Why Screen Time Is Important

[mr_cassandra 10]

But before I do remember one thing. Take everything you read in a forum or book, or hear from a guru or in a seminar with a grain of salt. Question everything. Only when you prove it to yourself, does it become the rule.

 

Thank you for reinforcing the most important mantra for any student of investing (or anything, for that matter).

 

The media and boards are full of learned sounding pontifications. You are tapdancing in a minefield unless you are willing and capable of checking out ideas for yourself.

 

You would be horrified to know how many people out there make long winded learned pontifications on things they've barely researched, if at all.

 

One example is people giving lectures about the out put call ratio, without ever mentioning that in recent years, its been totally skewed because of the inclusion of index options.

 

caveat emptor

Edited July 29, 2008 by Soultrader
request by member

[bootstrap 47]

i don't trade just patterns. so i don't base my decsions on the occurence of a single pattern. i take everything into consideration. which is what was the conditions before the pattern occured, what occured within the pattern and what is occuring on the other frames of reference. before anyone asks, i use 3 frames of reference.

 

so based on just the single pattern with no other frame of reference,

 

both are signs of volatility. is it currently occurring, no but it will in the near future.

 

but that is just me.

[gifropan 10]

I read your post with great interest. In fact I believe the only way to reduce whipsaws and cut down on over trading is to use multiple time frames. I have tried using multiple time frames in the past based on the concept of a main trend( longer time frame) , correction in the direction oposite to the main trend (shorter time frame), and then entering a trade in the smaller time frame in the direction of the main trend. The problem I had to try and resolve ( and still trying) is this:

 

Once your longer/main time frame gives you a signal that it is trending in a particular direction. when does you shorter time frame tell you that the correction is finished!

 

I tell you it is not so smiple. Then again if it were we would all be rich. Any comments are ideas would be most welcome.

[Bearbull 10]

I have tried using multiple time frames in the past based on the concept of a main trend( longer time frame) , correction in the direction oposite to the main trend (shorter time frame), and then entering a trade in the smaller time frame in the direction of the main trend. The problem I had to try and resolve ( and still trying) is this:

 

Once your longer/main time frame gives you a signal that it is trending in a particular direction. when does you shorter time frame tell you that the correction is finished!

 

I tell you it is not so smiple. Then again if it were we would all be rich. Any comments are ideas would be most welcome.

 

Check out the thread on Reversal or Retracement. Learning to read Price action via movement of price and activity via volume should provide the necessary clues, however it takes screentime and skill to recognise this in realtime trading;)

[Tams 20]

screen time is important, only if you can learn from your observation.

otherwise it is just going through the motion... ie. wasting time.

[TheNegotiator 13]

I'd agree with you there Tams and add one rather obvious caveat. It's only important if you can learn AND stay solvent long enough benefit from those experiences.

[Tams 20]

"Progress, far from consisting in change, depends on retentiveness. When change is absolute there remains no being to improve and no direction is set for possible improvement: and when experience is not retained, as among savages, infancy is perpetual. Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."

 

The Life of Reason (1905-1906) by George Santayana

[TheNegotiator 13]

Nice quote! I can see the retail lemmings now.

 

J/K (kind of)

[steve46 12]

I've been doing quite a bit of training in my office lately...and as a result I have discovered a lot about HOW we learn...

 

Some of the obvious and not so obvious things to note...HOW we learn depends on our senses and what we like to depend on for information...for instance some folks rely primarily on visual cues....some on tactile (how it "feels" to do something...I notice that some folks can learn by just "hearing" a description of what to do (reliance on hearing)...then they go and work it out themselves...

 

In this office because we use specific tools, screen time is critical to the success of the operator....especially in the bond market because it is dominated by professional interests and the one needs to react swiftly in order to take advantage of an opportunity. In that situation, we try to replay data sets so that the student can learn by seeing things in slower more relaxed environment.

 

Finally, where I see the greatest benefit of "screen time" is when I am teaching folks to read the "Time & Sales Strip"....Because that technique requires the operator to monitor multiple data sets concurrently and then make a decision, screen time and having an experienced person monitor and direct the student's attention at specific times in the process in critical. The nice part about it is that at some point it all "crystalizes" and you can see that the "light go on" as the student realizes what is happening...from then on its just a matter of repetition...

 

Hope this helps

[ReynaFan 10]

This is very interesting, especially as how it has evolved into psychology of learning, which my (main) profession centers on.

 

One thing I'd like to throw out there about adult practitioners and knowing/explaining/teaching what you know or can do, and that is stages of ability aligned to stages of cognizant awareness. After only trading for a year+, it seems like this applies, but you tell me.

 

Conscious Competence

Unconscious Competence

Conscious Incompetence

Unconscious Incompetence

 

I would argue that every trader falls into one of these 4 main categories. Knowing where you are is extremely important, in anything you do. It's not as easy as you think. I am conscious incompetent, working to become unconscious competent.

 

David

[steve46 12]

Hello David

 

I think there are a number of paradigms that can serve to organize our knowledge of this (or any) subject

What I have noticed is that those who aim to do something special, find a way to go beyond categorization....

So yes I think your systematic approach works (for me anyway)

 

In a practical terms, what I can tell you is that in terms of learning, the variables are time and talent....that is to say...if we assume that you have sufficient natural ability, intelligence, aptitude (whatever you call it) to learn how to do this, THEN what you need in addition, is access to information, proper guidance, and time to internalize the information. I suggest that the "time" needed is variable because some folks need a lot of repetition to learn a skill, while some can learn more quickly, and finally (and most importantly) there are folks who have the ability to go beyond what they are taught. They seem to have a innate ability to synthesize new information from what they observe around them

 

What I have learned in my short existence is that those who have this last talent, usually do very well in the financial markets because they can adapt quickly to the random, chaotic environments that we see today (check out the NYSE or CME exchanges during regular trading hours if you want to see good examples of what I am speaking about)...

 

and finally, in addition to adapting to noisy environments, this last group of folks has the ability to "make sense of"...or to find an "organizing principle" that can be used to their advantage..this arises from their ability to maintain their attention on solving a problem, even in the face of significant stress all around them....(something that we had to learn in my family early on lol).

 

So I hope this is of some help to you

[MightyMouse 12]

This is very interesting, especially as how it has evolved into psychology of learning, which my (main) profession centers on.

 

One thing I'd like to throw out there about adult practitioners and knowing/explaining/teaching what you know or can do, and that is stages of ability aligned to stages of cognizant awareness. After only trading for a year+, it seems like this applies, but you tell me.

 

Conscious Competence

Unconscious Competence

Conscious Incompetence

Unconscious Incompetence

 

I would argue that every trader falls into one of these 4 main categories. Knowing where you are is extremely important, in anything you do. It's not as easy as you think. I am conscious incompetent, working to become unconscious competent.

 

David

 

I would argue that the 4 categories are harder to apply to trading than other pursuits.

 

Its difficult to measure competence in trading because its not really something that you can break down into steps and evaluate, practice and perfect.

 

In tennis, for example, a player with a ranking of a 4.5 has mastered the following:

 

"Starting to master the use of power and spins and beginning to handle pace, has sound footwork, can control depth of shots and is beginning to vary game plan according to opponents. Can hit first serves with power and accuracy and place the second serve. Tends to overhit on difficult shots. Aggressive net play is common in doubles."

 

You can take a soda can and place it on the other side of the a tennis net and get a carriage of balls try to hit the can with a serve and eventually you will hit it and then you will begin to hit it more and more times in a row.

 

This is possible because you are dealing with a set of natural variables, wind, distance, arc, etc which are much easier to estimate and develop a mechanical system to get the get the ball to the can on a consistent basis.

 

If you were to see a 4.5 play a 6.0 you would be able to observe that the 6.0 is a much better player even if you know nothing about tennis. There is probably a 1 in 300 chance that a 4.5 can beat a 6.0. I am guessing at this. I was a 4.5 and played 6.0's and there was just no way for me to win. great experience and it does help you get to better levels but even tying them requires you to get to their level. Any

 

On the other hand, in trading, the mechanics are not quite that clear and there is no measurement system or method of practicing that can allow you to achieve expert level the way you can in other pursuits.

 

I think the only way you become an expert in trading is when you decide to call yourself an expert which to me means we are all experts or none of us are experts.

 

One of my trades that I do takes advantage of when traders get "stubborn and stuck". While I am, say, long and we are near a high for the day and I am observing the T&S, I see both large and small orders entering the market and then exiting the market and price continues higher. Obviously, I do not know if they are they exact same traders, but the fact that the market is pushing higher is indicative to me that traders are getting stopped out of trades.The activity is a series of trades by traders trying to push price back down to get out of shorts and traders trying to push price up trying to find the stops of the shorts who are underwater. They continue to short and provide stops to propel the market higher. These short traders "know" that resistance should hold or that there is supply up here and are not detecting that price wants to move up..

 

Large traders can enter trades in small orders but small traders do not enter trades in large orders. If it were all inexperienced traders who are taking the losses, you would expect to see streams of small orders and very few large blocks going through. That is not the case.You do see lots of small orders, but at the same time there are many very large orders as well going through. In this scenario, you have institutional size trades losing and acting exactly like amateurs who trade small size. So, you will find "experts" acting as amateurs and losing to amateurs in the market, but you do not find experts losing to amateurs in tennis.

 

If the institutional traders who destroyed our financial system and brought the USA to the brink were "expert" traders it wouldn't have happened.

 

MM

[ReynaFan 10]

Steve46,

 

What you describe is only loosely related to the framework I propose. What you describe is back to the argument of student A and student B. What I describe is more about the mentor. Your comments show characteristics of unconscious competence.

 

I hope this is of help to you.

 

David

[FXGirl 10]

ReynaFan: Are you sure that Steve46 is at the level of unconscious competence and not at the level of conscious competence of unconscious competence? LOL I love Maslow too. I think that there are a lot of ways to describe how we learn. If a particular categorization is helpful, great. I like implicit/explict learning myself.

 

Sounds like Steve has got a pretty good handle on how people learn and how to help others.

Edited April 14, 2011 by FXGirl

[ReynaFan 10]

HI FXGirl,

 

The unconscious competence characterization of steve46's comments are not insults. There is no value judgement implied in this organization. In fact, I'm fairly certain that steve46 is a more experienced, more knowledgeable, and more successful trader than I am.

 

The comments come out of some philosophies I hold that also apply to bootstraps OP.

 

First some clarification. Unconscious competence means first and foremost a competent trader. Second it also means that one may not be fully aware of all the the thought processes behind each judgement call/decision that is made to be competent. Conscious competence would mean that a competent trader has analyzed their own thinking processes to the point of being able to teach what is seen, what is questioned, what connections are made, what is analyzed, what is predicted, what is known from prior experience, what is known from prior knowledge (and proably many more). What is even more important is being able to teach the how and why for all of the above said and being able to teach how and why they relate and change depending on the free-flowing analysis of each in real time. Unconscious competence means that one does all this resulting in competence; conscious competence means one is so aware that they can teach it.

 

What leads to competence? Steve46 proposes that X percentage can do it because they have what it takes "innate ability" and put the time in, . It's this thought, that a special gene or innate ability, that drives success in trading that I disagree with. Sure, you have to have mental capacity to be successful, but I believe it's not a mystical innate have or have not. I believe that there are traders out there who would also argue that they could take people with requisite analytical thinking skills and teach them to be competent traders; not really talking about following a system of when this line crosses this line buy or sell etc.

 

The OP propositioned that we all know the three time frames and how to use them. He seems on the verge of being able to explain/teach his own thinking processes to take this from a procedural understanding to a conceptual understanding, which then allows a different level of application. Other posters have commented that when he posts, it always makes them see and understand things in a new way that changes how they understand all the variables working in chaos.

 

I'm interested in hearing more from bootstrap about this.

 

Maslow developed the hiearchy of needs from necessities of life to self-actualization.

 

None of this is meant to be condescending or insulting. I am a learner in this.

[steve46 12]

HI FXGirl,

 

The unconscious competence characterization of steve46's comments are not insults. There is no value judgement implied in this organization. In fact, I'm fairly certain that steve46 is a more experienced, more knowledgeable, and more successful trader than I am.

 

The comments come out of some philosophies I hold that also apply to bootstraps OP.

 

First some clarification. Unconscious competence means first and foremost a competent trader. Second it also means that one may not be fully aware of all the the thought processes behind each judgement call/decision that is made to be competent. Conscious competence would mean that a competent trader has analyzed their own thinking processes to the point of being able to teach what is seen, what is questioned, what connections are made, what is analyzed, what is predicted, what is known from prior experience, what is known from prior knowledge (and proably many more). What is even more important is being able to teach the how and why for all of the above said and being able to teach how and why they relate and change depending on the free-flowing analysis of each in real time. Unconscious competence means that one does all this resulting in competence; conscious competence means one is so aware that they can teach it.

 

What leads to competence? Steve46 proposes that X percentage can do it because they have what it takes "innate ability" and put the time in, . It's this thought, that a special gene or innate ability, that drives success in trading that I disagree with. Sure, you have to have mental capacity to be successful, but I believe it's not a mystical innate have or have not. I believe that there are traders out there who would also argue that they could take people with requisite analytical thinking skills and teach them to be competent traders; not really talking about following a system of when this line crosses this line buy or sell etc.

 

The OP propositioned that we all know the three time frames and how to use them. He seems on the verge of being able to explain/teach his own thinking processes to take this from a procedural understanding to a conceptual understanding, which then allows a different level of application. Other posters have commented that when he posts, it always makes them see and understand things in a new way that changes how they understand all the variables working in chaos.

 

I'm interested in hearing more from bootstrap about this.

 

Maslow developed the hiearchy of needs from necessities of life to self-actualization.

 

None of this is meant to be condescending or insulting. I am a learner in this.

 

I think I understand your comment (sir or madam)

 

To be clear I do think that at any point in time, only a small percentage of folks are going to be able (meaning that by innate temperment, by "nurture", whatever you want to call it) they will have the basics necessary to succeed in this very demanding profession)...I say this because of my experience (of many years), and of seeing many candidates come and go after trying unsuccessfully to learn how to do this..

Clearly one can overcome a lack of talent, by being motivated and working hard...I have seen that several times over my years, AND just as clearly I have seen seemingly intelligent people fail because they were unable to learn to manage stress (specifically their reactions to stress).

 

I believe that there are people who by luck, or by design, were raised in such way by their parents that they possess a specific type of character....again to be more specific I call that character "adult"......To me the term "adult" means that these people can look at the environment and make sense of the data around them in a dispassionate way...AND if the decisions they have made are unproductive, they are able to disengage their egos and make the necessary adjustments in order to be successful...

 

When I review applications for my classes I look for folks who display what I call "adult self esteem" first....THEN I look for education, experience and other factors...I do this because I have only 24 months to work with them, and I know that adult behavior and mindset is one of the best long term "indicators" of success in this business.

[FXGirl 10]

Hi, ReynaFan: Opps, sorry my sense of humor didn’t come across in my post. I understand that you weren’t being critical of Steve46.

 

One of the criticisms of Maslow’s description of competence was that if you are at the level of unconscious competence, you can’t teach or mentor what you know because the process is still unconscious. Critics suggested that a fifth category be added called conscious competence. This would mean, as you have clearly described, that you would be able to articulate what you know and thus be able to teach others.

 

Another way to describe this process is with implicit verses explicit learning. As we sit in front of the charts day after day, we see certain patterns recurring many times. After a while we subconsciously recognize those patterns. This is what we call trader’s intuition. You have a hunch or “feel” something about what the market is doing and you are able to use this in your trading decisions. This is implicit learning.

 

After more time in front of the charts seeing these pattern many more times, our level of awareness of these patterns changes and moves up to a conscious level and we are able to say what it is we are seeing in the charts. This is explicit learning. We still have our hunch, recognition of the pattern, but now we can share that with others because that recognition is at a conscious level.

 

I think it takes years to develop market pattern recognition at the unconscious, implicit level, and years more to move to the explicit level. But I wonder if there isn’t a way to speed it up. Does having a mentor pointing out the patterns and telling you what to look for speed up the process? Would this mean that you’d have to see the pattern a fewer number of times to have it fully integrated? What else could speed up the process?

[ammo 10]

Hi, ReynaFan: Opps, sorry my sense of humor didn’t come across in my post. I understand that you weren’t being critical of Steve46.

 

One of the criticisms of Maslow’s description of competence was that if you are at the level of unconscious competence, you can’t teach or mentor what you know because the process is still unconscious. Critics suggested that a fifth category be added called conscious competence. This would mean, as you have clearly described, that you would be able to articulate what you know and thus be able to teach others.

 

Another way to describe this process is with implicit verses explicit learning. As we sit in front of the charts day after day, we see certain patterns recurring many times. After a while we subconsciously recognize those patterns. This is what we call trader’s intuition. You have a hunch or “feel” something about what the market is doing and you are able to use this in your trading decisions. This is implicit learning.

 

After more time in front of the charts seeing these pattern many more times, our level of awareness of these patterns changes and moves up to a conscious level and we are able to say what it is we are seeing in the charts. This is explicit learning. We still have our hunch, recognition of the pattern, but now we can share that with others because that recognition is at a conscious level.

 

I think it takes years to develop market pattern recognition at the unconscious, implicit level, and years more to move to the explicit level. But I wonder if there isn’t a way to speed it up. Does having a mentor pointing out the patterns and telling you what to look for speed up the process? Would this mean that you’d have to see the pattern a fewer number of times to have it fully integrated? What else could speed up the process?

 

it's called learning by osmossis,it's an unmeasurable added benefit to years of study