Nvesta81

I don't see this idea taking off for the simple reason that transparency in a zero sum game that involves money just doesn't make any sense whatsoever to me. Or maybe I'm too paranoid, but there are so many sharks out there I feel justified in my reasoning.

My day job is software development so I understand the inclination to want to program all things and be challenged etc. However, I must say that when it comes to pattern recognition and identifying "zones" in the market -- is something us humans are very good at and can do with very little effort as opposed to programming all the steps for a computer program to do it. (time is money) I think your time would be better spent studying the market in general than programming something like this. You can identify these zones and draw them out on a chart in as little as 2 minutes, whereas programming something similar might take you weeks/months... Is it really worth your time? I also wouldn't pay a dime to someone who programmed something like this when I can spot the patterns myself for free and while doing so might learn something about the chart I'm looking at... :missy:

In my humble opinion the aggregate data that IB provides is sufficient when reading the T&S screen. With a trained eye there's no information you can get from T&S that you can't read from a chart anyway. If your success as a trader relies on this alone then I suspect you are going to struggle regardless of which broker you go with. Bottom line,I think the difference is negligible. Just thought I'd throw it out there so you don't choose your broker on T&S alone, there are more important things to consider IMHO.

This might be a dumb question but I'm compelled to ask anyway. Does anyone here know how I would go about calculating the probability (percentage wise) of price reaching a certain point completely disregarding past behavior? For example, say we ignore setups, patterns etc, and just randomly place a trade at any given time... so you buy at a stock at $10, you set a target at 15$, and a stop at $5. This would be an equal distribution so I would assume you have a 50/50 chance of your stop/target being hit, basically equal odds right? So how would I calculate the probablity of entering at $10, target $20, and place a stop at $5... the distribution is no longer equal so things change quite a bit. I'm not very good at math so I could use some help... for some of you this is a cake walk I'm sure. Any input is greatly appreciated, thanks.

Hello, been awhile since I asked a question here, love this site! I primarily trade futures indexes, ES and the Dow. My question, in order to better my trading in those contracts what other things should I be watching on the side? Let's say you only had 3 monitors to work with, what other charts would you be looking at? Would you watch individual stocks as well as the main indexes? Oil, gold? I'm sure some will say all of the above. However, I'm trying to narrow this down as much as possible. I want to know if any of you think some markets are clearly more important than others to monitor to improve your trading in any select one. I hope my question is clear. Thanks alot!

"A fool and his money are lucky enough to get together in the first place." - Oliver Stone

I have yet to become consistently profitable but I will say that some areas of psychology have definitely made a difference in not losing everything I have already. Some areas in particular: 1)having the patience to only enter a trade at the proper moment, and having the discipline to eliminate impulse trades. 2)being able to control the urge to trade larger size -- not being greedy. 3)knowing when to stop trading and then evaluating my strategy.

Futures are more simple when it comes to tax time, you don't need as much capital and the pattern day trader rule doesn't apply. Those are probably the main reasons. I also find it much easier to monitor one or two markets and study those charts rather than keep up with a dozen or more stocks all at once. The bid/ask spreads in futures are small too which is nice when it comes to managing a trade.

What you said does make a lot of sense and is a subject worth expanding on in my book. It's much easier to toss words around like edge and mentality but much more valuable to be able to define these things in-depth and see how they interrelate in specific circumstances as you just did. Good post.

The mere 5% making money might be speculating from fundamental information rather than a technical trading strategy. I'm not arguing that it's impossible to make money, clearly it's not, but I am arguing that having an edge is much more important than being the Yoda of trading. I am also questioning whether or not it is possible to define a 'technical' edge if you leave any sort of room for discretion. The 'force' doesn't work in the stock market.

I posted a reply to this thread a few days ago and it must of got deleted, sorry if I offended anyone. I'll try again. I think it's safe to assume that there's no mathematical formula that works consistently enough to predict stocks or futures, is this a reasonable statement to make? Now, being that no human on this earth can be more disciplined than a computer operating on strict rules before entering trades then one can only assume that there must be room for discretion in trading. To me, that is the contradiction I see often among traders. If you leave room for discretion that means you leave room to falt your own signals. At this point you can be the most calm and collected trader on earth, there's really no logical explanation one can give me other than "gut feeling" that would allow a trader to by-pass a trade that signals an entry that his backtesting and notes have classified as an edge. It just seems like you're all arguing in circles with this 'psychology vs edge' business. If a trader has specifically designed a system of trading by following strict rules that prove to give him an edge, then he must follow those rules each and every time with no exception otherwise the edge would be lost. It's simple logic really. It seems clear to me, you either have an edge or you do not. Lets be honest here, if you know that your 'edge' has the potential to falter now and again, then it has the potential to falter a x number of consecutive times just enough to make you question if it's a valid method or not, at which point it's no longer a question of discipline but a question of hope. I also find it kind of strange that it is rare that you see traders come out and say it plainly that they are making good money on a consistent basis by day trading, unless they are trying to sell something. I hope this post doesn't offend anyone and gets deleted once more. I don't see how my skepticism can't be of some value to this thread. I don't see anything wrong with questioning the validity of the profession.

I have my own theory that the reason most people fail in this business is because they are under-capitalized. Finding an edge is one thing, but can your account handle the draw-downs? No system is %100. Having the patience to trade through draw-downs is devastating to the psyche and perhaps that is where most mistakes are made (doubling up on contracts to make up for losses etc... )

I completely agree with this guy. Most jobs are repetitive in nature, and almost everyone endures them just for the paycheque. Show me a method that works and I'll grind it out if it means I can sit at home and have the freedom that day trading brings. I'm almost convinced that most people would be able to do this easily. Here's why it's not common, because it is my opinion that finding an edge is near impossible. I know that I'm still struggling to find one after countless hours of research, but maybe I'm just dumb. :crap:

Fair enough. If a person is fortunate enough to carry on and still pay for everything they need to live, more power to them! I for one have been reading and posting on a few day trading forums for awhile and I see a lot of optimism and hope among traders and I use to share that hope, but lately I'm starting to question a lot of these claims I see from traders. I thought I'd bring a little bit of skepticism to the table, or at least the perspective from a trader who has not yet seen the light at the end of the tunnel. I am currently that trader. I've been at this for over a year now. I have countless hours of screen time under my belt. I have programmed many different 'systems' and back-tested them to the last tick. My conclusion so far is that the market is very hard to conquer, if not impossible. Maybe I'm just burnt out, or desperate for a solution, but I see no light at the end of the tunnel.... and it sucks to be there. Discretionary trading just seems more like luck than anything to me... but if some traders out there actually have that magical 'intuition' that allows them to ride waves of money consistently time and time again, I applaud you, but I really don't think it can last... maybe I say that only because I can't do it...and honestly, I really hope that some of you can, because that means I might some day be able to as well. Right now I just can't wrap my head around it that people actually make a living doing this year after year without hitting any walls, unless they are wealthy to begin with.

I don't want to be "that guy" that sh**s on everyone's parade, but I will be anyway. If success in day trading is only acquired very slowly yet almost everyone who's drawn to the profession wants fast money then it begs the question of "why bleeping bother?" If it's going to take 5 years of watching your equity stay flat or fluctuate above and below your starting point, and then another 5 years before you can make any consistent gains at all ,then you're wasting a lot of time and money on something that's highly risky and painstakingly tough to do while trying to make a living. A million dollar a year job? I'd say that's unlikely given that the way you've just described trading makes it sound like a hit-and-miss operation. A person would be better invested getting a high paying job with benefits and pension plan while accumulate blue chip stock rather than gamble their life on a pipe dream in which the duration it will take to succeed may last as long as it would to get a nice retirement package. Just my 2 cents.