Trading with Moscow Rules

i've been listening to the le carre season on radio 4 and they mention 'moscow rules' a lot.

apparently they are rules designed for working in a hostile environment.

...

# Assume nothing.
# Murphy is right.
# Never go against your gut; it is your operational antenna.
# Don't look back; you are never completely alone.
# Everyone is potentially under opposition control.
# Go with the flow, blend in.
# Vary your pattern and stay within your cover.
# Any operation can be aborted. If it feels wrong, it is wrong.
# Maintain a natural pace.
# Lull them into a sense of complacency.
# Build in opportunity, but use it sparingly.
# Float like a butterfly, sting like a bee. (borrowed from Muhammad Ali, aka Cassius Clay.)
# Don't harass the opposition.
# There is no limit to a human being's ability to rationalize the truth.
# Technology will always let you down.
# Pick the time and place for action.
# Keep your options open.
# Once is an accident. Twice is coincidence. Three times is an enemy action

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Moscow_Rules

given trading is a hostile environment its not surprising that some of the rules seem quite good for trading too

Cool, but the one thing I'd be wary of with things like this is the rules that 'personalise' the market. The market is wholly IM-personal, and neither knows nor cres whether you win or lose, live or die. I see so many traders on this site get this wrong (not necessarily saying you do OT).

So for example "lull them into a sense of complacency". Who is THEM? things like that aren't that helpful imho. But not to say some of the other rules aren't.

yes. i do say some. its only meant as a bit of fun. and just to be clear some of the rules wouldn't apply or make sense.

Not sure about the relevance to trading, but am with the OP on the whole Radio 4 Le Carré thing. iPlayer/Listen again is brilliant. (I use "Freecorder" to record things like that).

That last one ("Once is an accident. Twice is coincidence. Three times is an enemy action") is nicked from James Bond isn't it?

i think what appealed to me was the idea 'a hostile environment' needs 'rules' comes out in many fields.

mont

what struck me was the deference and politeness of the words seems so old fashioned in these days of in 'yer face' yelling.

oiltanker said:

i think what appealed to me was the idea 'a hostile environment' needs 'rules' comes out in many fields.

Click to expand...

Well I think this is where we differ as I simply don't see the market as hostile. That for me is exactly the sort of personalisation I'm talking about.

I'm taking it too seriously aren't I? Sorry.

reading part 1 i think you're more plugged into the order flow?

i'm just a humble self learning spread better with a chart trading one's own money with no order book clerk mates.

the ease with which one can lose money makes it a pretty hostile place for me.

if that is personalisation then i'm guilty

oiltanker said:

mont

what struck me was the deference and politeness of the words seems so old fashioned in these days of in 'yer face' yelling.

Click to expand...

Yes, absolutely. I think the original books (which are now getting on a bit) were set in an earlier period than that in which they were published, and the dramatisation may be trying to reflect this. Interesting the deference shown by the police inspector to GS.

There's even more of that in the "Paul Temple"s that are currently on Radio 7.(I'm having a nostalgia-fest). In one of them, he (a writer who dabbles as a private eye in his spare time, but is a proper gent and no mistake full time), "summons" a police inspector round to his flat, who duly arrives within 30 minutes! Don't think that would work nowadays somehow