9 Net winning trades, the road to being a Pro Trader?

[Chalky_trader]

Firstly this is not my Idea, someone else on this forum introduced me to it a while ago.

I brought it up and we had a recent discussion on another thread and I thought that maybe a thread of its own was in order.

It’s a great challenge in a number of ways, it inspires discipline, trade planning as well as goal setting, yet all of the usual % account balance risk arguments are irrelevant.

So here goes

The challenge is to turn £10 into £10,000 in 9 net winning trades
9 NWT examples

9 wins 0 losses
18 wins and 9 losses
30 wins and 21 losses
50 wins and 41 losses
150 wins and 141 losses

lets face it, if you aren't making 9 net winning trades then you are most probably losing anyway!

Trades are taken on a 2:1 Risk reward basis and 50% of the net winnings are risked on each trade
Each trade takes you one step forwards or backwards on the P&L Ladder, losing on the first trade means its game over and you are down £10

You can start with £50 & target 50K if you wish

Anyway I thought I would give it a go in 2017,

anyone else care to join me

I wont be posting entries, i'm not into trade calling, but will post results, and reasons for the trade when i can I suggest anyone else wanting to do it do the same.

We will just have to trust each other there's nothing to be gained by making up phony results


Chalky

 

[forker]

looking forward to seeing the results

 

[counter_violent]

Firstly this is not my Idea, someone else on this forum introduced me to it a while ago.

I brought it up and we had a recent discussion on another thread and I thought that maybe a thread of its own was in order.

It’s a great challenge in a number of ways, it inspires discipline, trade planning as well as goal setting, yet all of the usual % account balance risk arguments are irrelevant.

So here goes

The challenge is to turn £10 into £10,000 in 9 net winning trades
9 NWT examples

9 wins 0 losses
18 wins and 9 losses
30 wins and 21 losses
50 wins and 41 losses
150 wins and 141 losses

lets face it, if you aren't making 9 net winning trades then you are most probably losing anyway!

Trades are taken on a 2:1 Risk reward basis and 50% of the net winnings are risked on each trade
Each trade takes you one step forwards or backwards on the P&L Ladder, losing on the first trade means its game over and you are down £10

You can start with £50 & target 50K if you wish

Anyway I thought I would give it a go in 2017,

anyone else care to join me

I wont be posting entries, i'm not into trade calling, but will post results, and reasons for the trade when i can I suggest anyone else wanting to do it do the same.

We will just have to trust each other there's nothing to be gained by making up phony results


Chalky

Good luck, but I think it's doomed.

Bear with me, perhaps try this little experiment.

Predicting instrument direction and timing a move is pretty much guesswork. So lets do a little exercise. Say you take a coin and flip it for direction, heads for long and tails for short. Once direction is determined, then flip the coin Two more times, If original flip was heads, then the Two consecutive flips would also need to be heads for a successful outcome. If One of the Two flips is tails, then it's an unsuccessful outcome.

If you manage to do this coin flip process Nine times consecutively, then in theory you could say that it's possible to do the same with the trading to achieve the 10k target.

 

[Chalky_trader]

Oh dear

Here we go again, ive already had this discussion

Take trade 7 as an example

a loser takes you back to trade 6

a winner takes you to trade 8

so you can gave 3 consecutive losers, which will take you back to trade 4

and then a winner takes you to trade 5

so you need 9 NET winners......not consecutive winners

Make sense now?

 

[counter_violent]

Oh dear

Here we go again, ive already had this discussion

Take trade 7 as an example

a loser takes you back to trade 6

a winner takes you to trade 8

so you can gave 3 consecutive losers, which will take you back to trade 4

and then a winner takes you to trade 5

so you need 9 NET winners......not consecutive winners

Make sense now?

OK as you wish, but with a R:R of 2:1 then I don't think we need to be talking about bouncing around between trades 5,6 and 7 in the series. Will be lucky to ever make it to first base. Even if you did manage to get up to trade 5 or beyond, psychologically you wouldn't be able to detach from the money at stake and therefore bottle it.

 

[Chalky_trader]

OK as you wish, but with a R:R of 2:1 then I don't think we need to be talking about bouncing around between trades 5,6 and 7 in the series. Will be lucky to ever make it to first base. Even if you did manage to get up to trade 5 or beyond, psychologically you wouldn't be able to detach from the money at stake and therefore bottle it.

Like i've said before there's so much negativity in these forums, where has all the positivity gone.....

I thought id give it a go as a new years resolution and a bit of fun


So to answer your post,...Lucky to get past first base, is 2:1 RR to high for you? what kind of RR do you go for?

You are correct in some of what you say though i have tried it before, more than once and either lost or bottled it and banked the profit when the numbers started to get bigger, last time though i was starting off with £50 looking to make £50K.

Also as the challenge progresses you instinctively start to get more choosy with the trades as the stakes rise which is wrong. This is equivalent to the tilt in poker (google it anyone who hasn't heard of that).

All in all however, in my opinion, it is a great way to expose your weaknesses as a trader and make you REALLY think of the Psychology behind it with little financial risk.

And if i or anyone else who tries it fails, we wont have lost a fortune and may learn a whole lot about our own trading along the way.

He who dares wins Rodney

 

[metrader]

I think that most of the members are realistic rather than negative. They mainly learned the hard way, so they may apear a bit negative after the experience.

I've read about predetermined r/r only in books written by non traders and in real trading didn't work for me. The market doesn't care that much about r/r of yours. I've tried quite a few get rich quick systems similar to one you hope it may work and again they didn't work for me. I guess it's a (painful) process a trader has to go through on his journey towards success – in my case I have to try it myself to see it not working and I think most of the new traders are like that. In that sence it is a road to being a pro trader as you put it, albeit a losing part.

Who knows, you may prove others wrong and make 50k out of £50 in 9 net winning trades? Whatever the case it's a bit of fun

 

[Chalky_trader]

I think that most of the members are realistic rather than negative. They mainly learned the hard way, so they may apear a bit negative after the experience.

I've read about predetermined r/r only in books written by non traders and in real trading didn't work for me. The market doesn't care that much about r/r of yours. I've tried quite a few get rich quick systems similar to one you hope it may work and again they didn't work for me. I guess it's a (painful) process a trader has to go through on his journey towards success – in my case I have to try it myself to see it not working and I think most of the new traders are like that. In that sence it is a road to being a pro trader as you put it, albeit a losing part.

Who knows, you may prove others wrong and make 50k out of £50 in 9 net winning trades? Whatever the case it's a bit of fun

I get your point, 100% with you on normal trading run it till it falters and close it

for this though scalping the DAX is my prefered method, if i think i can use a 10 point stop then 20 point target is ok and achievable

sometimes 7 point stop 14 point tgt

Bit of fun and a learning experience is where i'm coming from

DAX is so slow theres nothing for me ATM though

 

[metrader]

I get your point, 100% with you on normal trading run it till it falters and close it

for this though scalping the DAX is my prefered method, if i think i can use a 10 point stop then 20 point target is ok and achievable

sometimes 7 point stop 14 point tgt

Bit of fun and a learning experience is where i'm coming from

DAX is so slow theres nothing for me ATM though

Maybe it changed in the meantime, but the last time I scalped DAX it used to hit 1/1 spot on and then reverse (based on my entries). At that time it was an exception for me to get more than 1/1 and would go for higher success rate with r/r mostly below 1/1. Can't see 2 to 1 working on DAX (scalping) especially with that kind of targets

 

[dbphoenix]

I think that most of the members are realistic rather than negative. They mainly learned the hard way, so they may apear a bit negative after the experience.

I've read about predetermined r/r only in books written by non traders and in real trading didn't work for me. The market doesn't care that much about r/r of yours. I've tried quite a few get rich quick systems similar to one you hope it may work and again they didn't work for me. I guess it's a (painful) process a trader has to go through on his journey towards success – in my case I have to try it myself to see it not working and I think most of the new traders are like that. In that sence it is a road to being a pro trader as you put it, albeit a losing part.

Who knows, you may prove others wrong and make 50k out of £50 in 9 net winning trades? Whatever the case it's a bit of fun

I agree with metrader (who cares?). The R:R thing has never made any sense to me. If price is running, let it run. The NQ, for example, is up 20pts so far and still going. Why choke it off?

But your experiment is well worth doing. Everybody should go through this process. It's all part of developing a robust trading plan.

 

[Pipstream]

Firstly this is not my Idea, someone else on this forum introduced me to it a while ago.

I brought it up and we had a recent discussion on another thread and I thought that maybe a thread of its own was in order.

It’s a great challenge in a number of ways, it inspires discipline, trade planning as well as goal setting, yet all of the usual % account balance risk arguments are irrelevant.

So here goes

The challenge is to turn £10 into £10,000 in 9 net winning trades
9 NWT examples

9 wins 0 losses
18 wins and 9 losses
30 wins and 21 losses
50 wins and 41 losses
150 wins and 141 losses

lets face it, if you aren't making 9 net winning trades then you are most probably losing anyway!

Trades are taken on a 2:1 Risk reward basis and 50% of the net winnings are risked on each trade
Each trade takes you one step forwards or backwards on the P&L Ladder, losing on the first trade means its game over and you are down £10

You can start with £50 & target 50K if you wish

Anyway I thought I would give it a go in 2017,

anyone else care to join me

I wont be posting entries, i'm not into trade calling, but will post results, and reasons for the trade when i can I suggest anyone else wanting to do it do the same.

We will just have to trust each other there's nothing to be gained by making up phony results


Chalky

Interesting game!

I would like to ask what time frame you are intending to use for this? Is not a 2:1 RR more achievable on say a 1H TF than on a 5m but then the position size / SL would need to be adjusted accordingly to achieve the same overall risk amount?

Depending on the TF used what would you then anticipate being the total duration to achieve your net 9 wins? Does this not depend on the average success rate of the strategy you are using - assuming you are using the same strategy throughout?

E.g. a NWT of 18 wins and 9 losses (27 trades) is a success rate of about two thirds whereas a NWT of 150 wins and 141 losses (291 trades) only requires a success rate of about a half- but a NWT of 9 wins 0 losses would of course need a 100% success rate.

But maybe that is making it all too analytical! I am intrigued to see how this works out!

 

[Signalcalc]

Shouldn't the question be about probabilities? What is the probability that this can be achieved? If you can work out the probability then you can work out if it's worth the effort in the first place. But then to work out the probabilty you would need to know the strategy.

Anyway, I've got a massive bag of popcorn which I'm sure will probably be eaten many times over before this thread ends [emoji23]

 

[darktone]

We not all negative Chalky.
GL :clover:

 

[Oscar Reed]

Firstly this is not my Idea, someone else on this forum introduced me to it a while ago.

I brought it up and we had a recent discussion on another thread and I thought that maybe a thread of its own was in order.

It’s a great challenge in a number of ways, it inspires discipline, trade planning as well as goal setting, yet all of the usual % account balance risk arguments are irrelevant.

So here goes

The challenge is to turn £10 into £10,000 in 9 net winning trades
9 NWT examples

9 wins 0 losses
18 wins and 9 losses
30 wins and 21 losses
50 wins and 41 losses
150 wins and 141 losses

lets face it, if you aren't making 9 net winning trades then you are most probably losing anyway!

Trades are taken on a 2:1 Risk reward basis and 50% of the net winnings are risked on each trade
Each trade takes you one step forwards or backwards on the P&L Ladder, losing on the first trade means its game over and you are down £10

You can start with £50 & target 50K if you wish

Anyway I thought I would give it a go in 2017,

anyone else care to join me

I wont be posting entries, i'm not into trade calling, but will post results, and reasons for the trade when i can I suggest anyone else wanting to do it do the same.

We will just have to trust each other there's nothing to be gained by making up phony results


Chalky

Anybody reported this thread to @tar

Will have just one go at if you fail?
Once you done it what will you do next? @Chalky_trader

Not a lot of wiggle room. IMO
Also better on direct market with DAX and not a chart. IMO
Just looking for those sweeping trade's where you are picked up for the ride.
Looking for the trade to go into the green on entry.
In and out very quick.
But would need a bigger account.

All the best

 

[tar]

Anybody reported this thread to @tar


All the best

I like the idea , initially - like cv - i thought 9 consecutive winnings .

Read more here :

http://www.trade2win.com/boards/home-trader/218130-how-get-investors-my-trading-3.html

 

[tar]

Looking for more than 50% win rate with 2:1 reward to risk isnt easy . But hence he is looking to turn 10 quids - should start with more - into 10k he can take all the time he wants to pick his trades , no rush really .

Swinging long equities is a good candidate for this strategy .

I may open a similar journal .

 

[tar]

Dont forget to get a vendors badge BTW

 

[Chalky_trader]

Dont forget to get a vendors badge BTW

Id love one.

and maybe a T shirt

 

[Chalky_trader]

Thanks for the feedback

In terms of strategy its fairly simple

AB=CD retracements in a trending market

Retests of breakouts at significant SR

failed breakouts

only interested in DAX and maybe US30

Its been relatively flat last couple days, consolidating at a daily resistance

NFP today may liven it up this PM, looking forward to getting started

Ill give myself 10 goes at it, not expecting it to be easy, its a challenge after all!

 

[Chalky_trader]

Interesting game!

I would like to ask what time frame you are intending to use for this? Is not a 2:1 RR more achievable on say a 1H TF than on a 5m but then the position size / SL would need to be adjusted accordingly to achieve the same overall risk amount?

Depending on the TF used what would you then anticipate being the total duration to achieve your net 9 wins? Does this not depend on the average success rate of the strategy you are using - assuming you are using the same strategy throughout?

E.g. a NWT of 18 wins and 9 losses (27 trades) is a success rate of about two thirds whereas a NWT of 150 wins and 141 losses (291 trades) only requires a success rate of about a half- but a NWT of 9 wins 0 losses would of course need a 100% success rate.

But maybe that is making it all too analytical! I am intrigued to see how this works out!

timeframe is 5 mins chart, haven't thought too much about anything else