Why and how Win-Win in Forex is possible | Page 3 | Forex Factory

Options

Go to
Permalinks
Print Thread

Similar Threads

Why it is possible to predict price movement? 1,353 replies

Win in Trend and Win in Range 227 replies

Financial Transaction Tax - You think it's still possible to win the game? 16 replies

Win 2 trades out of 10 and win 180 pips 8 replies

Is it possible to consistently win at Forex trading? 12 replies

Attachments: Why and how Win-Win in Forex is possible
Exit Attachments

Why and how Win-Win in Forex is possible

  • #41
  • Feb 20, 2012 9:55am Feb 20, 2012 9:55am
Quoting nubcake
great. another one with one eye closed and not even paying attention. i'm sure custos really appreciates your well-thought examples which completely missed the point of what custos was actually saying. good one!
Nubcake, I'm sure that costos is old enough to answer is own post. We are all adult and vaccinated here. We don't need big brother or sister to talk on our behalf.

If I'm wrong and did not answered the question then my apology.
  • #42
  • Feb 20, 2012 10:03am Feb 20, 2012 10:03am
Quoting arjfca
Nubcake, I'm sure that costos is old enough to answer is own post. We are all adult and vaccinated here. We don't need big brother or sister to talk on our behalf.

If I'm wrong and did not answered the question then my apology.
i guarantee you that he can reply to your post quite well, however, why should he waste his time on people like yourself who can't even manage to 1-hand 1-finger type his 6-letter username correctly? i might as well reply to you since i'm happy to grind my teeth on the mentally challenged amongst at this fine hour of this fine day.
Congratulations ScalaFX for coming out of the closet!
  • #43
  • Feb 20, 2012 12:45pm Feb 20, 2012 12:45pm
Quoting arjfca
Hello Custos

We don't trade again each other on a one / one basis. We trade in a pool of traders. So two different approaches in a long and short position in the same direction trend by two different traders could result in a winning situation for both.

All depend where is your own entry and exit, no matter or caring about who is winning or loosing.

Also all depend also on the chart scale use.
Trader A: He use A 1h chart as a long trend. Trader A entered and 2 hours later close is position after the price as reach is profit. He is...
Yeah, I agree with nubcake. You actually missed my point. If I go long eur/usd and you take the opposite side of my trade at the same time and price shoots up from 1.32 to 1.33, then I made profit and you made a loss. Doesn't matter if it is realized or unrealized profit / loss.
Don't understand what is so difficult about this simple concept. Somebody will always lose, when I win and the other way around.

Of course this is simplified, in fact there are thousands of market participants. But without losers, there won't be winners.
  • #44
  • Feb 20, 2012 1:47pm Feb 20, 2012 1:47pm
Quoting arjfca
Hello Custos

We don't trade again each other on a one / one basis. We trade in a pool of traders. So two different approaches in a long and short position in the same direction trend by two different traders could result in a winning situation for both.

All depend where is your own entry and exit, no matter or caring about who is winning or loosing.

Also all depend also on the chart scale use.
Trader A: He use A 1h chart as a long trend. Trader A entered and 2 hours later close is position after the price as reach is profit. He is...
Or actually a better example for you.
You can compare the currency market to the universe.
In the universe no energy is made and none is lost. There is always the same amount of energy in the universe. The energy just gets converted all the time, but you can't get more energy when this conversion takes place.

Same goes with the currency market. Money = energy. Exchanging = conversion. If everybody would be a winner, then you would create money during the exchange, which is not possible. There is only a finite amount of money in the system. The only way there can be more money exchanging hands is by taking it in from the outside (e.g. funding a new brokerage account). So, if only we two would be the market and I have a thousand bucks and you have a thousand bucks, then the volume of our market would be 2 thousand bucks. Now there are only two possibilities, you extract money from my account or I extract money from your account. We can't both win.
  • #45
  • Edited 7:33pm Feb 20, 2012 7:05pm | Edited 7:33pm
[quote=nubcake;5401122]your title says 'not zero sum'. ok, so show me a trade where money appears or disappears in thin air. a trader, or business, losing money on a trade does not mean that trading is negative sum. a winning trader who has an ever increasing balance is not proof that it is positive sum. combine everyone all together and what do you get? zero sum.



It was a little bit of a stretch for you to read my argument wasn't it mr nub??? Maybe i should have put my whole post in bold so you actually read it.

Most market participants are not traders but use the market to either offset risk or facilitate trade. They effectively pay money for a service from the market. They therefore lose money - but gain overall.

As speculative traders in any currency market do not represent the majority of market activity - even though most traders lose - the majority of people that participate in the market gain what they wanted from it.

So in THAT way (and that way only) we could say fx isn't simply a win/lose proposition. I only make the argument for argument sake - to see an outlier alternative to the obvious fact that one dollar lost by one is gained by another.
Enter Signature
  • #46
  • Feb 20, 2012 8:51pm Feb 20, 2012 8:51pm
Quoting Sarythsaya
....Most market participants are not traders but use the market to either offset risk or facilitate trade. They effectively pay money for a service from the market. They therefore lose money - but gain overall.....

So in THAT way (and that way only) we could say fx isn't simply a win/lose proposition....

Before the arguments heat up on this. I would point out that this is, again, a separate issue and we are back to talking apples and oranges.

Each market, each currency pair, each instrument is zero-sum.

If a corporation uses a forex instrument for offsetting risk, for example.... That particular 'trade' may win or lose, but it always becomes a part of the overall market which, at the end of the day, is zero-sum.

All of the arguments against this are simply talking about something else.
  • #47
  • Feb 20, 2012 10:27pm Feb 20, 2012 10:27pm
Quoting Price

That particular 'trade' may win or lose, but it always becomes a part of the overall market which, at the end of the day, is zero-sum.

All of the arguments against this are simply talking about something else.

Yes - absolutely.
Enter Signature
  • #48
  • Feb 21, 2012 4:48am Feb 21, 2012 4:48am
Quoting Luckosa
Look at your chart, sleep with it, wake with it, work with it, play with it, talk to it and then LISTEN. The CHART will talk to you. and if you HEAR what it is saying, then you have taken the first of many steps to create a strategy for a "win win game" (whatever that means!)
Thanks for your suggestion. Is CHART sufficient for create a strategy to a "win win game"?
  • #49
  • Feb 21, 2012 12:48pm Feb 21, 2012 12:48pm
henryduncan1,

for me, chart is not just enough to win in the market, it is the all in all. nothing else. the problem i have with fundamentals isnt about interpreting the economic base of a fundamental BUT of interpreting how people will react to it. moreover, the fundamentals get worked into the chart pattern. i basically trade with EMAs and make use of stoch and CCI as filters. it works for me, so why bother about others. .so i marry my chart (for better for worse till superyacht do us part)
  • #50
  • Feb 21, 2012 1:14pm Feb 21, 2012 1:14pm
Quoting henryduncan1
Thanks for your suggestion. Is CHART sufficient for create a strategy to a "win win game"?
I believe chart IS sufficient in creating a strategy to a "win win" game. Regardless how any news is interpreted, the interpretation has nowhere to go but end up being reflected in the PA on a chart. In another words, PA is the interpretation. It's nice to be aware of the news event and economic numbers and fundamental analysis gives you an overall preview of what could happen but that's not what you trade, you don't trade on what could happen (unless you are Warren Buffet or George Soros), you trade on what is happening and that's your PA on a chart analyzed by your indicators and etc.

My humble opinion
Make your losses in demo. Earn your profits live.
  • #51
  • Feb 23, 2012 12:04am Feb 23, 2012 12:04am
Ok, I have had another think about this and have realised I was chasing something that wasn't there. I was trying to look a bit deeper into this and was thinking along the lines that if the fed prints some money and sells it on the market that happens to be a losing trade then where has the money for the profitable trade come from (or something like that, I don't know). But the fact that the markets are not a closed system and money flows in and out of them has nothing to do with whether transfer of profits is zero sum or not. I just had this little niggle in my brain that I wanted to explore but now that I have done that I am right back at where I started - forex is zero sum plain and simple.

Quoting nubcake
no the missing link is that people are fucking stupid, start off talking about one thing, and then decide that they want to add bits and pieces here and there to sway things one way or another without also adding the offsetting side of these extra pieces.

can you sometime this week perhaps type a post that isn't completely wrong? actually don't bother. i know you are completely lost in confusion through all of this. take a month and meditate on it or something...
I don't know why you keep calling me stupid or unintelligent when I am clearly neither. Does it make you feel better about yourself? Just because I want to look into something more deeply. I mean your posts clearly show that you have never understood the zero sum concept and that you just accepted it because smart people all agree that it is so (which is fine but not the way I like to do things). Yes, you were right in that it is zero sum and I was chasing something that was not there, but you didn't even understand that the market does not have to go down at some point to make it zero sum, nor does anyone have to actually lose actual money for it to be zero sum, that they just have to transfer their potential profits to someone else's account (opportunity cost). Also, you think that inflation and other offsetting factors, as you put it, affect the zero sum concept when they have nothing to do with it at all. Hopefully, if you took anything that I said onboard, you now have a clearer understanding of the zero sum concept so I don't know why you need to get so agro about it (pun intended).

ps As far as my posts being completely wrong that was obviously not the case. I set you straight on a lot of things you had wrong.
  • #52
  • Feb 23, 2012 1:43am Feb 23, 2012 1:43am
Quoting Forexia
I believe chart IS sufficient in creating a strategy to a "win win" game. Regardless how any news is interpreted, the interpretation has nowhere to go but end up being reflected in the PA on a chart. In another words, PA is the interpretation. It's nice to be aware of the news event and economic numbers and fundamental analysis gives you an overall preview of what could happen but that's not what you trade, you don't trade on what could happen (unless you are Warren Buffet or George Soros), you trade on what is happening and that's your...
Charts may be sufficient to creating a strategy to a "win win" game. But as you discussed news also play great role in forex trading.
  • #53
  • Edited 5:07am Feb 23, 2012 4:47am | Edited 5:07am
Quoting Agro
Ok, I have had another think about this and have realised I was chasing something that wasn't there. I was trying to look a bit deeper into this and was thinking along the lines that if the fed prints some money and sells it on the market that happens to be a losing trade then where has the money for the profitable trade come from (or something like that, I don't know). But the fact that the markets are not a closed system and money flows in and out of them has nothing to do with whether transfer of profits is zero sum or not. I just had this...
i had nothing wrong. you still need to meditate more. you did not correct a single thing i have said. you only added more nonsense.

you should consider re-reading my posts as they are instead of how you want to perceive them.

now give it a rest. i'm not interested in debating the finer points of everything you said that continues to be wrong, so enjoy whatever conclusions you think you have come to.

edit : take it here if you must, or not if you don't... http://www.forexfactory.com/showthread.php?t=343905
Congratulations ScalaFX for coming out of the closet!
  • #54
  • Feb 23, 2012 9:31am Feb 23, 2012 9:31am
Quoting nubcake
i had nothing wrong. you still need to meditate more. you did not correct a single thing i have said. you only added more nonsense.

you should consider re-reading my posts as they are instead of how you want to perceive them.

now give it a rest. i'm not interested in debating the finer points of everything you said that continues to be wrong, so enjoy whatever conclusions you think you have come to.

edit : take it here if you must, or not if you don't... http://www.forexfactory.com/showthread.php?t=343905
Ok nubs, I will respond to your thread in the members lounge tomorrow. I know you enjoy a good debate, as do I, and we shall have it. Good trading to you my friend
  • #55
  • Nov 7, 2017 5:17am Nov 7, 2017 5:17am
Quoting Brutalpip
Hey friends! Because of ongoing judgements over my passion as a way to rob the weak in the markets, I'd like to explain how the other side of my winning trades is no way determined to LOSE money to me. The image explains everything. The only possible argument to bring forth after this is, most people get robbed of constantly anyway. Right. Because they trade by taking bigger or more losers than winners. They make their loss happen. I know what Im talking about, as I went through this pain for one full year, 5 days fulltime. By the way, my losses...
Essentially can not get what you are attempting to state! Two individuals who purchase and offer at a similar cost and afterward square off the exchange again at a similar cost can not be at benefit in the meantime, one would need to book a misfortune , for that specific exchange. I think what you are attempting to get at is that the forex showcase isn't a zero aggregate amusement and that there does not need to be a failure for each victor.
  • #56
  • Nov 7, 2017 3:24pm Nov 7, 2017 3:24pm
If anybody's interested, there's more fun and games in the 'zero sum' argument in this thread (interesting that the OP there has apparently changed his mind by post #37!!)
  • #57
  • Last Post: Nov 14, 2017 10:24pm Nov 14, 2017 10:24pm
I think what you are endeavoring to get at is that the forex advertise isn't a zero aggregate diversion and that there does not need to be a failure for each champ. I trust this is erroneous however and the forex advertise IS a zero whole diversion and for each exchange there is a champ and a failure (not really single elements but rather it is simpler to consider it such). This is a hard idea to get a handle on for most I think, it was for me, however the way I at last persuaded myself regarding this reality is through the accompanying speculative situation.
0 traders viewing now