Look at the facts

Joe Ross

Active member
Messages
192
Likes
36
Have you ever made a small losing trade and thought, "It's all right; I'll win on the next one." The next trade comes along, and you lose. And then the next one is a loser, and so on, and so on...until finally, you are in a severe drawdown. You need to constantly monitor your progress, so that you never dig yourself into a hole that is virtually impossible to climb out of if you’re going to survive. Take a good hard look at the facts and make adjustments. Believe me, I know whereof I speak. I once lost 11 consecutive trades. The odds of doing that are astronomical as I later discovered. I don’t remember the exact figure, but it was something way more than a million to one.

Humans are notorious for their eternal optimism. Who wouldn't want to think they were making a killing in the markets. When you aren't profitable it's easy to fall into a state of denial. In order to build up our egos, we ignore how poorly things are going and tend to look at the world through rose-colored glasses. There are times when it is useful to look on the bright side. To win in the markets, you have to truly believe that you can succeed. Focusing on your limitations or the inherent challenges the markets often pose may get you down. And when that happens, you may think it's impossible to master the markets.

On the other hand, too much denial may prevent you from taking the steps you need to improve your trading performance. Denial can go too far. If you feed your account every month, you may not face the fact that your trading strategies just aren't working. Successful traders carefully monitor the process of trading. They keep a trade diary in order to identify those strategies that work from those that don't. They identify the specific market conditions that are optimal to their methods. They also report their moods in an attempt to isolate psychological factors from market factors. Some strategies just do not work under particular market conditions. And if you are bogged down with psychological factors, no trading method is going to produce a profit. It may be hard to face the facts, but unless you do, you'll never be able to identify your weaknesses, make midcourse corrections, and hone your trading skills.

It's hard to not be impacted by images and feelings that enter our consciousness without knowing it. Humans have a natural affinity to attach emotional significance to inanimate objects, like a stock, or a particular futures market of a forex pair. It is helpful most of the time. When you hear about a product or services failing to perform at par, such as a new computer running too hot or an airline that tends to arrive late and misplace luggage, you instinctively try to avoid such companies in your personal life. You may similarly avoid the supermarket that fails to store its raw meat properly or the drug store that sells over-the-counter medications with expiration dates that end within a week. We feel uneasy when we experience such events in our everyday lives. Avoiding products and businesses that don't meet our expectations is a useful rule of thumb. Unfortunately, the same processes also work for pleasant events. When we see an attractive model of a car that everyone is buying, we tend to want to get one for ourselves.

Don't be afraid to keep a trade diary. Identify what works and what does not. Don't let denial prevent you from taking a good honest look at what you're doing. You may be surprised to find that you are doing a lot right, and that by making a few minor changes, you can greatly improve your trading. The aware trader is the winning trader. By taking an honest look at your limitations, you'll be able to hone your trading skills, reach ever-higher levels of performance, and take home huge profits.
 
310842351_6feae586cd.jpg
 
Don't be afraid to keep a trade diary. Identify what works and what does not. Don't let denial prevent you from taking a good honest look at what you're doing.

This actually helps. Until recently, the very thought of logging my trades made me soil my underwear.. the notion was downright scary. But thanks to the Cap'n's reassuring words, I'll start to keep a record of what I'm doing.
 
Although in fairness, his point about giving a wide berth to shops that don't appropriately store raw meats is on the money. It's one of my pet hates too, Joe.
 
Yes! I'm not too late. :)

Joe, I have a query. Are the health benefits of doing fish fingers in the oven outweighed by the fact that they taste much better fried?
 
Yes i agree you shouldnt be results orientated moreover you should understand the impacts of variance in any probabilities based game.
 
Joe, I have a query. Are the health benefits of doing fish fingers in the oven outweighed by the fact that they taste much better fried?
I’ve just checked the facts and on paper, (greaseproof presumably) they’re better grilled.

But for my money, you can’t beat a nice piece of planked shad.

And I'm not afraid to keep a log of the shad I'm planking.

Joe is absolutely right. Humans do have a natural affinity to attach emotional significance to inanimate objects, like a nice stiff hairbrush with a rounded end.

He could do his beard with it afterwards.
 
I’ve just checked the facts and on paper, (greaseproof presumably) they’re better grilled.

But for my money, you can’t beat a nice piece of planked shad.

And I'm not afraid to keep a log of the shad I'm planking.

Joe is absolutely right. Humans do have a natural affinity to attach emotional significance to inanimate objects, like a nice stiff hairbrush with a rounded end.

He could do his beard with it afterwards.

Very good post, I am most grateful for your research.
 
I just don't know what I'd do without Joe's homespun wisdom.

It's rawther like reading a chapter out of Little House On the Prairie on a cold and rainy night.

DAMN! I just scalded my tongue with hot cocoa!
 
I’ve just checked the facts and on paper, (greaseproof presumably) they’re better grilled.

But for my money, you can’t beat a nice piece of planked shad.

And I'm not afraid to keep a log of the shad I'm planking.

Joe is absolutely right. Humans do have a natural affinity to attach emotional significance to inanimate objects, like a nice stiff hairbrush with a rounded end.

He could do his beard with it afterwards.

I think you find Joe sexually attractive. Would you like to comb his beard for him?
 
Not true and somebody should.

There's probably a planked shad in there that he's forgotten all about.

Mrs. Ross probably thinks its her.
 
. I once lost 11 consecutive trades. The odds of doing that are astronomical as I later discovered. I don’t remember the exact figure, but it was something way more than a million to one.

Good lord :rolleyes:

Million to one, eh?
 
Amazing that Joe, at last, had inadvertently posted something that can be discussed.

And it's even to do with trading.

The probability of X consecutive losing trades is dependent upon the Pw of your trading method.

I’m sure there’s a more current and sexy and useful formula for determining the probability of numbers of consecutive losses given the Pw, but one I have tucked away, from when I used to consider this sort of stuff, states that you have a more than 50% chance of encountering X consecutive losses is 20*(1-Pw). So with a system having a Pw of 0.5 you can expect a run of 10 consecutive losses. A Pw of 0.75, 5 and with 0.85, 3.
Of course, this is largely moot as Pw is rarely calculated correctly (or perhaps ‘usefully’ is a better word).

More interesting is that Joe would admit to a run like that given that he’s peddling trading training. It was fairly obviously a system with a Pw less than 0.5… a Why would any sane person trade a system with negative expectancy?

Perhaps Joe will break with his normal MO and actually come back and respond to some of these points.
 
More interesting is that Joe would admit to a run like that given that he’s peddling trading training. It was fairly obviously a system with a Pw less than 0.5… a Why would any sane person trade a system with negative expectancy?

Pw = % winners? Pw < 0.5 is only negative expectancy if average win <= average loss.

Nonetheless, his stating that 11 losers in a row is many millions to one against .... total horsesh1t ....
 
Top