Jump to content

Welcome to the new Traders Laboratory! Please bear with us as we finish the migration over the next few days. If you find any issues, want to leave feedback, get in touch with us, or offer suggestions please post to the Support forum here.

  • Welcome Guests

    Welcome. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest which does not give you access to all the great features at Traders Laboratory such as interacting with members, access to all forums, downloading attachments, and eligibility to win free giveaways. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free. Create a FREE Traders Laboratory account here.

Recommended Posts

Michael,

 

Don't you think that it is more reasonable that a trader should have AT LEAST 4x the daily loss limit? I can make a case for making it even larger but I could never make a case for reducing it. Don't you think that having less then 1x drawdown from your daily loss limit makes the loss limit pointless? I think your website would look less fishy without these discrepancies and the cool thing is you don't even have to change the amounts you are willing to risk on a trader.

 

This is how you do it.. See.

 

1500/4 = $375/daily loss limit

2000/4 = $500/daily loss limit

3000/4 = $750/daily loss limit

4000/4 = $1000/daily loss limit

 

I personally don't like to risk more then 5% of my account. Risking more then about 10% will cause most traders to blow out. Given the small account sizes, so that's 1500/10 = $150 daily loss limit in reality and a 4000/10 = $400.

 

Also, I think it would far more honest not to mention the account sizes which isn't MEANINGFUL or representative. No serious trader who used a 2% loss limit would quit when they were down 3%. I'm trying to help you go legit here.

 

Let's also change up something else. Let's quit with the nonsense of your sending your traders back to combine. If your process works then they should be good to-go or they were bad apples: toss them.

 

Better, why not do something like a real trader might do? We'll make sure the cushion is a healthy 10x the daily loss limit. This is equivalent to risking having a loss limit of 10% per day.

 

Okay... so that's 4,000/10 = $400 loss limit. Now, if the trader is down X% then what we do is reduce the loss limit. Its hard to do in your case because its damn hard to trade a futures account with only 4k.

 

So here is a reasonable setup:

 

$400 daily loss limit. If at any time down more then 30% then required to take 1 week off and loss limit is decreased to let's say about $350 or 10% of the remaining. Loss limit is increased back to $400 when previous equity reached.

 

If ever down more then 50% required to take 2 weeks off/encouraged to sim and loss limit is further reduced to $300. And returns to $350 and to $400.

 

Finally, if down 60% required to take 2 weeks/encouraged to sim. Loss limit not reduced.

 

No more risk capital. That's it. Hit the road jack and don't come back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hello guys- I wanted to jump in this thread and provide the opportunity to answer any of your questions.

 

As for training traders, the market is your best teacher and the longer you are immersed in the market the more you will learn about it and yourself. With the failure so high in this business we designed the Combine, where traders can get the time, feedback, and opportunity to showcase their talent risking any trading capital.

 

I am open to questions you have. As for the dummy 1 and dummy 2.. Those are actual traders we have funded.

 

mp

aka "nebraska" in our Squawk Radio broadcast and interactive chat room.

 

How do people who mostly fail; go about "showcasing their talent"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I trade. I've did well too. However, it is very stressful as my account is still small -- not as small as Patak's but small for futures. I am always monitoring my performance. I feel like I'm trading close to my ability (that I had in the simulator) but I'm not sure. I don't want to go back to sim and risk giving up profits. For me, this could be a way for me to test and see if I do better with less pressure.. It would be like a break but I'd still be able to make money.

 

Also, I could continue to trade my own account...

 

Don't worry,it's nothing a bit of spamming and sales patter wont rectify.Don't worry..it must be good 'cos these guys work in the pit,,just like Oscar used to.And everyone knows Oscar is whiter than white,honest as the day is long.Don't believe me? Just ask Larry Levine,an early promoter of "the next big thing" -pit traders who make sooo much money in the pits but are desperate to help a bunch of retailers get rich...

Why are you agonizin' over this "deal"..is it greed? i mean you do trade right? What the hell do you need anybody else for?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Michael,

 

Don't you think that it is more reasonable that a trader should have AT LEAST 4x the daily loss limit? I can make a case for making it even larger but I could never make a case for reducing it. Don't you think that having less then 1x drawdown from your daily loss limit makes the loss limit pointless? I think your website would look less fishy without these discrepancies and the cool thing is you don't even have to change the amounts you are willing to risk on a trader.

 

This is how you do it.. See.

 

1500/4 = $375/daily loss limit

2000/4 = $500/daily loss limit

3000/4 = $750/daily loss limit

4000/4 = $1000/daily loss limit

 

I personally don't like to risk more then 5% of my account. Risking more then about 10% will cause most traders to blow out. Given the small account sizes, so that's 1500/10 = $150 daily loss limit in reality and a 4000/10 = $400.

 

Also, I think it would far more honest not to mention the account sizes which isn't MEANINGFUL or representative. No serious trader who used a 2% loss limit would quit when they were down 3%. I'm trying to help you go legit here.

 

Let's also change up something else. Let's quit with the nonsense of your sending your traders back to combine. If your process works then they should be good to-go or they were bad apples: toss them.

 

Better, why not do something like a real trader might do? We'll make sure the cushion is a healthy 10x the daily loss limit. This is equivalent to risking having a loss limit of 10% per day.

 

Okay... so that's 4,000/10 = $400 loss limit. Now, if the trader is down X% then what we do is reduce the loss limit. Its hard to do in your case because its damn hard to trade a futures account with only 4k.

 

So here is a reasonable setup:

 

$400 daily loss limit. If at any time down more then 30% then required to take 1 week off and loss limit is decreased to let's say about $350 or 10% of the remaining. Loss limit is increased back to $400 when previous equity reached.

 

If ever down more then 50% required to take 2 weeks off/encouraged to sim and loss limit is further reduced to $300. And returns to $350 and to $400.

 

Finally, if down 60% required to take 2 weeks/encouraged to sim. Loss limit not reduced.

 

No more risk capital. That's it. Hit the road jack and don't come back.

 

What's that old cliche?...you cant polish a turd

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes, I trade. I've did well too. However, it is very stressful as my account is still small -- not as small as Patak's but small for futures. I am always monitoring my performance. I feel like I'm trading close to my ability (that I had in the simulator) but I'm not sure. I don't want to go back to sim and risk giving up profits. For me, this could be a way for me to test and see if I do better with less pressure.. It would be like a break but I'd still be able to make money.

 

Also, I could continue to trade my own account...

 

Ok i can understand those points.But if you look at your own words which i highlighted it looks like your own instinct is saying everything.You know,you got this far on your own against heavy odds...jmo/experience but hell is other people.Personally,i'd rather screw up 6 times in a row on my own than get screwed once by somebody else.That's the whole point in trading...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Predictor, there is likely a threshold of capitalization below which it would make sense for a developing trader to try something like TST. Have you figured that up?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Michael,

 

Don't you think that it is more reasonable that a trader should have AT LEAST 4x the daily loss limit? I can make a case for making it even larger but I could never make a case for reducing it. Don't you think that having less then 1x drawdown from your daily loss limit makes the loss limit pointless? I think your website would look less fishy without these discrepancies and the cool thing is you don't even have to change the amounts you are willing to risk on a trader.

 

This is how you do it.. See.

 

1500/4 = $375/daily loss limit

2000/4 = $500/daily loss limit

3000/4 = $750/daily loss limit

4000/4 = $1000/daily loss limit

 

I personally don't like to risk more then 5% of my account. Risking more then about 10% will cause most traders to blow out. Given the small account sizes, so that's 1500/10 = $150 daily loss limit in reality and a 4000/10 = $400.

 

Also, I think it would far more honest not to mention the account sizes which isn't MEANINGFUL or representative. No serious trader who used a 2% loss limit would quit when they were down 3%. I'm trying to help you go legit here.

 

Let's also change up something else. Let's quit with the nonsense of your sending your traders back to combine. If your process works then they should be good to-go or they were bad apples: toss them.

 

Better, why not do something like a real trader might do? We'll make sure the cushion is a healthy 10x the daily loss limit. This is equivalent to risking having a loss limit of 10% per day.

 

Okay... so that's 4,000/10 = $400 loss limit. Now, if the trader is down X% then what we do is reduce the loss limit. Its hard to do in your case because its damn hard to trade a futures account with only 4k.

 

So here is a reasonable setup:

 

$400 daily loss limit. If at any time down more then 30% then required to take 1 week off and loss limit is decreased to let's say about $350 or 10% of the remaining. Loss limit is increased back to $400 when previous equity reached.

 

If ever down more then 50% required to take 2 weeks off/encouraged to sim and loss limit is further reduced to $300. And returns to $350 and to $400.

 

Finally, if down 60% required to take 2 weeks/encouraged to sim. Loss limit not reduced.

 

No more risk capital. That's it. Hit the road jack and don't come back.

 

How does being away for 1 week or 2 weeks help? (rhetorical) Or how does going to sim help? (rhetorical)

 

If you have an edge, you need to be in the trenches trading, slogging it out. If you don't have an edge, then lose you capital and go do something else. If you can't survive the equity swings like a man, you need to come to grips with the fact that you are not a trader. There is really no point in fooling yourself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MightyMouse: For trading a rule-based system, I agree but discretionary traders often don't have a specific edge but rather rely on adapting to the market and identifying the current tendencies. There is a much more uncertainty.. A rule-based system relies on a small edge over a large sample while a discretionary trader relies on correctly identify the market environment. Due to psychology/market tendencies/etc a series of risk controls can work better...

 

zdo: Yes, there definitely would be. One of my main contentions is that the figures that TST posts are meant to mislead less experienced traders. You can get 1k margin these days and trade in the overnight or day session. You never have to put up the full margin unless you hold through the close. This means for example to replicate what they claim is their 50k account, you'd need 5k for 5 contracts +2k= 7k total. However, 5 contracts is probably more then anyone would need at that capitalization, more seriously 2-3 would be a real max. That reduces the capitalization from 5k to 2k+2k = 4k (2 contracts).

 

However, the exact figures are difficult to calculate because its based both on the risk outlay and probability of winning. The simplest way is to look at the fee as a bet with the return as an outlay. So for example you get 2K for $175 or a 10 to 1 payoff. But, realistically you have to reduce this by 40% because that's what they take back. So you get only 1200 for 200 or a 6x payoff. This is still rather low.

 

The other way is just to ask what a "serious offer" would be that would allow for splits and meaningful profit building. I'd say around 8k to 20k would be a reasonable minimum outlay. For example a 12K risk per trader would allow for 2k risk limit per day * 6x the daily loss = 12k.

 

You don't see them offering this though because their "game" can't pay for such high costs. Also worth considering is how honest they are...i.e. how likely they are out to payout in the event of a "bank run"-> many winners during one month.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm really thinking about trying this. For the record, I believe that it was originally setup as a way to generate fees from the combines. However, if they can make the "math" make sense then they may get some real traders -- like me. I've did well in my personal account but it might be good for me temporarily take a rest break.

 

I still have to look at the math and see if it makes sense. The reduced goals should up my odds though.

 

Michael, you are now offering a NinjaTrader version?

 

Predictor- We have currently removed NinjaTrader platform option due to data/feed and connection issues we were experiencing with the back-end. We will have this back available at the first of the year.

 

mp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I've submitted a custom combine. However, on second look at the website I notice some things. There are still some inherent/fundamental problems in what they offer, that to me, would need to change for me to say the math actually made sense:

 

Max risk is only 2x daily loss limit for higher plans. Max risk should be at least 4x-6x the daily loss limit to enable a trader to realistically assume the daily risk given. For example, on the highest plan the max drawdown is only 4k while the daily loss limit is 3k.

 

That is not realistic. It is not an honest offer. An honest offer would say okay, if I'm giving you 3k daily loss limit then I'm going to give you 12k loss limit.

 

I mean ask yourself, would you trade a system that stated up front it could lose 3k in a single day with only 4k allocation? It doesn't make sense. You wouldn't do that unless you were an idiot.

 

So what's the real daily loss limit for the 4k account... you guessed it 1k before splits or about equivalent $600 after splits. Not bad but not what is advertised. What would you need to trade under same parameters? 600*4 = $2400 account + intraday margin or about $3500-$4500.

 

Predicator- Our program is about evaluating who can manager their downside. In the futures industry more risk does not mean more reward. There is a failure rate in this business of 95% or greater for a reason.

 

We want traders focused on protecting their downside. Finding better trade location with patience and discipline. Our Combine helps us find those traders. We then place those traders with our Proprietary trading firm for trading on a funded account. The max drawdown that funded traders receive is posted here: Live Trading Room | Trading Program | Topstep Funded Trader

 

If a traders hits their max drawdown they are then placed back in the Combine (at no cost) to work on what they need to work on. If that trader then works out the kinks and comes BACK onto the funded account they do NOT have to make up the loses. Their account starts back at scratch and they have a new shot to produce.

 

Instilling discipline in a trader to avoid these big losses you talk about takes time and the only way to do this is in actively trading in the market. With the average trading account closed withing 6 months traders do not get this time. We provide this real trading environment in the Combine using a SIM environment with risk parameters were discipline has the opportunity to grow within the trader.

 

mp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How do people who mostly fail; go about "showcasing their talent"?

 

mitsubishi- Traders may never know their strengths or weakness when they are out of the market so quickly. We help those traders find their identity by recognizing their strengths and weakness and then working to develop these daily building their talent.

 

While they are working and developing. Our scout team is evaluating these recruits. Those that show an increased aptitude for trading and whom meet the Combine objective will be extended an offer to trade on a live funded account

 

Basically... the Combine helps us develop and discover traders.

 

 

mp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Michael: Hope you do indeed bring back NinjaTrader.. I can't trade on that other platform. Okay, I hear what you're saying but as they say the proof is in the pudding. Are your graduates actually building their accounts with such small risk limits? I On another forum, you previously reported at the end of the year you'd release the stats on your top earners. Are you still planning to do this and when do you plan to do that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Blue: Just my opinion but this is a side issue and not central to the CLAIMS we are trying to evaluate here. It is not really at all difficult to come up with an estimate. They use the T4 simulator. They also have some rules against trying to "game the software". I don't think it is terribly important really. NinjaTrader also has a method for simulating fills, also. If you're average profit is greater then 2 ticks then it shouldn't be a deal breaker. Again, there are many ways to simulate a fill that will be good enough for most trading discretionary trading styles.. i.e must trade through, time wait, or volume estimation.

 

Michael: The problem is you charge about what $200 per month for the training. If it takes a student 12 months to get consistent then they've spent $2400 which is greater then your lowest 2 funding levels. Your basic claim is that you provide a low risk way to learn futures and then fund those traders who succeed. Your basic claim is that you're providing an avenue for funding that will allow a trader to make a tangible return in a low risk environment. And, this is what I'm having trouble and is open to some debate. I suspect you won't be able to release those top trader stats ? If you can't produce a trader who can net at least 50k then maybe your program is flawed or needs to be adjusted, at least.

 

Also, your assertion that greater risk doesn't correlate with greater reward is fundamentally false on multiple levels. First, if we take a net return of 50% on 10k = 5k while 50% on 20k = 10k return. We see if we keep the return constant that risking more money produces a greater return. Now, let's look at the second equation which is the probability of ending a loser or the probability of ending a winner i.e account loss vs profitable. Likewise, a greater account cushion allows one to RISK LESS as PERCENT and still MAKE MORE. A good example, take an identical method that produces about 1:1 return, i.e make 50% and hvave 50% DD. If your total account is 100k and you ratio it to produce a 30% return then you'll make 30k and only experience a 30% DD. This means your estimates can be off by a factor of 2x and still provide the ability to continue trading and recover. Now, if your account is 10k and you you should for 60% return then you return only 6k while experiencing a 60% DD -- not providing much room for unexpected error.

 

I have counter claimed that your assertion that greater risk doesn't equal greater reward is therefore false. What you may have meant to express is the sentiment that if a strategy is a losing strategy then no finite amount of capital will save it: to that, I agree.

Edited by Predictor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Blue: Just my opinion but this is a side issue and not central to the CLAIMS we are trying to evaluate here. It is not really at all difficult to come up with an estimate. They use the T4 simulator. They also have some rules against trying to "game the software". I don't think it is terribly important really. NinjaTrader also has a method for simulating fills, also. If you're average profit is greater then 2 ticks then it shouldn't be a deal breaker. Again, there are many ways to simulate a fill that will be good enough for most trading discretionary trading styles.. i.e must trade through, time wait, or volume estimation.

 

Hi Predictor,

 

I realise that it is a side issue to the main dispute over this company's claims.

 

With regard to the fill simulation methods you mention in NinjaTrader, I have found them to be woefully inaccurate (they're also present in TradeStation). Having said which, NT's method for volume may be more sophisticated than TS's.

 

Thanks,

 

BlueHorseshoe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MightyMouse: For trading a rule-based system, I agree but discretionary traders often don't have a specific edge but rather rely on adapting to the market and identifying the current tendencies. There is a much more uncertainty.. A rule-based system relies on a small edge over a large sample while a discretionary trader relies on correctly identify the market environment. Due to psychology/market tendencies/etc a series of risk controls can work better...

 

 

I disagree. I am not sure which you do, but I am a discretionary trader. I look for opportunities where weak traders have entered in the wrong direction. I have rules that I follow to prevent me from making mistakes.

 

There is nothing wrong with taking a break when you feel like smashing everything, but taking yourself out of the opportunity flow because of a hard x or y I think is nonsense. Losses are expected and psychologically you should be ready to take losses and be ready to be wrong.

 

Analogy: in poker (Hold'em) you can go for weeks playing, say, AA and losing every time. But, just because you are losing every time you get AA does not mean that you should stop playing AA and it does not mean that you should stop playing. Now, if you are playing them wrong, then I would suggest that you are not really ready to play, since only a novice expects to win every time he gets AA.

 

For the record, I am criticizing the idea and not the person.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mighty... I understand what you're saying but many discretionary traders don't really have an edge. Some successful discretionary traders don't believe in a generalized edge, even. They make their profits by identifying how the market is working "right now". There is no statistical basis for it, like with a quantitative system. Many of these types of methods will work really well in some markets and not at all in others.

 

Let's think about it hypothetically too, let's imagine a hypothetical "good" trader who on most days if that he trades if he's down a loss limit will be able to "recover" and do better if he kept trading. In other words, if our hypothetical trader is down $500 then on most days he'll recover that and might turn a small profit. But on some days.. a rare day if he keeps trading then he'll dig himself into a very deep pit. It might be more optimal trade that way but some traders will not want to take the swings. They'd rather make a bit less and know that they'll never lose more then $500 per day. I know personally that knowing I can't lose more then x% is a tremendous safety net for me. For example, I'll move my stops. I'll adjust them. I'll do things that people say you shouldn't do. Sometimes it works. Sometimes it doesn't. But, what I do know is that at the end of the day.. I won't lose more then $x. In futures, where the losses can multiply easily by a factor of 10, this is a good safety net in exchange for not trading at 100% optimal. The futures game is about survival -- not optimal. If you're an automated trader, trading 1000 stocks per day with a highly refined money making system then I agree.

 

I really think that most discretionary traders, even great traders don't have a very explicit edge and that's why they're able to do so much better because they're not relying on a very specific set of rules but rather able to consider a lot of information that a simple system can't use. The cost for this advantage is higher uncertainty. If you explicit rules, for example, you can't enter a trade without a certain condition then I classify that under systematic trading. It is not fully discretionary. I trade both highly discretionary where I don't have explicit rules and also I trade systems that have strong historical performance and use my discretion.. which is again what I classify as systematic trading. It is certainly easier to make money with systematic trading. The psychology factors aren't as involved and generally the performance factors are lower.

 

I agree that a "stop and go" approach isn't the right way but rather gradual risk reduction. This is the model that other prop firms use and one I recommended Michael to think about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mighty... I understand what you're saying but many discretionary traders don't really have an edge. Some successful discretionary traders don't believe in a generalized edge, even. They make their profits by identifying how the market is working "right now". There is no statistical basis for it, like with a quantitative system. Many of these types of methods will work really well in some markets and not at all in others.

 

A discretionary trader who doesn't have an edge is neither a discretionary trader nor a trader at all.

 

Being able to identify how the market is working, whatever that means and if that is possible, is an edge.

 

Taking money from the market is an edge no matter how you do it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I understand what you're saying but many discretionary traders don't really have an edge. Some successful discretionary traders don't believe in a generalized edge, even. They make their profits by identifying how the market is working "right now". There is no statistical basis for it, like with a quantitative system. Many of these types of methods will work really well in some markets and not at all in others.

...

I really think that most discretionary traders, even great traders don't have a very explicit edge and that's why they're able to do so much better because they're not relying on a very specific set of rules but rather able to consider a lot of information that a simple system can't use.

Reality check PREDICTOR. Apparently, like seen from the ‘outside’, you just described the type of trader I am – but it is only apparent!

Refinements/ alternatives: I developed my whole trading world around such a very granular, context first, approach.

Market Typing – “identifying how the market is working "right now"” - is at the galactic center of my trading.

 

However, profits are not made only by identifying how the market is working "right now" . Ultimately a system is applied… Profits are made by knowing which (usually) very simple system to apply from a diverse ‘portfolio’ of systems. Each of the systems in the portfolio do have statistical basis – but that statistical basis for each individual system is typically very weak if it is thrown, like in ‘real’ system trading, at every bar or day or whatever that comes along. MM nailed it "A discretionary trader who doesn't have an edge is neither a discretionary trader nor a trader at all."

 

The “lot of information” that must be considered is for typing the market – not for making distinction on how to play the situation. Ie Rules are still required… just must become adept at switching (actually shifting weighting) between different sets of rules.

 

And yes “The cost for this advantage is higher uncertainty.” - mostly because several of the systems actually lead the auction instead of follow

And yes, it took far more work than I ever imagined…

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Michael: The problem is you charge about what $200 per month for the training. If it takes a student 12 months ...

 

You ( and maybe Michael Patak too) are driving me crazy.

Yesterday you clarified pretty well the capitalization thresholds for noobs and developing traders to consider.

In my mind, unless you're a totally broke, ramon noodle student it's better to trade your own account - unless you need training / handholding / co-something (dependence, etc.)

Previously, when I brought up the potential benefits in this program of the 'training', here's what you said

Michael Patak, patak head-honcho, has stated numerous times they don't train traders. They don't offer training of any sort

Then this morning in post 39 you said

Michael: The problem is you charge about what $200 per month for the training. If it takes a student 12 months to get consistent then they've spent $2400 which is greater then your lowest 2 funding levels

mery chrismas colors dude

:angry::crap:

ya'll make up your fkn minds. :doh: ;)

 

The combines, which i admit i don't fully understand, are the 'socialization' / tribal / training / developmental component that many - including yourself maybe - need

How do those interested (/ needing that) assess the 'training' program (that doesn't exist ;)) for compatibility with self?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

zdo: Answer in this case is simple, I didn't use precisely correct vocabulary. There is no real confusion when my words are taken in context to the surrounding. First, I claimed that TST doesn't offer formal training that will help a trader to meet their goals. This is true, as far as I know and it formal training is not a claim that Michael has made. So, this isn't under contention. What he has claimed is they offer an ENVIRONMENT where a trader can become successful in a low risk environment and learn risk manage presumably required to become a SUCCESSFUL futures trader. In the second context, I referred to this environment as "training" when "environment" or "simulation" would have been more appropriate.

 

For me, the tribal aspects could be be a plus... help me stay aware of things. Not terribly "wanting it" but it could be a benefit. ZDO, techncially the combine is just a try out. It is not any training -- just an evaluation. They also offer chat rooms, psychologists, etc but that's part of their monthly program...

 

So, the question is what claims is TST making and are they reasonable.

 

Claim #1 On their website it says you are funded with a 30k,50k,100k, or 150k account. This is critical because a larger account allows for a larger return to be made and account sizes near upper end would certainly allow for tangible returns.

 

In reality, the 100k account only has a 3% loss limit or 3k and positions are not allowed to be held over the close. It is easy to obtain margin levels of around only 1k (for ES) if positions are not held past the close. They allow you to trade up to 10 contracts but with only a 3K max drawdown: 10 contracts is not realistic or required. If we take a more reasonable 2-3 contracts then we can see that the "100k account funding level" would be equivalent to about a 5k-6k account, only. They do post the loss limits on the account but the account sizes seem arbitrary. For example, they could just as easily claim they were funding the trader at 1 million with a 2k loss limit.

 

Claim #2

 

Michael Patak has claimed they offer a LOW RISK environment that ENABLES a trader to learn discipline and presumably become consistent. If this is true then they should be able to show traders that have managed to clear a decent sum of money. We have to question if the low risk part is true/i.e low risk in relation to what and if the success part is true. He needs to show that traders were able to clear tangible returns under his program for it to make sense. Yes, I agree it is lower risk then the market but there is no return possible in the training whereas there is in the market. Trust me, I know. I racked up a lot of profits on the simulator or trading/making money for others. Didn't make much for myself.

 

Claim #3

TST and Michael Patak have repeatedly claimed that the training doesn't pay the bills. . He would actually present it in the form of a question, "Do you think the combine pays the bills?" which made me think they could be dodging. The implication is that HE MUST have profitable traders or he was lying or running a loss making operation. He previously wasn't willing to claim that he had any traders who had cleared at least 30K (if I'm not mistaken). If true then it is difficult to see how the combines COULD NOT BE the primary source of income.

 

Again, the question we're trying to get at is whether or not the system/environment process they claim enables a trader to learn what it takes actually works. For them to do this, they need to show traders who have produced tangible returns.

 

Of course, a large account balance isn't required if a trader hits a good sprint. So, if they have a system that remotely works they ought to, by pure chance, have some traders that have produced a decent return..

 

Michael, I tell you what you give me a free shot and I'll do my best to clear 50k for you so that you can show that you have profitable traders. However, I only do this when using NinjaTrader SuperDOM (or at least not T4 -- ask and we'll see).

 

ZDO, I grant you we are basically beating a dead horse at this time... I wish it were a good/real offer but hard to argue with my reasoning.

Edited by Predictor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been around this board for a while and posted occasionally. I'd like to step in and comment on this thread before it gets too weird. I have been evaluating the TST program and am actually in a combine. So, right off the bat you know I am biased in favour of their program.

 

Claim #1 On their website it says you are funded with a 30k,50k,100k, or 150k account. This is critical because a larger account allows for a larger return to be made and account sizes near upper end would certainly allow for tangible returns.

This is irrelevant in my opinion. By entering a combine you are trying to demonstrate your trading ability and if you meet their scouting requirements, in all likelihood, you will be funded and can grow your account in a live condition. As you grow the account and continue to show that your combine wasn't a fluke - they will provide additional capitil. It's a simple as that. Why try to determine the "underlying" motives. Hey - guess what - their motives are the same as mine. MAKE MONEY !

 

 

Claim #2

Michael Patak has claimed they offer a LOW RISK environment that ENABLES a trader to learn discipline and presumably become consistent.

The LOW RISK environment is the opportunity to trade without having to lose any of your own capital. That is about as low risk as it can get.

 

 

Claim #3

TST and Michael Patak have repeatedly claimed that the training doesn't pay the bills.

 

This is obviously true once you get to join and understand their offering. It is by far the most extensive and helpful environment for traders that I have seen in the past 7 years I have spent trading futures every day.

 

For those of us who trade at home - the day time ritual can be somewhat stagnant and lonely. TST is a great resource to be a part of a community of like minded traders helping each other in real time. Plus you get Breaking News, Squawk Service and daily educators all included with your combine.

 

Also - do you realize that if you finish your combine in a net positive, regardless of the amount - then you are entitled to retry your combine AT NO COST.

 

Finally, I realized that by completing the profile and participating in the daily activities I will earn what they call "ticks" in sufficient quantity to cover the cost of an additional combine should that be necessary.

 

bakrob99

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Bakrob, thank you for sharing some real life info. I saw your profile on the TST recruits page, sitting on the bow of your boat. I passed my skipper exam last month so could appreciate.

 

Did you need to have any condition customized? How are you faring so far? Do you have an idea what time it will take for you to getting funded?

 

 

I have been around this board for a while and posted occasionally. I'd like to step in and comment on this thread before it gets too weird. I have been evaluating the TST program and am actually in a combine. So, right off the bat you know I am biased in favour of their program.

 

 

This is irrelevant in my opinion. By entering a combine you are trying to demonstrate your trading ability and if you meet their scouting requirements, in all likelihood, you will be funded and can grow your account in a live condition. As you grow the account and continue to show that your combine wasn't a fluke - they will provide additional capitil. It's a simple as that. Why try to determine the "underlying" motives. Hey - guess what - their motives are the same as mine. MAKE MONEY !

 

 

 

The LOW RISK environment is the opportunity to trade without having to lose any of your own capital. That is about as low risk as it can get.

 

 

 

 

This is obviously true once you get to join and understand their offering. It is by far the most extensive and helpful environment for traders that I have seen in the past 7 years I have spent trading futures every day.

 

For those of us who trade at home - the day time ritual can be somewhat stagnant and lonely. TST is a great resource to be a part of a community of like minded traders helping each other in real time. Plus you get Breaking News, Squawk Service and daily educators all included with your combine.

 

Also - do you realize that if you finish your combine in a net positive, regardless of the amount - then you are entitled to retry your combine AT NO COST.

 

Finally, I realized that by completing the profile and participating in the daily activities I will earn what they call "ticks" in sufficient quantity to cover the cost of an additional combine should that be necessary.

 

bakrob99

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did customize a combine and basically went for a 30K $2000 profit with $500 loss limit 3 contracts but the part that I changed was that I could trade any number of days up to the 60th day if I needed to continue to get to my profit target as long as I have not hit max loss / drawdown. The loss control part is pretty easy. The trick for me is to hold my winners longer in order to meet the metric which requires greater time in winning trades than losing.

 

I have only traded 2 days of the 18 and plan to trade 2 more next week and then most of January. Most of my trades are 1 lots - at least to start the day and once I have a bit of a profit cushion I will trade 2 lots and try to get a runner.

 

That's the plan - most of December I traded my own account in order to generate some Christmas $$$. I find that I really am not good at trading 2 different accounts at the same time - partly because of the screen real estate I give up. And because the trading domes are so different.

 

The trading this month had been a bit strange with news events creating moves that have no easy entry for me once they are underway. Not sure what the holidays will bring - with the Fiscal Cliff hanging over it could be volatile and if you get on the right side of a move hopefully hang onto it.

 

I'm enjoying it anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Michael: Hope you do indeed bring back NinjaTrader.. I can't trade on that other platform. Okay, I hear what you're saying but as they say the proof is in the pudding. Are your graduates actually building their accounts with such small risk limits? I On another forum, you previously reported at the end of the year you'd release the stats on your top earners. Are you still planning to do this and when do you plan to do that?

 

Predicator- We will have Ninjatrader back at the first of the year. As for proof is in the pudding. We have all LIVE funded traders that are in the Squawk Radio broadcast. Other traders are free to talk to them but we do not release any information on funded trader.

 

mp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.