Institutional Equivalent Education?

Perhaps you think I was too unkind to Boris Schlossberg in the post above, when he said this (and my comment in Blue):-

I kept my algos on into the Fed meeting and got annihilated. - Wow, that really shows how great Algos are ! And also how overconfident (or just plain dumb) Boris is- LOL !

Perhaps you think that last week's Fed statement was really hard to trade!
- WRONG !!! See the 2 marked up screens below. The 1st is a 5 min chart showing the day's price action into the Fed.
Then the 2nd one is a 1 min chart showing the actual release of the statement.

Attached Image (click to enlarge)

Attached Image (click to enlarge)

Perhaps Boris' Algo's aren't up to the job, but a almost any novice human trader could have done well with a little preparation and some common sense!

Here is the latest email from Lance Beggs of your trading coach (no comments from me this time):

**************************************************************************************
Higher Quality Breakout Failure Trades

One of the aims of your journaling process is to build a collection of near textbook-perfect examples of each of your trade setups.

And from these, develop awareness of the factors which lead to increased odds of success.

Friday, 21st June, offered an absolutely beautiful Breakout Failure setup.

Let's start with a 5 minute chart to get some context:

Attached Image

The important factor that I wish to highlight today is not where the trade occurred.

But rather - how price got there.

One of the key features I like to see, which suggests potentially increased odds of success, is price not only having to travel a long way to reach the level, but to have also STRETCHED to do so.

Attached Image

Looking at the 1 minute chart (my preferred Trading Timeframe in this market):

Attached Image

This is a Breakout Failure that I DO NOT want to miss.

Additional study for those with the YTC Price Action Trader:

Attached Image

Attached Image

Attached Image

Happy trading,

Lance Beggs

****************************************************************************************

A far simpler way to analyze this situation would be to analyze volume or order flow at this top. Even the reversal candle pattern with the wick off the top edge would've given a trader a huge hint that higher prices would've been rejected.

Quoting n7ekg

Disliked

A far simpler way to analyze this situation would be to analyze volume or order flow at this top. Even the reversal candle pattern with the wick off the top edge would've given a trader a huge hint that higher prices would've been rejected.

Ignored

@n7ekg True, but if I am not mistaken, you (like me) have the advantage of having been trained by Ray, which gives us so very many additional tools than poor Lance knows how to use!

Forex is fixed- You hear that all the time! - Well it is - sort of, you just need to know the 'rules' in order to follow along with the institutions!
There may be some people reading this who doubt if Ray really teaches us institutional style trading.
Here is something that Ray's students who trade GBP/USD could have traded alongside UBS bank's traders and clients:
Ray's tweet around midnight (all times are UK time). You can see it was at that time because I show both my computer's time and how long ago the Tweet was.

Attached Image (click to enlarge)

OK, so Ray teaches that we need a nice pullback level plus Value to be in our favour, in order to take a trade.

How interesting that at 10:00am Ransquawk reported UBS advising their clients of these trade ideas, one of which is a short of G/U.

Attached Image (click to enlarge)

If you look at their average prospective entry price and the prior low, then using a measured move you get the same target that they advised to their clients, of 1.2480

So did we have Value? Looking at the major Value line for the G/U (in blue), what do you think? - Isn't it fabulous, and just at the right time!

Attached Image (click to enlarge)

How would Ray's students have been marking up their own charts? - Something like this:

Attached Image (click to enlarge)

But hey, it didn't get to the target - so it is all B*S* isn't it? - Well perhaps so for UBS clients, but certainly not for Ray's students who know to watch the Value line!

Attached Image (click to enlarge)

Notice that the value line (in Blue - yes it is the same value line) was falling from the entries through until 13:00 and then started to rise, even though price had not yet got to our conservative target area ( the aggressive target area was the same as for UBS traders and clients i.e.1.2480 which it never reached!)
Well that's OK, because we know that institutions need liquidity both to enter and to exit a trade - so they won't be panic buying yet!
Then price reaches our 1st target which is a 'round number' and thus an automatically high liquidity area. And at the same time the value line reaches the opening low.
- Who says that Forex isn't fixed! LOL !

Utter Garbage:
Boris Schlossberg getting about as low as he can go, without actually physically mugging people!

Attached Image (click to enlarge)

Claiming you can learn to 'trade with confidence' in under 2hrs - LOL !
-False confidence! - Yes! Over-confidence! -Yes! - More like utter blind stupidity.

An honest educator might say: trade with confidence in 2 weeks ! - though the actual course may be shorter than that.

There is no way that you can start from scratch and even learn how to use , and then evaluate an EA in 2hrs!
Oh, but Boris probably expects his students to run an EA that they have not evaluated, or likely don't even know how to evaluate!

The Number 2 rule of trading (after 'Don't lose money!') is 'If you don't understand why price will move in your favour - don't trade it !'
Does anybody seriously think that traders for the big institutions take trades that they don't understand- they have to know where they will exit before they even enter a trade!

Another strange mix of B*S* and practicality from Boris Schlossberg (my comments in Blue follow the whole email):
***************************************************************************************************
Insane on the Membrane

What a better risk strategy - one that loses $300 on one thousand or one that loses $100,000 on a million?

See what I did there? The logic says the former, but almost all of us say the latter because like all people we react with our hearts rather than our head and the prospect of losing $100,000 is far more terrifying than the idea of losing $300 bucks even though in percentage terms the $300 is a much worse loss.

Money is also the reason why it’s easier to double a small account rather than a big one. Doubling an account is always a function of taking on way too much risk (even if it doesn’t seem like at the time). The classic rule of thumb is that in the best strategy your drawdown should be about 1/2 your return, which means to make 100% you need to be willing to lose 50%. Again this is much easier to do with $1000 account than $100,000 one or even a $10,000 one. After all getting margined out on $1000 account is far less painful financially which is why the smartest advice I can give to those traders who trade without stop - otherwise known as the “trade and pray” method - is to open multiple small accounts rather than keep all your capital in one. You will for sure get margined out in a few of them, but you may get lucky catch a mean reverting market that will make all your average down trades turn green and double or even quadruple your equity and pay for all those margin stops.

Trading is full of these non-intuitive tricks.

Take a look at the equity curves below for one the strategies I trade in BK. Which one looks better? What if I told you that they are both trading the exact same strategy with exact same pairs on the exact same time frame?

Attached Image (click to enlarge)

They are both positive but one of the left looks much worse. Yet that one trades with a 5:1 risk reward ratio. It risks 50 pips to make 250. If you read every standard trading book the world, it will tell that this is a great approach. After all, the better the risk reward ratio the less accurate you need to be to win.

Now look at the chart on the right. What do you think? 1:2 risk reward? 1:3? 1:4?? How about 1:5! That version risks 250 pip stops against 50 pip gains. That’s insane on the membrane! You need 83% just to break even on that approach. And yet, crazy as it seems, trading over a 42 month time frame across all the seven major pairs the strategy hit winners 89.5% of the time Beating the breakeven spread handily.

But what’s even more amazing about the two charts is the steepness of the drawdown. You would think that a strategy that losses five times more than it wins would have stomach churning equity dips - but its doesn’t. Sure - its has declines but they are quickly recouped as the high winning percentage makes up for the losses. The approach on the left however has some very sharp drop off as trade, after trade, after trade gets stopped out.

And now you begin to understand why insurance companies make so much money while many venture capital funds do not. In trading as in business common sense is often unconventional.

***************************************************************************************************

The first thing to point out is that while Simulated trading may be considered to be at least partly science, Live trading is much more psychological. We are not robots and so we feel emotions as trades either are going in out favour or are going against us.
Boris keeps talking about how using an MT4 EA (algo/robot) can protect us against this, however that is nonsense because using automation can only protect us against emotions until we take a look at how it is doing!

We all have limited capital, even institutions, but the emotions from having limited capital are much stronger when we are trading with out own money (unlike an institutional trader). It is unwise to risk our house, car, family etc. even if the probability is hugely in our favour (unless we don't have those comforts in the first place).

So the second thing is that although Boris provides 2 equity graphs of a single system using two different sets of Trade Management, they are both hypothetical simulations and would almost certainly work out differently in real trading life (even if done automatically).

Finally, I consider that in order to trade like that, with a 'set in stone' Stop Loss and a single 'come hell or high water' target - you need to be at either extreme of the trading spectrum i.e. either a complete novice who doesn't know any better. Who would not be able to tell that a successful outcome was becoming much more likely -so look to scale-in or to stretch your target(s). Or that it was becoming much less likely - so look to either cut your losses or reduce your (next) target.
Because if you know these things, why wouldn't you take action instead of sitting on your hands like a sack of potatoes.

One additional observation: There is no 'one size fits all' in trading. What works well as a trading plan for one strategy in a particular market during particular market conditions (or even times of day), will work either worse )or better) for a different strategy/market/conditions etc.
The future will never be exactly the same as the past because what is past is known, and is thus already factored into traders future plans!

Ian, how can one sign up and take the course that you are offering? Is there a website with information?

It isn't me who is offering a course. There may not be another fresh course (each one is an attempt at continuous improvement) until next year, since even Ray finds it tough to fit in 4 or 5 weeks formal teaching alongside his actual paid employment and his live webinar room sessions 5 days per week.

However I do run a free 'Self Help Group' for students (and ex-students) of the CompassFX 'Sharp Edge' course current membership of over 400 but most are fairly inactive.
Since the last course finished in May, we have had several new students 'taking the course' via the recordings of those sessions, joining my group and attending the regular Live Focus sessions (ongoing training) that Ray does Monday on through Friday.
There is no discount for 'tasking the course via the recordings', though Compass may allow some additional free weeks in the live webinar room (trading and ongoing education).

The general posts and information in this thread about the last course starts from around post number 795 and goes on into May 2019.

It has been a while since Boris Schlossberg (of BK Forex) sent me any interesting emails, but here is one.
At first I thought it was just a repeat of an old one about how 'discipline' or 'willpower' ultimately fail.
The first time he mentioned this in a email, he then went on to praise using MT4 EAs to trade instead of trading manually.
This one contains more both interesting evidence about 'discipline' and something more like my own views on avoiding the trap!
My comments are in Blue as usual:

************************************************************************************************
Dear Ian

Discipline is a Lie – but Here is How You Can Trade Much Better


Executive function is a fancy scientific word for willpower or discipline. It’s how social scientists study our ability to control our impulses and the latest research has pretty much debunked conventional wisdom on the subject.

We have all heard about the famous marshmallow test where kids who displayed discipline at not grabbing a marshmallow right away were shown to be much more successful later on life seemingly proving that notion that self-control led to success. The truth is actually much more nuanced. What the test really showed was that rich kids who had no scarcity worries in their lives were much more likely to wait than poor kids, in essence proving nothing more than the fact that socioeconomic standing rather than character correlated with financial success later in life.

Still, the test provided a clue to what really matters which is context. A poor kid coming from a context of scarcity where the future is uncertain would very logically have a much stronger predilection towards present value while a rich kid for whom the present was much more stable could take a bigger risk on the future. (This little dynamic by the way explains why poor people spend their disposable income on the lottery while rich people buy bonds)

Yet within this idea of context, there were a few new discoveries that social science made. For example when scientists re-ran the marshmallow test with children controlling for socioeconomic background but this time told one set of kids that they were on the “green team” and that members of the green team waited for the marshmallow the executive function of those kids was much stronger and their wait times much longer even though they never met any members of their team. The mere concept of peer pressure was good enough to improve behavior.

Group support is one of the easiest and most effective ways to improve executive function whether it be exercising through a tennis league, joining a walking club, attending a Weight Watchers meetings or in our case trading together in a chat room where we can discuss markets and ideas in a social setting.

The net takeaway from the latest research is that discipline does not work. In fact, it is extraordinarily counterproductive as the mental energy expended on telling yourself to NOT do something actually weakens your resistance to the very thing you want to avoid.

According to scientists the better tactic is to create a plan that simply never exposes you to temptation while at the same time makes proper behavior as pleasant as possible. - I completely agree with the those scientists!
I’ve actually managed to do all that with my own day trading recently without even realizing that I was using the latest cutting edge science techniques. I love to day-trade but my two biggest weaknesses have always been to make random trades out of boredom and fade the trend in an often futile attempt to find a bottom or a top.

A few weeks ago, however, as I was preparing for the Chicago Traders show I was going back through BK library of strategies and stumbled across #bkflow a strategy we used to trade in the heyday of FX volatility but abandoned a few years back. I took a look at it with a set of fresh eyes and realized that this could be a very good setup if it had a trend overlay filter. Then I got in touch with my programmer and coded the logic.

Now I have an algo that spits out 8-10 trade ideas for me per day. Ideas that are naturally on the side of the trend. The net result has been nothing short of astounding. I stopped making random trades out of sheer boredom because now I had legitimate setups to follow. I stopped trying to pick bottoms or tops as well.

Don’t get me wrong, I still use discretion on the selection and on exit -- but that is very much playing to my strength as I apply my analysis of newsflow and price flow within the very clearly defined rules of the #bkflow setup. Here is how I traded it for the past two weeks -- and the best part is that it was totally stress-free.
*************************************************************************************************************************

Note: I do not include his results here since they are statistically meaningless.
He only took 15 trades over 2 weeks at an estimated 8 to 10 possibles per day, that means he rejected approximately 75 trades or 84% of them!
He says he won 14 of the 15 trades - but would you have chosen to takes the same 16% ? - Highly unlikely!

I know that most FF members never consider 'Value' and that few even trade news and of those most just gamble on it.

This is partly due to lack of proper trading education, partly due to all the cr4p in Forums which say 'Fundamentals don't work' - or 'Technicals show everything' etc. and partly due to laziness!

Yes, some trades who should know better are just too darned lazy and so are constantly taking shortcuts which damage their trading results!

Ray did a mini-lesson on how to learn the things he teaches.
He said it all stems from wanting to know how things work and why price moves the way it does.
He has often said 'If you don't understand it - DON'T TRADE IT!'
But some students just ignore that and try to copy his 'magic charts' instead - then they trade divergences between lines they don't know and they don't understand.

Ultimately 'Value' comes from News. I have been a News Trader since 2014 so before I started this thread back in February 2015
But rather than leap into trading the news, Ray showed how to learn to trade it with an example of a financial headline from this past week:

Background: The Chinese currency is not a conventional freely traded currency. The Peoples Bank Of China (PBOC) periodically pegs the exchange rate to the US Doller i.e. it 'fixes' the exchange rate.

He asked us to consider the following as an economic news headline and work through the subsequent points 1. and 2.

Attached Image (click to enlarge)

OK, so 1. was Can I see it on a chart? Well can you?:

Attached Image (click to enlarge)

This is a 10 min chart of the E-Mini-S&P with some 'Value lines over-laid. The time setting on the chart is UK London time - so currently GMT+1 or NewYork Time +5
The Value lines are: Chinese Renminbi (yuan) against the U$D in Red ( I am plotting the version traded in Hong Kong because that has decent volume)
Dollar Index in pale Blue
US 10yr Bond Yields minus US2yr bond yields in Darker blue.
USDJPY currnecy pair in Gold

You can see how the CNHUSD shot up (CNH is much stronger) but the Dollar index hardly changes - so the cause is the CNH not the USD.
We can also discount other factors such as Risk On (since the Yen is not weakening in so dramatic a way), and the Bond Yields.
We can also discount Economic 'red' news

Attached Image (click to enlarge)

So the cause must be the Renminbi

That brings us to 2. Consider why it happened.
Well, that should be easy - but perhaps not for most FF members.
The US and China are currently in a 'trade war' both sides applying 'tit for tat' trade tariffs.
The US Treasury has finally formally accused China of being a 'Currency Manipulator'. Implying more tariffs to come i.e a worsening of the trade war.
Trade wars are bad for trade ( Duh!). Worsening Trade is bad for economies. Worsening economies are bad for Stock markets.

So far, so simple! - but all of that is talking about China artificially weakening the Renminbi. What the Headline and the chart show is China artificially strengthening it!
What does that mean?
Well perhaps a lessening of trade tensions, perhaps signs that China is prepared to concede some point to the US and come to an agreement.
An agreement would mean a reduction in tariffs and hence be good for trade, and good for the Stock market.

All of these things are discounted before they happen ( Buy the rumour, Sell the News)

For further info on Currency Manipulation I suggest these:

Attached Image (click to enlarge)

Attached Image (click to enlarge)

Now I suppose that some people will say 'All that doesn't help me - I trade the US session, or I only trade Forex' etc.
The whole point is that to be a real trader (not just a retail gambler), you need to be able to do that sort of work in order to trade your chosen market(s) - to know which things will have a big effect on the market and which ones won't.

What if the same POBC 'fix' had been done when there was no 'Trade War' when tariffs were low, when relations were good?
Then would it have had the same effect? - Of course not!

Honestly Ray's knowledge sharing regarding fundamentals and macro analyses opens new horizons in trading for me.
Value paired with trading against overall retail sentiment (contrarian) on EURUSD. Quite perfect "setup" signaling "long" trade on significant price drop. Buit I'm still novice regarding the Value ...

I rarely find a good article from a Broker, but here is one from Optimus Futures:

****************************************************************
How to Manage Risk in Futures Trading | 5 Steps to Deal With Market Uncertainty
This article on Futures Trading Risk Management is the opinion of Optimus Futures
https://i0.wp.com/optimusfutures.com...00%2C339&ssl=1
The reality of the markets is very different from those faced in most situations in life and work. The difference, of course, is the level of speculative risk. Strangely, many futures traders who don’t quite get this try to develop methodologies, approaches, or even futures trading rules aimed to eliminate all the uncertainty and ambiguity from the process of trading in order to make trading decisions more confidently.
Well, as most successful futures traders might tell you, this can only lead you down the wrong path. Risk embodies uncertainty, as uncertainty is often accompanied by risk. As traders, we don’t shy away from risk. We engage it. We assume it. Risk is our theater of operations. But to eliminate all the uncertainty and ambiguity is to make your measure, your context, your tools “super-fragile”, as Long Term Capital Management (LTCM) showed us with its massive blow-up back in the 90’s.

Their arbitrage system eliminated all statistical “uncertainties” — most of them, at least. There were no “ambiguities” in the way they saw the markets. The problem, however, was that their system got it all wrong. Like, $4.4 Billion wrong. Believing they had a near-perfect “ruler” to measure market activity, they somehow forgot that sometimes the thing being measured (i.e. the markets) reflects more the quality of the ruler than the measure of the thing.
There is nothing wrong with being uncertain. But where you want to be confident is in your capacity to work with the circumstances that make the market environment uncertain. You want to be agile enough to turn uncertainty into a potential advantage. In other words, success in trading potentially hinges on your ability to adapt to uncertain and often fickle trading environments, rather than trying to find a way out.
Below we list five key aspects of futures trading risk management to help you adjust to market uncertainty.

Distinguish Between High and Low Quality Trade Setups
It isn’t uncommon to feel nervous when entering a trade. But you shouldn’t doubt it either, that is, if you did things right (measure your setup, calculate your risks, etc.). It doesn’t mean that you are 100% confident your trade will work out as planned. It’s more like you’re 100% confident that you know what to do if it doesn’t.
One of the most important ways to settle doubts in your mind when executing a trade is to clearly identify and choose between varying trading setups in terms of quality. Pick the best setup, make sure you understand it completely (e.g. risk/reward, profit, and termination points), and execute it. In the end, it’s really the best you can do. But note that many traders can’t even get this far.
Whatever set of triggers you use to decide your market entries, you need clear-cut rules to distinguish between high-quality and low-quality setups, which can either be too risky (low return-to-risk setups) or whose conditions or potential payoffs are too obscure. In other words, you need to know how to filter trades based on risk and reward.
This, of course, is much easier said than done. It might take a considerable amount of iterations, testing, and tweaks to get your trading method to your desired level of objectivity and effectiveness. But it’s worth it. Knowing whether you are entering a potentially high probability trade setup versus a low probability trade setup can help you go a long way in terms of preparation and dealing with live-scenario outcomes.
You are more likely to accept a loss on a trade that you know is aggressive and high risk, than taken aback by a loss taken on a trade you thought was a high-quality trade setup. Not being able to distinguish between high- and low-quality trade setups is a place you don’t want to be.

Plan Out Contingencies
If you haven’t planned alternate solutions to potential contingencies, then you may find yourself struggling when unexpected market movements take place.
Often, simply relying on high-quality trade setups may not be enough to escape the perils of unexpected price movements. As we mentioned at the beginning of this article, there is no proven way to ensure accurate price predictions and as such, no level of trade setup quality can ever insure you against the likelihood of an uncanny price move derailing your trade.
The solution is to consider all potential outcomes on the trade. This is not just a matter of statically determining whether a trade may be a winner or loser but rather how price action might dynamically change the winning and losing conditions of a trade. Outlining potential support and resistance areas on the chart that you believe could hinder price from moving in your preferred direction is a good starting point. Better yet, plan for potential moves against your initial setup. How might you react if x happens, or x1 or x2 or x3? How might you adjust your position? Try to eliminate most elements of “foreseeable” surprise (as ironic as that may sound).

Attached Image (click to enlarge)

The chart above illustrates just one potential trading opportunity marked out with various support and resistance levels in close vicinity that could serve as valid checkpoints as the trade develops. During the trade, how will you respond if price broke below the higher lows at [A], [b], or [C]? With potential targets at [1], [2], and [3], how will you respond if price fails to reach each level? Or how will you determine your position size should you anticipate price reaching each target level?
Having a deep understanding of the markets and price action dynamics is a crucial skill that can take the sting out of uncertain trading environments. And all trading environments are relatively uncertain. While predicting the next market move with 100% accuracy is virtually impossible to do, having a deep understanding of a given market can give you a relative edge, providing you with a better grasp of potential outcomes.

Stay Away from Rigid Trading Plans
New traders often intuitively fall back on rigid and inflexible trading plans to eliminate all guesswork and mental strain arising from making ad hoc trading decisions. Bad move. As counterintuitive as it may sound, leaving some level of subjectivity and variance in your trading plan is essential to a well-rounded and competent trading style.
Perhaps you expect the market to tick higher in line with the current uptrend momentum. Instead of merely ticking up, the market skyrockets by several points, possibly on some favorable news development or economic report. Would you want to raise your final target (and exit point) for the trade to benefit from the better-than-expected reaction from the market? Or would you stick with your original price target?
Conversely, you may be expecting the market to break below (or above) a support (or resistance) area. But instead, the price ends up just hovering near your anticipated level. You may want to alter your trading plan, perhaps tightening your stop loss or moving your take-profit level a little closer to account for the dissipating momentum.
The point here is to be able to find the perfect balance between the objective aspects of making trading decisions (classifying trade setups, marking out clear-cut trouble areas for price) and the subjective aspects (some flexibility in trade management) resulting from variance in market conditions.

Let the Numbers Play Out
This might be one of the most important factors to consider while trying to deal with the ambiguity prevalent in your day to day trading. Cumulative trading results hardly ever hinge on a single trade or, for that matter, even a small group of trades.
If you truly have a trading edge, it can only be confirmed over a wide sample size of trades. Your last trade doesn’t really count, so don’t fall victim to the tendencies of “recency bias.” You must take into account all of your trades, and this develops and changes with each and every subsequent trade you make. Analyzing your past trades can also provide valuable insights into how you can improve your system and increase the asymmetric risk and return ratio.
Realizing the importance of the numbers game can go a long way in settling your nerves (unless you are unsuccessful, for one reason or another). Remember, the quality of your method and execution will always be secondary to your live results. When it comes to trading, your overall sustainable profitability settles all–it’s the final and foremost measure.

Practice Makes Perfect
Everything we’ve discussed so far connects with the number of hours spent behind your computer screen. It’s about practice. And we’re not talking about “demo” practice. That should be left behind as soon as possible as it doesn’t come close to the live market.
Planning out all contingencies requires an alert mind that is open to various angles of chart analysis – a skill that gets better with time and practice. Finding the right trading method that clearly differentiates between good and bad quality trades also takes time to develop. As there is no one-size-fits-all trading method out there that guarantees success, any workable method will usually involve iterative and corrective processes to refine it to suit your unique trading personality and style.
Such a system is important to help you manage risk and navigate across uncertain trading environments, but it can also take time to develop. The same is also true for developing trading management strategies with the right amount of flexibility to deal with live market activity.
As long as you are committed to improving your trading and are willing to put in the time and effort required to hone your trading skills, the ambiguous aspects of your day to day trading will cease to bother you given time.
But even with ample practice, you will never be able to eliminate all risk and uncertainty from your trading. Remember, trading is all about managing risk and engaging uncertainty, that is, intelligently engaging risk. That’s why trading is called “speculation.” But with enough practice, you may evolve into a capable trader who is immune to the anxieties of not being able to predict future outcomes. In other words, you may finally learn what trading is about, and how to do it right.

************************************************************************************************************************

I have no comments, other than that I pretty much agree with all of it.

Boris Schlossberg has posted a video about trading the News. He says he trades new every day and uses 3 techniques.
Now although I think that the 3 ways he outlines are rather crude and probably don't have as high a win % as my Overcooked/Undercooked style or Ray;s Market Maker Fair Value and Liquidity style or his pre-news style, or even Sam's 30min Oil Inventory style, the techniques Boris outlines are valid.

So here is his video:
https://www.bkforex.com/three-way-i-...new-every-day/

More from Boris Schlossberg on him trading the News.
I like the way he says 'I may be stupid, but I'm not stubborn'

Confession: in my case, unfortunately I can be stubborn as well as stupid!
Here is his Video: https://www.bkforex.com/trading-is-like-weather/

Hi Ian F, just wondering if you're still alive and made any money trading with Ray yet?

What a strange question?
Obviously I am still alive as I answer this question.
But why should you care? - Several times you have made it clear that you don't believe what I write!

Have I made any money trading with Ray yet. - Well the answer to that is both yes and no. I have made money when applying Ray's teachings correctly and trading in the same direction as him. Yet for some strange reason when I trade in the opposite direction to him, either from getting 'married to a trade' or because I skimped on the pre-trade analysis, I usually find myself losing money.

Today was a slightly unusual EIA Crude Oil Inventory release.
As usual I did my analysis and was confident enough to place Limit Orders before the release (both a Buy and a Sell). But for some reason Ray had forgoten that it was Inventory day and only realised when he saw the spike.
I had been too cautious with my Limit Buy and so although I would have been placed into a Sell Order at that price, I was the spread away (or 1 tick more if at the end of the line) from getting my Buy Order filled (But of course you don't actually believe this!).
Additionally I needed an urgent bathroom break which meant I didn't have enough confidence to chase the trade and the go and poop! (But again you don't believe this!)

As happened about half of the time, the 30min 'Sammy trade' was not available on the release , since it didn't retrace back far enough after 30min, so I diddn't fet any Oil trade on at all. (But you don't believe this either!)

Until you actually answered though, it wasn't obvious. I asked my question because you hadn't posted anything in a month, aren't a youngster anymore and are easily riled up. As such I was worried that something had maybe happened to you. Thankfully that's not the case.

... I also knew that if you were okay then your (justifiably!) grumpy response to me would be good for a laugh. Thank you for not disappointing.

Another thing, you have me all wrong! Although I still am of the mind that in spite of the amusingly false hyperbolic rhetoric you and the other Medici-ites spew in relation to his teachings (i.e. none of you are fabulously wealthy, which you would be if you really had a proper edge), that doesn't mean that I don't think that he has something to offer OR that you're spreading bunkum. On the contrary, I DO believe that what you've learned has some value and so I was/am genuinely interested to see what your progress was/is. I remember you very graciously showed some Core Spreads statements once before in the past, so I know that you are serious. Given how my posts are dripping with sarcasm you can be forgiven for thinking I'm what is commonly referred to these days as a 'troll', but I'm not.

Anyhow, I'm sorry about the Crude Oil set up, but the good thing is that you've got the chance every week to make up for it with this report.

Take care,

Ian K

P.S.
- I swear that I believe you pooped.

I know that many (retail) Traders skip doing a post trade or end-of-trading analysis of their trade(s).
I strongly feel that this is a mistake. It isn't possible from one day's/week's P&L alone, to see if a trader was trading well or not - they might have broken 'rules' in their trading plan and just got lucky. Alternatively, they may have just been very unlucky despite actually trading well!

Here is a good Podcast about trade analysis from Optimus Futures:
https://optimusfutures.com/podcast/p..._hsmi=77339624

" .... Anyhow, I'm sorry about the Crude Oil set up, but the good thing is that you've got the chance every week to make up for it with this report.

Take care,

Ian K"

No need to feel sorry about my Crude Oil set-up not triggering even though I had set my Limit Orders quite carefully - I was just a little too cautious this time.
But the great thing about these trades is that since it is a weekly report, there is at least one decent trade opportunity almost every week.

Cheers,
Ian F