Is all discipline not the same?

[SOCRATES]

I am very disappointed with you DB, very disappointed indeed.

 

[SOCRATES]

JP Morgan was probably already dead even before Mark Douglas was born.

Jesse Livermore was an honourable man, he was bankrupted and handed over everything he owned, and solemnly promised he would pay off all his creditors, which he did eventually, to the last cent, when he got on his feet again.

So from where do you invent such rubbish, only to see yourself in print in front of an international audience ?

I now find you more disappointing the more I read your posts. You can put this nonsense past the membership but you cannot get it past me, as I am very well informed as you know and am in possession of the true facts, and not spin like you, and don't laugh again.

 

[Quenkish]

dbphoenix & socrates

My friends a great trader & internationally renowned author Joe Ross has posted a very informative article about trading on the discussion board, what do you guys do?
Try to prove who has the biggest ego & turn it into an argument & personality clash.

I think you could both learn from the author of the post.

 

[dbphoenix]

Socrates, what on earth are you talking about? I was referring to the passage quoted. How could Wyckoff or Livermore know anything about Mark Douglas?

If you weren't so eager to make me look foolish, you'd read what's written and understand that the content of the paragraph quoted from Ross and the bulk of Mark Douglas' work originates with the work done in the early part of the twentieth century. I'm not attacking Ross or anyone else, just pointing out that this advice is nothing new.

You might try extracting that very long pole before pursuing this further.

 

[SOCRATES]

dbphoenix & socrates

My friends a great trader & internationally renowned author Joe Ross has posted a very informative article about trading on the discussion board, what do you guys do?
Try to prove who has the biggest ego & turn it into an argument & personality clash.

I think you could both learn from the author of the post.

Dont't talk nonsense, this is about what is morally acceptable to put in front of an international audience. It has nothing to do with Mr Ross, it just happens that it has come to a head on this thread that he has started. I am certain that Mr Ross is well capable of taking care of himself without any help.

This is not about ego, it is about what ought not to be said because it is not correct.

When something is not correct, it has to be rectified by those who know for the benefit of those who do not know, otherwise all of you would fall victim to all sorts of people telling lies.

The great majority are not in a position to do this. This is because they are not in possession of the true facts. I am. Therefore I have the moral responsibility to put the record straight so that you are not misdirected, so that you do not have to suffer doubt, so that you are not disempowered by having the wrong information.What you have witnessed here tonight is just an example of what goes on, and has been going on for a long time, unchecked.

If you truly wish to become the vicitm of misdirection I will gladly stop posting.

Incidentally, I do not seek to learn anything any more. This is because I have evolved a methodology perfected over many years that serves me very well indeed.

I very rarely ask a question on this website or elsewhere. This is because I have all the information I need and want and have mastered it. If I do ask a question I assure you it is not to seek knowledge, but most likely to have something confirmed which is a very different proposition indeed.

If you look through my posts you will read that 99% are either answers or explanations.

I respectfully suggest you read them all before you comment again.

And a very good night to you Sir.

 

[SOCRATES]

And by the way, since you are obviously Greek, I will tell you and you will appreciate that I adopted this Name in honour of your great philosopher, who was sentenced to death by drinking hemlock on the charge of corrupting the young. What he was doing was teaching people to reason, and to think for themselves, and to act, in accordance with their reasoning. People who can do this are not popular, because they are able to slice through nonsense like a knife through butter.

One must be in awe of his personal bravery, because he refused to recant. He chose to drink the poison so that his name would be recorded for posterity, so that history could be witness that the trufh cannot and should not be supressed, whatever the cost.

This is the reason why I say the things I do say, that can stand up to the most ferocious scrutiny, as there is too much nonsense bandied about this topic for my liking, by people who should best keep quiet and keep their ignorance to themselves and not proceed to argue against all odds in their obstinate attempts to corrupt everyone who listens to them.

 

[dbphoenix]

This reminds me of Emily Latella's defense of violins on television . . .

 

[SOCRATES]

Socrates, what on earth are you talking about? I was referring to the passage quoted. How could Wyckoff or Livermore know anything about Mark Douglas?

If you weren't so eager to make me look foolish, you'd read what's written and understand that the content of the paragraph quoted from Ross and the bulk of Mark Douglas' work originates with the work done in the early part of the twentieth century. I'm not attacking Ross or anyone else, just pointing out that this advice is nothing new.

You might try extracting that very long pole before pursuing this further.

Don't put spin on it. That is all.

 

[SOCRATES]

don't see why we have to get so esoteric about an issue that is really very simple...discipline regardless of it's sphere of application is simply the ability to subordinate what you think you want to a lower priority to that which you actually know you really need in order to achieve some desired outcome...ask any athlete who knows he has to roll out of bed at 5.30am to train when he would much rather stay where he is etc ..much more interesting debate is how that ability is acquired if it is acquired at all...

Very interesting post, Chumpy. But of course it goes over the heads of most.

What really puzzles me is whether the bedrock of ability is a natural gift which is then refined, or, whether refining by persistent effort confers the gift or, whether it is half and half.

The subordination of what is wanted, or percieved to be wanted is what has to be suppressed in order to achieve what is needed.

Couldn't have put it better myself, frankly.

This is what the great majority cannot do , will not do, or for some reason that baffles me, or succeed in preventing themselves from doing.

Kind Regards.

 

[nine]

A plea to Socrates

Very interesting post, Chumpy. But of course it goes over the heads of most.

Socrates,

As much as I agree with many things you say about trading I find your posting style wordy and arrogant. I think this might have been obvious to the earlier poster who commented about two egos going at it. If you don't see the arrogance and egotism then you might reread the sentence in red above and consider that similar sentences are repeated in a number of your posts.

You might also reconsider the torture you proposed when you said that someone above should read all of your posts before commenting.

On the good side, you have saved db from my criticisms. This is partly because his posts on T2W are far less arrogant than those on the earlier board but also because you have made him appear comparatively mild mannered and, on occasion, almost cuddly.

I do enjoy the content of many of your posts, especially when you have something specific to say, so, if you care for me at all, perhaps you might stay more focused?

Kind Regards,
Kiwi

 

[the blades]

I do enjoy the content of many of your posts, especially when you have something specific to sayKiwi

Any chance you could point the rest of us in the direction of those "three sentences" amongst the endless pages of drivel?

UTB

 

[thepoliteone]

back to the topic...

Whilst I'd hate to interrupt the usual round of slanging matches, I just wanted to make a quick point on discipline - that was what we were talking about wasn't it?

I often get up at 6 and go for a run along the canal near my flat. When most people hear I do this they think I'm mad, sacrificing my lie-ins, running at that hour, I'll hurt myself in the cold and all the other excuses people make for self-improvement. I can't say it's exactly fun when it's raining or so foggy I can't see the path but I know something they don't - it's not just the physical improvement I seek but the willpower improvement that comes with it as well.

All it takes is the discipline to get up 30 mins earlier, not much by any means but aren't most people just too comfortable in their routines or too soft in their minds and bodies?

To give my answer to Socrates' question on if the ability is natural or can be obtained, in my own case it was half and half I feel - I had a drive to improve myself and be better than others, and I read a few books (Robin Sharma, Ross Enamait (boxing coach)) which made me realise that quite plainly I had to stop being lazy! I think the majority are too happy in their little lives of TV soaps, game shows and the like - the 'proles' of 1984 if you will.

Regards,
-TPO.

 

[chump]

Look leaving personalities aside I am going to defend this statement "But of course it goes over the heads of most." made above by another poster. After many years in business I have arrived at exactly the same conclusion and I have the grey hairs to prove it

It is nothing short of amazing to see the volume of people out there who can't achieve personal honesty (for clarity I am talking here about how they view themselves and their interelationships),but who would rather practice reality avoidance and therefore in that sense the above statement holds true....not actually sure I would describe in the same words as used "going over their head"..think I prefer the approach that many people actually move their bloody heads almost continuously so they don't have to face reality because in doing so they would have to develop the discpline to make hard choices where all outcomes might very well be negative ,but some more sever than others...we are of course talking of things more dire than the discpline involved in making oneslf roll of bed at 5.30 !

Topical actually , I'll tell a story from yesterday without mentioning personal details....tenant of mine has been struggling to meet his living costs for nearly 6 months and I have been working with him over that period..hey this guy makes poor decisions and from that takes poor choices ,but he doesn't realise it...so he's got a problem..now due to a medical problem his income situation in the future is on a probability basis going to be a damned sight worse than it is now...indeed IMO if left he will undoubtedly encounter a debt level he can't handle (to arrive at that conclusion isn't rocket science ,just number crunching)...now despite he knows is circumstances are going to worsen does he plan forward and try to find an option to reduce his living expenses ?..no he just wants to ignore it going forward and presumably deal with it afterwards simply because he wants to stay where he is living for as long as he can hoping presumably that some miracle will come along and rescue him..he's practicing avoidance..LOL unfortunately I don't have that luxury so I made the decision for him...if you are wondering what this has to do with discpline and trading..next time you are in a losing trade think about it and don't wait for someone to make the decision you should have made yourself

 

[chump]

DBP,
http://www.trade2win.com/boards/showpost.php?p=163440

I'd pretty much agree with most of that and throw in some Skinner behavioural stuff...a plan ,just about any plan (slight exageration for lterary effect) will be better than performing adhoc ....implicit in the plan is some form of positive outcome .might not actually be a profit ,could simply be the act of sticking to the plan (or my tenant avoiding a major financial problem in favour of a minor one LOL)...main thing is the individual sees the outcome as a positive ..that is a reward ..this builds motivation from which he his encouraged to repeat the experience...enough repetition I think could be interpreted as the buidling of discipline...but you can't escape the necessity of being honest with yourself (this is what you allude to I think by sayng personal reflection etc)...fact is personal honesty in recognising what you really need ,why you need it and what you are really willing to do to achieve is for me the prerequisite..without that in place the rest of the house falls down...and the argument Socrates alludes to on Nature v Nurture with regard to these basic qualities is I believe unresolved..we simply don't know do we how much of all this is actually dependant on our social relationships and how much is genetic ...being an optimist I'll lean towards the former

 

[dbphoenix]

DBP,
http://www.trade2win.com/boards/showpost.php?p=163440

I'd pretty much agree with most of that and throw in some Skinner behavioural stuff...a plan ,just about any plan (slight exageration for lterary effect) will be better than performing adhoc ....implicit in the plan is some form of positive outcome .might not actually be a profit ,could simply be the act of sticking to the plan (or my tenant avoiding a major financial problem in favour of a minor one LOL)...main thing is the individual sees the outcome as a positive ..that is a reward ..this builds motivation from which he his encouraged to repeat the experience...enough repetition I think could be interpreted as the buidling of discipline...but you can't escape the necessity of being honest with yourself (this is what you allude to I think by sayng personal reflection etc)...fact is personal honesty in recognising what you really need ,why you need it and what you are really willing to do to achieve is for me the prerequisite..without that in place the rest of the house falls down...and the argument Socrates alludes to on Nature v Nurture with regard to these basic qualities is I believe unresolved..we simply don't know do we how much of all this is actually dependant on our social relationships and how much is genetic ...being an optimist I'll lean towards the former

Thank you, Chump. I appreciate your effort to focus on the content.

It's unrealistic to believe that everyone can become a professional trader. But we tend to forget that not everyone who frequents these boards wants to become a professional trader. Many just want to have fun. And to regard them in the same way as something one just stepped in says far more about the regarder than the regardee.

But while not everyone can become a professional trader, it is ludicrous to advance the notion that one must somehow be blessed with those special qualities of exquisite sensitivity which enable him or her to see or hear what only the select few see or hear, that one must be in a near-psychic alignment with the music of the spheres in order to slog out a living trading the markets.

Discipline is relatively easy to achieve if one has confidence in his trading plan. Of course, in order to have confidence in a trading plan, one must have a trading plan. And the trading plan must have been tested to the point where -- even though the trader does not and cannot know the outcome of a particular trade -- the trader knows that, over a series of trades, he will come up a winner. Is the ability to observe, speculate, hypothesize, test, evaluate and begin again learned or genetic? Certainly in some cases these qualities are near-genetic and exhibit themselves in children who have been entirely unexposed to formal or even informal education. But to claim that one cannot learn these skills if one is not naturally gifted with them is untenable.

I've said before and will undoubtedly say many times again that once one has a consistently profitable plan in which he has confidence, most if not all of the "discipline" and "emotion" issues evaporate. The question of suppression does not arise because there's nothing to suppress. The question of discipline becomes one of doing what one knows he should be doing for reasons other than faith, hope, desperation, and so on.

Incidentally, I haven't heard the name "Skinner" in years, but, yes, operant conditioning applies here in the same way that it applies to social interaction or skill development. We can't all be Renoir, but Kinkade isn't exactly starving to death.

Observation, experience, memory and mathematics -- these are what the successful trader must depend on. He must not only observe accurately but remember at all times what he has observed. He cannot bet on the unreasonable or on the unexpected, however strong his personal convictions may be about man's unreasonableness or however certain he may feel that the unexpected happens very frequently. He must bet always on probabilities -- that is, try to anticipate them. Years of practice at the game, of constant study, of always remembering, enable the trader to act on the instant when the unexpected happens as well as when the expected comes to pass. --Livermore

 

[chump]

DBP,
Again I have no basic disagreements with your point of view...for me this issue exists on a continuum like most.....those who will attain great success right down to modest success etc..those who have god given virtual ability to be disciplined down to us mortals who simply try our best

Re "fun" etc..there can be no criticism here of that IF that individual understands that this is primarily what he is after and IF he understands what is involved in achieving that goal..but lets be frank the problem area here is "fun" in trading can be a very expensive hobby for the unitiated or those of shallow pockets

I also don't think a debate like this can ignore the fact change is also a personal matter not just something in the markets....people who set out with a clear objective, a level of motivation geared to achieving that objective , a discipline to make the two gel will change over time...objectives can become blurred / lost...motivation tapers off...discipline starts to waver etc... personally I adhere to the view nothing is forever so stay aware..keep asking yourself why or before you know you might just wake up one day wondering why it went 'wrong'

 

[dbphoenix]

Again, agree. There are those who walk into a casino with the right attitude and those who don't. But nearly everyone understands that each must have a limit as to what he is willing to lose. Not that everyone abides by this. But it isn't secret knowledge.

As for objectives and motivation, it's not difficult to find parallels with addictions of various sorts: smoking, alcohol, food, sex. People who have difficulty making connections between what they eat and how they look will likely also have the same trouble making connections between what they do as traders and what the results are (what Magee would call a disconnect between the map and the territory). Some people will never make these connections, just as some women invariably seek out men who will abuse them, and some men are on a never-ending search to marry their mothers (i.e., someone to cook, clean, wash, etc).

But then they might all be especially good with a guitar.

 

[Salty Gibbon]

personally I adhere to the view nothing is forever so stay aware..keep asking yourself why or before you know you might just wake up one day wondering why it went 'wrong'

A very prudent and sensible approach.

It is always good to check with yourself just before entering a trade and say very firmly to yourself, " Why am I taking this trade ?"

If you have a sound answer based on your rules of engagement, then go ahead.

I used to ask a similar question but it was " Why did I take that trade ?" after I booked a loser.

I have now trained myself to ask such questions prior to the trade rather than afterwards when counting the cost.

 

[commanderco]

Discipline, discipline isnt a chapter in a book you just flick to and just peruse over with your bi-focals? No!...Besides, discipline for what? Discipline for a winning method....thats easy....too easy. A method should be flexible to accomadate all market conditions, in fact, why trade method, why not trade market conditions anyway? An 'open mind method' would coincide better than an absolute, because nothing is absolute( only in hindsight). Sounds rubbish, probably is?

I agree with you Rude.
Discipline is similar to habit and is not necessarily the key to trading profitabily.
ie Keeping fit requires discipline. But within a short period of time it creates a habit,
which is backed up by a chemical change within the body to the point where you suffer withdrawal pains if you do not maintain your programme.

Trading requires a decoupling of the mind from it´s attachments so it may operate
with near perfect clarity. This is why "paper traders" get so excited, because they have not yet confronted their minds attachment to money. Once their stops have been clipped a few times however, their excitement turns to fear and they then unwittingly expect their mind to function perfectly in this now fearful state.
In order to release their mind from this burden, they then tell themselves that their account balance can be freely traded as some sort of play money ie they can afford to lose it.
Bugger the fact that the balance took thousands of hours to earn after tax or it was an inheritance.
Sure enough, they lose the lot but not until they have further tortured themselves with the occassional win or two.
All this can easily occur whilst the Trader is in a state of high discipline.

The answer I believe lies in an "open mind" and it is in this state that you become AWARE of the markets and see beyond the dazzelment of indicators, codes and programmes, back testing etc.

Yes, you must have the discipline to create a trading plan, yes you must have the discipline to apply it, but most importantly, you must remove the contraditions from your mind in order to become successful.
Discipline will block these contradictions but it will not remove them.
In order to do this, firstly you need to acknowledge their existence.
Write them down if you need to and explore the reasons for their existence, positive and negative. They have been created by you somewhere in your past to protect you from a perceived threat, which probably no longer exists.

As you start to do this, the greed, the pain and the fear that trading creates will diminish and your mind will open up to the markets.
Then and only then will you achieve consistent results.
To rely solely on discipline in markets in my opinion will turn you into a dedicated gambler.

 

[dbphoenix]

Yes, you must have the discipline to create a trading plan, yes you must have the discipline to apply it, but most importantly, you must remove the contraditions from your mind in order to become successful. Discipline will block these contradictions but it will not remove them. In order to do this, firstly you need to acknowledge their existence. Write them down if you need to and explore the reasons for their existence, positive and negative. They have been created by you somewhere in your past to protect you from a perceived threat, which probably no longer exists.

As you start to do this, the greed, the pain and the fear that trading creates will diminish and your mind will open up to the markets. Then and only then will you achieve consistent results.
To rely solely on discipline in markets in my opinion will turn you into a dedicated gambler

Correct, though it's important to focus on just what it is that "discipline" is supposed to do.

The purpose of discipline is not to suppress neurotic or psychotic tendencies. The purpose of discipline is to follow the trading plan. Employing discipline not only to follow the plan but to initiate and maintain continuous psychotherapy is expecting more of discipline than it can deliver. Though some schools of thought suggest that these emotional blocks can be removed through "discipline", there are others that emphasize exploration and examination, with a continuum inbetween. Lashing oneself to "follow the plan" while at the same time suppressing all those self-sabotaging tendencies that are making it next to impossible to do so is a recipe for failure.

Addressing and resolving all of these emotional and psychological issues is not the province of discipline. One must figure out why the self requires all this suppression in the first place, and, further, if any repression is taking place that also needs to be cracked open and resolved. Returning to the example of dieting, many if not most (if not all) of those who fail at dieting do so not necessarily because of a lack of discipline per se but rather because they haven't addressed the issue of why they eat so much to begin with. Yes, "discipline" failed them, but not because of any fault with discipline as such. They were instead expecting discipline to cure all of their unresolved conflicts with no further thought or effort on their part.