Why did price spike on my broker but not on the FTSE?

I'm only trading 50p-£1 a point and I'm not a beginner. Size doesn't indicate skill just because you have loads of money that £1 a point is meaningless to you.
 
I'm only trading 50p-£1 a point and I'm not a beginner. Size doesn't indicate skill just because you have loads of money that £1 a point is meaningless to you.

Already been done, can label yourself what you want but:

The point was that trading in larger sizes IS different.Strategies for small sizes don't scale up well. That is the point.
 
I suppose the larger you trade the more beginner you think smaller sizes are.

The point was that trading in larger sizes IS different. For example, you can trade without a SL if you trade small say 1 ppp and you have 500 pound on margin then you could well be given a margin call if you have gone down by 250 points (50%). To hold this position you will have to top up by 250 pound, not a large sum.

Eventually the market will recover and you may eek out say 30points.

However , If you trade 10ppp and you have 5000 in account, you will have to cough up 2500 pound . That's a huge difference and a large chunk out of most ordinary people's finances.

So trading w/o a SL, hitting and hoping is not appropriate for larger size and 10ppp is nothing special.

Strategies for small sizes don't scale up well. That is the point.

Thats not a "small stakes" strategy though, that's just using no risk management because you think £500 is chump change. The other guy might think that £5000 is chump change and do exactly the same thing. Somebody else considerably richer might think 50k is chump change.
 
Thats not a "small stakes" strategy though, that's just using no risk management because you think £500 is chump change.

What do you mean ? I never said ' using no risk management because you think £500 is chump change ' . I said no risk management with larger sums would be very difficult if not impossible.

That IS just one of the ways mini size strategies are irrelevant to larger size traders.

The other guy might think that £5000 is chump change and do exactly the same thing. Somebody else considerably richer might think 50k is chump change.

Yes, I stated that many times BUT 0-100ppp is the bottom of the barrel, it is a mathematical fact, I'm not dissing but just stating so we know that the scale is absolute at some point.
 
Why would you use no risk management on small accounts but use it on large accounts? Shouldn't you trade these both the same? I have a 1k account that I use standard risk management on because that's all I have set aside for my trading journal, should I use a "small stakes" strategy and just go £1 a point with no stop?
 
Last edited:
Why would you use no risk management on small accounts but use it on large accounts? Shouldn't you trade these both the same? I have a 1k account that I use standard risk management on because that's all I have set aside for my trading journal, should I use a "small stakes" strategy and just go £1 a point with no stop?

Far be it for me to dictate to you what to do, unlike some people.

But you've missed the point, I've covered all this before:

I suppose the larger you trade the more beginner you think smaller sizes are.

Trading in larger sizes IS different. For example, you can trade without a SL if you trade small say 1 ppp and you have 500 pound on margin then you could well be given a margin call if you have gone down by 250 points (50%). To hold this position you will have to top up by 250 pound, not a large sum.

Eventually the market will recover and you may eek out say 30points.

However , If you trade 10ppp and you have 5000 in account, you will have to cough up 2500 pound . That's a huge difference and a large chunk out of most ordinary people's finances.

So trading w/o a SL, hitting and hoping is not appropriate for larger size and 10ppp is nothing special.

Strategies for small sizes don't scale up well. That is the point.

Indeed I would agree one should not trade w/o SLs so is that clearer now?
 
Far be it for me to dictate to you what to do, unlike some people.

But you've missed the point, I've covered all this before:

I suppose the larger you trade the more beginner you think smaller sizes are.

Trading in larger sizes IS different. For example, you can trade without a SL if you trade small say 1 ppp and you have 500 pound on margin then you could well be given a margin call if you have gone down by 250 points (50%). To hold this position you will have to top up by 250 pound, not a large sum.

Eventually the market will recover and you may eek out say 30points.

However , If you trade 10ppp and you have 5000 in account, you will have to cough up 2500 pound . That's a huge difference and a large chunk out of most ordinary people's finances.

So trading w/o a SL, hitting and hoping is not appropriate for larger size and 10ppp is nothing special.

Strategies for small sizes don't scale up well. That is the point.

Indeed I would agree one should not trade w/o SLs so is that clearer now?

Your strategy for small sizes in your example is actually risking the whole £500. You need an account size of 25k to make that a 2% risk. Is 25k a large account or small stakes account?
 
If you're gambling then a £500 account would be different to a 5k account but it shouldn't be if you're trading properly.
 
wisefool you get yourself all tangled up in different concepts when someone is trying to talk about one straightforward principle with you. im not going to say anymore about it, its been said now already..

thanks @brewski1984 for illustrating the point as well
 
Your strategy for small sizes in your example is actually risking the whole £500. You need an account size of 25k to make that a 2% risk. Is 25k a large account or small stakes account?

Your reading comprehension is poor, I am stating the opposite of that, in rebuttal to someone here who advocated no stop loss trading.

What part of that is unclear ?
 
wisefool you get yourself all tangled up in different concepts when someone is trying to talk about one straightforward principle with you. im not going to say anymore about it, its been said now already..

thanks @brewski1984 for illustrating the point as well

What principle ?

All you have demonstrated to me is that you don't want to be labelled " a beginner " and I replied that labels are irrelevant, you somehow took offence to that.

Would you like us to call you the Soros of T2W ?

My point is simple and I stand by it - that very small stake strategies are not genuinely replicable to larger sizes - end of and I gave you many simplified examples for your benefit.

Is this too complicated for you?

I suspect you are feigning ignorance because you somehow took offense to the word " beginner ".
 
What principle ?

All you have demonstrated to me is that you don't want to be labelled " a beginner " and I replied that labels are irrelevant, you somehow took offence to that.

Would you like us to call you the Soros of T2W ?

My point is simple and I stand by it - that very small stake strategies are not genuinely replicable to larger sizes - end of and I gave you many simplified examples for your benefit.

Is this too complicated for you?

I suspect you are feigning ignorance because you somehow took offense to the word " beginner ".

you got off to a good start with "what principle?" then got tangled up again :D
its all been said already im not gonna spend anymore time on it
 
you got off to a good start with "what principle?" then got tangled up again :D
its all been said already im not gonna spend anymore time on it

How about pot... kettle... black ?

Or I suppose that tangles you up as well , you must be very simple minded. :clap:
 
Last edited:
How pot... kettle... black ?

Or I suppose that tangles you up as well , you must be very simple minded. :clap:
have you been reading this book by any chance-
51SwGh%2BfzXL._SX306_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg

;)
 
Top