I fail again and again and bite the dust | Page 5 | Forex Factory

Options

Go to
Permalinks
Print Thread

Similar Threads

From nothing to Dust! 40 replies

The Future of Dust 0 replies

Trades of Dust 15 replies

Trading journal - from dust to gold 21 replies

Attachments: I fail again and again and bite the dust
Exit Attachments

I fail again and again and bite the dust

  • #81
  • Nov 21, 2011 12:26pm Nov 21, 2011 12:26pm
Quoting Pipskateer
I think a better metric is to design a trading system that shows performance over "X" number of trades, rather than some arbitrarily imposed time limitation.

In my system modeling stage, I begin by setting fixed variables for money management which are blended to give me profitable expectancy "targets" or a range of targets. I think in terms of specific units of trades, usually 100 trades. I then factor in sound money management principles and use them as the foundation of my system.

For example, let's say you choose a fixed "risk per...
Gold.
  • #82
  • Nov 21, 2011 12:27pm Nov 21, 2011 12:27pm
Quoting moneydeep
I have been trading live for a year now and I can not make money.........
I have problems controlling my greed.............
I have a system that works..................
There have been many a occasion when I have thought of just quitting. I know I am a good analyst. Even my friends say so. But when it comes to trading I screw up.
I am asking very sincerely if there are others there who have been through this and are willing to guide me in the right path.
There is a post many will relate you. Just DO NOT think "Its f**king me"
I do not want to advise you anything, (for some reasons)..but i see you have got some appropriate info/help here for sure.

Just to keep you on track... i would want to ask you...what have you gained/grasped/changed/thinking to adopt, from all these 6 pages of replies? in case you are interested to reply.
100 Fold Challenge->Interested? ->https://www.forexfactory.com/thread/32152
  • #83
  • Nov 21, 2011 12:29pm Nov 21, 2011 12:29pm
Quoting hanover
@Pipskateer --- FWIW, I find myself agreeing with pretty much everything you've said. Like PTJ, all of the pros focus on risk management; they know that if they implement their edge consistently, profits will ensue as a matter of course.
I certainly have noticed our tendency to speak from similar perspectives in this thread. After spending the last several years coming to the conclusions I've reached about money management, I only recently began to read some of Dr. Van Tharp's work. I was amazed how closely the principles he has taught for years so closely describes many of my own realizations about money management. Not that I am anywhere near as learned or scholarly as he is, but it is good confirmation that I am on the right track in my own thinking nonetheless. I wonder if you have read and agree with Dr. Tharp's perspectives as well?
  • #84
  • Nov 21, 2011 12:32pm Nov 21, 2011 12:32pm
Quoting kk007

Sounds to me that both Pipskateer and pip_seeker don't think it is quite possible for 100% a year account increase (consistently and sustainably) for a person, while both of you cannot propose a logical upper limit.
I think you mis-read what I wrote. When I said not sustainable I was referring to 100% per month NOT per year.

You can look at my demo journal that shows it can be done and easily exceed 100% per year.

Shooting for 100% per month is not sustainable. It doesn't mean you can't do it from time to time but it is not sustainable IMO.

Demo Journal
  • #85
  • Nov 21, 2011 12:37pm Nov 21, 2011 12:37pm
Quoting pip_seeker
I think you mis-read what I wrote. When I said not sustainable I was referring to 100% per month NOT per year.

You can look at my demo journal that shows it can be done and easily exceed 100% per year.

Shooting for 100% per month is not sustainable. It doesn't mean you can't do it from time to time but it is not sustainable IMO.

Demo Journal
I agree, it's not "likely" sustainable, but not due to the underlying math. It is mostly likely due to human inconsistency or inability to follow a rule-set, for whatever reason.

Mathematically, all I need to do 100% per month is to find 100 trades at 2:1 reward/risk, using 1% per trade, and win 60 out of 100. Do that every month and you'll be insanely wealthy in a year. That equates to making five trades a day for 20 trading days per month. Doable...
  • #86
  • Nov 21, 2011 12:47pm Nov 21, 2011 12:47pm
Quoting Pipskateer
I agree, it's not "likely" sustainable, but not due to the underlying math. It is mostly likely due to human inconsistency or inability to follow a rule-set, for whatever reason.

Mathematically, all I need to do 100% per month is to find 100 trades at 2:1 reward/risk, using 1% per trade, and win 60 out of 100. Do that every month and you'll be insanely wealthy in a year. That equates to making five trades a day for 20 trading days per month. Doable...
nice, if it is mathematically possible, then why not program it? then the human inconsistency is away. You would make a staggering 409,600% p.a. (e.g. from 1.000 to 4 million in a year).

Okay, I shut up already. Had enough of these discussions in the past.
  • #87
  • Nov 21, 2011 12:48pm Nov 21, 2011 12:48pm
Quoting Pipskateer
Most people build systems without even considering the mathematical "expectancy" of the system. Why? Because it isn't "sexy" enough. They prefer to build their system based on their pet biases of what they think the market is doing.
Great post.

Quoting Pipskateer
I agree, it's not "likely" sustainable, but not due to the underlying math. It is mostly likely due to human inconsistency or inability to follow a rule-set, for whatever reason.
Very true... so often I go into "shut-down" mode because I'm up 2% in my first half-hour of trading.
Why? ...because 2% per day for 20 days a month is 40% and that can be extraordinary.
Rationalizations, fear, etc. keep me from spending more screen time to wait for additional worthwhile trades.
  • #88
  • Nov 21, 2011 12:50pm Nov 21, 2011 12:50pm
Quoting Pipskateer
Mathematically, all I need to do 100% per month is to find 100 trades at 2:1 reward/risk, using 1% per trade, and win 60 out of 100. Do that every month and you'll be insanely wealthy in a year. That equates to making five trades a day for 20 trading days per month. Doable...
I just think it's crazy to shoot for such a high return... once you let mr greed out of his cage there is no way to get him back in.

Just ask Lehman Bros, MF Global, Refco, Enron, Bernie Madoff, Alan Stanford and a list of banks a mile long. They all have one thing in common: GREED.

If you make 100% per year ROE live with in your means you would never run out of money EVER. There is no need for greed. Even 50% ROE would make you a superstar in any financial circle of your choice.

  • #89
  • Nov 21, 2011 1:06pm Nov 21, 2011 1:06pm
Quoting Intu
Great post.



Very true... so often I go into "shut-down" mode because I'm up 2% in my first half-hour of trading.
Why? ...because 2% per day for 20 days a month is 40% and that can be extraordinary.
Rationalizations, fear, etc. keep me from spending more screen time to wait for additional worthwhile trades.
I showed you all my 2 month statement. It is what it is.
Taigen Profit This Month: na
  • #90
  • Nov 21, 2011 2:00pm Nov 21, 2011 2:00pm
Quoting pip_seeker
I just think it's crazy to shoot for such a high return... once you let mr greed out of his cage there is no way to get him back in.

Just ask Lehman Bros, MF Global, Refco, Enron, Bernie Madoff, Alan Stanford and a list of banks a mile long. They all have one thing in common: GREED.

[size=3]If you make 100% per year ROE live with in your means you would never run out of money EVER. There is no need for greed. Even 50% ROE would make you a superstar in any financial...
I didn't say anything at all about "shooting" for it. I just gave the math parameters that will produce the results kk007 asked about if they are achieved. You're imposing your own set of standards on my information.

If I designed a system based on 2:1 reward/risk using 1% risk per trade and was able to achieve 60% wins every month, would that mean I was somehow immoral in doing so? Surely not, it would only mean I was following a system that I designed.
  • #91
  • Nov 21, 2011 2:03pm Nov 21, 2011 2:03pm
Quoting Taigen
I showed you all my 2 month statement. It is what it is.
Excellent results, Taigen. My only caution to you would be to check your mathematical expectancy to be sure you're not just riding a temporary wave of profits. Your system may in fact be positive, but you can only know by doing the math and only you can do that since you have the trade data.

Expectancy = (Probability of Win * Average Win) – (Probability of Loss * Average Loss)
  • #92
  • Nov 21, 2011 2:03pm Nov 21, 2011 2:03pm
Quoting pip_seeker
[size=3]I just think it's crazy....
Are you telling me if you have a $1000 account, it's crazy to make $20 in one day. Hmmm.
Taigen Profit This Month: na
  • #93
  • Nov 21, 2011 2:05pm Nov 21, 2011 2:05pm
That is a very good start indeed, Taigen. Can I ask you (and others!!) something? What was the longest period of time you managed to keep an account in profits?

I mean real money account. Even if the profits were not so high as with this one you've shown. I just want to gauge the average, even if I'm probably far below that but that's my problem anyway LOL

Quoting Taigen
I showed you all my 2 month statement. It is what it is.
forget about tomorrow, just steal away into the night
  • #94
  • Nov 21, 2011 2:11pm Nov 21, 2011 2:11pm
Quoting Taigen
Are you telling me if you have a $1000 account, it's crazy to make $20 in one day. Hmmm.
you would be my personal hero, if you can pull that off consistently over a year. 2% increase per trading-day = 56,401% a year or $ 565,008.48 on $ 1,000.

Congrats, if you really can pull that kind of percentage return off.
  • #95
  • Nov 21, 2011 2:13pm Nov 21, 2011 2:13pm
Quoting spekitox
That is a very good start indeed, Taigen. Can I ask you (and others!!) something? What was the longest period of time you managed to keep an account in profits?

I mean real money account. Even if the profits were not so high as with this one you've shown. I just want to gauge the average, even if I'm probably far below that but that's my problem anyway LOL
I've been in design and demo stage for a few months now, so I'm not trading live right now. But using a system that has now been proven to have serious flaws, I once had sustained positive profits for eight months in a row. My lowest month was better than 10% and my best was over 60% with no losing months in between. It ultimately crashed and burned, but I was fortunate enough to get more than my initial investment out plus some profits before it tanked. After that, I began system hopping for quite some time...but no more.
  • #96
  • Nov 21, 2011 2:15pm Nov 21, 2011 2:15pm
Quoting Pipskateer
Excellent results, Taigen. My only caution to you would be to check your mathematical expectancy to be sure you're not just riding a temporary wave of profits. Your system may in fact be positive, but you can only know by doing the math and only you can do that since you have the trade data.

Expectancy = (Probability of Win * Average Win) – (Probability of Loss * Average Loss)
Fair enough. I truly hope that this in not a temporary wave. Time will tell. I have (as much as can be) implemented the necessary safeguards to obtain this objective.

The math is based on linear and exponential cost averaging that I am sure someone thought this up before me but this is what I'm doing. I also (and this may totally be irrational) only short (well, 98% of the time). Most who hear about this strategy are very negative to it's concept. I don't know what to say.

I plan to post my numbers monthly whether good or bad.
Taigen Profit This Month: na
  • #97
  • Nov 21, 2011 2:17pm Nov 21, 2011 2:17pm
Quoting Custos
you would be my personal hero, if you can pull that off consistently over a year. 2% increase per trading-day = 56,401% a year or $ 565,008.48 on $ 1,000.

Congrats, if you really can pull that kind of percentage return off.
Let me just say that we will never find what we aren't even trying to look for. What I mean by that is... until I began looking for trades that were at LEAST 2:1 RR, I never found any. But amazingly...once I built that parameter into my system, I began finding trades that are even BETTER than 2:1... which is now my MINIMUM standard for R/R.

When you fire a gun, do you aim it AT the target? BELOW the target? or slightly ABOVE the target?
  • #98
  • Nov 21, 2011 2:20pm Nov 21, 2011 2:20pm
Quoting Pipskateer
Let me just say that we will never find what we aren't even trying to look for. What I mean by that is... until I began looking for trades that were at LEAST 2:1 RR, I never found any. But amazingly...once I built that parameter into my system, I began finding trades that are even BETTER than 2:1... which is now my MINIMUM standard for R/R.

When you fire a gun, do you aim it AT the target? BELOW the target? or slightly ABOVE the target?
I aim to find positive expectancy systems and trade them regardless of the outcome of individual trades. The daily target is to execute the system, nothing more and nothing less. The odds will play themselves out over a couple of thousand trades, like a casino.
  • #99
  • Nov 21, 2011 2:27pm Nov 21, 2011 2:27pm
Quoting Custos
I aim to find positive expectancy systems and trade them regardless of the outcome of individual trades. The daily target is to execute the system, nothing more and nothing less. The odds will play themselves out over a couple of thousand trades, like a casino.
Understood, and that is the way to do it. But a system without positive math parameters is a waste of time. Setting the math parameters as a standard during the system selection or building process is like aiming the gun, that's all I'm saying. Expectancy is math that is calculated from specific factors, only two of which you have any control. Most don't even know about expectancy or whether their system's is positive.
  • #100
  • Nov 21, 2011 2:34pm Nov 21, 2011 2:34pm
Quoting Pipskateer
Understood, and that is the way to do it. But a system without positive math parameters is a waste of time. Setting the math parameters as a standard during the system selection or building process is like aiming the gun, that's all I'm saying. Expectancy is math that is calculated from specific factors, only two of which you have any control. Most don't even know about expectancy or whether their system's is positive.
Very true, especially your last sentence.
0 traders viewing now