[brownsfan019]

Originally Posted by cooter »

I'm sure your current brokers would just love you for doing that. That means you'd have to consider trading new markets just to keep up your daily R/T volumes for your discount.

Then again, since you're a former stockbroker, why not just get your Series 3 (if you haven't already) and go work in, say, Columbus for OEC? That'll keep you busy during the day for sure....

I'm not worried about the commission discounts. If they need adjusted, they need adjusted. Of course, I'll prolong that as long as possible.

Not moving to Columbus though, that's for sure. Not about to leave everything in Cleveland just to work somewhere that is to help kill the time.

[enlightedtrader]

We make choices in life. There is no exception in trading. Every trader will have to make an important choice(decision):

Will I be a specialist or generalist as a trader?

Everyone has his/her own choice. I've been flipping between specialist and generalist for quite a while. Now it is clear to me to be a specialist is the right way. To be a specialist means we must be real experts trading a particular method in a particular market. Only when we become real specialists, then should we consider expand our trading to become generalists.

The key to excel in trading is to have edge. It is difficulty to have edge since trading is a very competitive game. To be focused makes it earlier to have edge and trade with edge.

BTW, take a look at John Carter. Needless to say, John Carter is a veteran trader with a lot of experiences and knowledge. However, if you read his book Mastering the Trader, you will find he is far from a master trader. Frankly speaking, I don't even consider he is a good trader. The reason is simple, the majority of his trading set-up have little edge. I guess this may be attributed to the fact that he is involved in too much trading styles in too many markets. He trades everything in every style. Unfortunately, he is an expert in none of them.

This is my 2 cents.

[james_gsx]

Originally Posted by enlightedtrader »

BTW, take a look at John Carter. Needless to say, John Carter is a veteran trader with a lot of experiences and knowledge. However, if you read his book Mastering the Trader, you will find he is far from a master trader. Frankly speaking, I don't even consider he is a good trader. The reason is simple, the majority of his trading set-up have little edge. I guess this may be attributed to the fact that he is involved in too much trading styles in too many markets. He trades everything in every style. Unfortunately, he is an expert in none of them.

It's a beginners book and I don't think you should judge his trading skills off that book (I'm not sure if you are). But his ideas are simple, and thats what sells. Pivot and gap plays are prefect examples, they are simple to understand - how you trade them may not be. He could write out his exact strategy and you may never make a dime off of it. Does that make him a bad trader? Or does that mean you just can't trade his strategy like he can?

[neustaju]

Originally Posted by brownsfan019 »

enlightened - I will not argue the point that the ES is the best day-trading vehicle, as I agree!

BUT, if one can take advantage of many markets vs. being forced into one, I am giving a hard look at what is best in the long run. What I mean is, when the ES is in a junk day (however you define it) the ZN could be providing excellent opportunities. But if you are only looking at the ES, you'll never even notice the ZN trades.

Anyways, I think it's a valid point that all traders at some point need to consider. Is it better to look for opportunities over many markets, which will probably require a higher timeframe, or focus on a small number, as little as one knowing that some days that one will just not be providing much?

Opportunities over Many markets I agree. Join with me to as we create an algorthim designed to factor in SUB-INDEX Leading buy/sell signals NEW THREAD Titled "Do Sub-Indexes hold the key to the door all traders are looking to open?"

[BlowFish]

Originally Posted by james_gsx »

It's a beginners book and I don't think you should judge his trading skills off that book (I'm not sure if you are). But his ideas are simple, and thats what sells. Pivot and gap plays are prefect examples, they are simple to understand - how you trade them may not be. He could write out his exact strategy and you may never make a dime off of it. Does that make him a bad trader? Or does that mean you just can't trade his strategy like he can?

Just means that he has not actually presented how you trade the strategy adequately. I kind of enjoyed the book from the 'inside the head of a trader' point of view but not a great beginners book. Funnily enough I originally bought it to see what he had to say about pivots but came to the conclusion that all the 'setup' stuff was filler, there's much better on these forums for example. At the end of the day setups are probably the least important part of the trading equation however many educators do great damage to learning traders by emphasising them. (Not saying JC did this particularly).

Cheers

[james_gsx]

I agree Blowfish. JC did a great job introducing me to futures and while I like a lot of his systems I don't use them. I used them when I first started out but with more screen time I was able to come up with my own. I do like the way he presents market internals and how he uses them. I think a lot of people buy his book explaining it to be complex, but like you said it has to do with the mind of the trader. I believe that's his edge in trading, he can have a simple setup but with the right attitude he'll make more money than someone with a complex system running high with emotion.