing and winning at the highest stakes games. LAG & TAG can both be profitable/losing styles just one will come with more variance. I'd argue LAG is more profitable as there's more LAGs at high stakes than TAGs. Ivey, Antonius etc.

Greetings fellow poker player. LAG is nice for 6-max cash and low table volume I will agree but to apply a loose-aggressive playstyle to sng's (<-- 20 table grinder) full-ring cash or MTTs vs randoms isn't going to end well.

LAG play is more common at higher limits because of the increasing need for metagame due to the decrease in field size. I would argue LAG has very little space in tournament structure due to the implications of ICM & push-fold strategy, which is mandatory in high level play.

As you will agree, my aim for the sentence was to imply that poker knowledge is widely accessible & the community congruent..
In comparison to the opposites of TA.

 

[Paul71]

I wanted to aim some of my thoughts towards the experienced users of this forum.

I, like many others am looking to accumulate a trading skillset during my free time at University. Currently spending alot of time trading demo accounts, watching seminars, reading books and articles.. However i feel the more I'm studying the more controversial its getting.

From EMH to indicator failures and academics telling me technicals are a waste of time.. I'm so lost in difference of opinion it just seems like no one really knows where to look, only to trust their own initiative.

I came to trading as a semi-pro poker player and in the years that i learnt the game you understand there is only 1 truly profitable approach.. the tight-aggressive. This is public knowledge..

I believe the underlining concepts of trading and poker lie hand in hand. However, in combination of so many trying to f**k over the new generation of traders in exchange for a quick profit & the huge amount of speculation, academic research and controversy.. I have absolutely no idea where to look!

Even starting to doubt FXstreet & the live webinars which are all by "CEO of Learntomake$$$trading.com"

No one answer will help, i guess what will is experience.. but in the mean time if you, the more experienced user had to start from scratch..

How would you learn to trade & who would you trust?

Trading is no different than poker in some respects, to most on this site, except for the employed types, trading is only ever a pet project. No one on this site has access to any special information regarding the markets, but the different skills and talents will vary amongst the members. There is a lot of decent information on T2W, but in the end it's all down to you as the individual, you've got to be able to trust yourself.

 

[shadowninja]

I need to go through the rest of the thousands of academics in finance to prove my point? I think you've lost the plot..

I think you've lost the plot if you think someone is going to believe a statement based on a sample of two, surely?

So, what we have here is 4 out of 5 academics who worked in industry in a potentially non-trading role (their wealth is irrelevant). Have you spoken to anyone in the industry? They take a very dim view of T2W's members, particularly retail traders... and especially of anyone who uses technicals to trade.

 

[Splitlink]

I wanted to aim some of my thoughts towards the experienced users of this forum.

I, like many others am looking to accumulate a trading skillset during my free time at University. Currently spending alot of time trading demo accounts, watching seminars, reading books and articles.. However i feel the more I'm studying the more controversial its getting.

From EMH to indicator failures and academics telling me technicals are a waste of time.. I'm so lost in difference of opinion it just seems like no one really knows where to look, only to trust their own initiative.

I came to trading as a semi-pro poker player and in the years that i learnt the game you understand there is only 1 truly profitable approach.. the tight-aggressive. This is public knowledge..

I believe the underlining concepts of trading and poker lie hand in hand. However, in combination of so many trying to f**k over the new generation of traders in exchange for a quick profit & the huge amount of speculation, academic research and controversy.. I have absolutely no idea where to look!

Even starting to doubt FXstreet & the live webinars which are all by "CEO of Learntomake$$$trading.com"

No one answer will help, i guess what will is experience.. but in the mean time if you, the more experienced user had to start from scratch..

How would you learn to trade & who would you trust?

I believe that you have to trust the integrity of the person with whom you do business, otherwise you are crazy to get that close!

However, trust the opinion of anyone! No way! No one knows what is going to happen and, in the final analysis, it's your money. If you lose it, they may be sincerely sorry but that won't buy your baby a new dress.

 

[Paul71]

I wanted to aim some of my thoughts towards the experienced users of this forum.

I, like many others am looking to accumulate a trading skillset during my free time at University. Currently spending alot of time trading demo accounts, watching seminars, reading books and articles.. However i feel the more I'm studying the more controversial its getting.

From EMH to indicator failures and academics telling me technicals are a waste of time.. I'm so lost in difference of opinion it just seems like no one really knows where to look, only to trust their own initiative.

I came to trading as a semi-pro poker player and in the years that i learnt the game you understand there is only 1 truly profitable approach.. the tight-aggressive. This is public knowledge..

I believe the underlining concepts of trading and poker lie hand in hand. However, in combination of so many trying to f**k over the new generation of traders in exchange for a quick profit & the huge amount of speculation, academic research and controversy.. I have absolutely no idea where to look!

Even starting to doubt FXstreet & the live webinars which are all by "CEO of Learntomake$$$trading.com"

No one answer will help, i guess what will is experience.. but in the mean time if you, the more experienced user had to start from scratch..

How would you learn to trade & who would you trust?

Mentors, teachers and coaches, If you end up taking this route, be careful. Here are some points to keep in mind.

1) Could you teach someone/anyone to play poker and guarantee them consistant profits for the future?

2) How much would you charge per hour?

3) Does the inland revenue know them as a trader?

4) Remember, personal account documents can be easily tampered with.

5) How long has the person been in the business of trading? (they may have accumulated thier wealth within a previous business)


You have to understand that private trading coaches are similar in function to golf instructors, you may pick up a few tips, but there are no guarantees you will even improve slightly. Some areas of this business are like the wild west in terms of regulation, just be wary.