[diablo272]

But what makes their results credible? Earlier you inferred that you knew that Bernie Madoff was running a scam, yet he was written about in many publications, so what differentiates him from these "top traders" who you've read about? Are you saying that being a professional and appearing in a book or article automatically makes one credible?

[MightyMouse]

Originally Posted by diablo272 »

But what makes their results credible? Earlier you inferred that you knew that Bernie Madoff was running a scam, yet he was written about in many publications, so what differentiates him from these "top traders" who you've read about? Are you saying that being a professional and appearing in a book or article automatically makes one credible?

Lol. I had no idea that Madoff was running a scam.

I do know there are traders who make money. Read the books if you want and you decide.

[BrianNC]

Originally Posted by MightyMouse »

Lol. I had no idea that Madoff was running a scam.

I do know there are traders who make money. Read the books if you want and you decide.

I think his point is, what makes them more credible than say Thalestrader, bathrobe, or Brownsfan here?

[sevensa]

Originally Posted by MightyMouse »

If someone suggests that they should know something more than you because of their credentials, do you want to question their credentials? I mean if they post week in and week out great results then shouldn’t they be able to produce those live? I mean what would be the difference between showing someone that they can really produce those blotters live and posting them after the fact? Can you guess why no one will do this? I know. No one has anything to prove. But if you have nothing to prove, then you really shouldn’t suggest that you know something more than someone else because you are “experienced” if you really do not want to prove that you are a better trader.

As I said.. you are missing the point and apparently unwilling to see it. No point to take this further as the thread has been derailled too much already.

[MightyMouse]

Originally Posted by BrianNC »

I think his point is, what makes them more credible than say Thalestrader, bathrobe, or Brownsfan here?

Paul tudor Jones, Monroe trout, Richard Dennis and others are or were CTA's that have documented, audited resullts. If one of these guys said that a new trader should trade in 6 markets, it would be more credible but that's just me.

[thalestrader]

Originally Posted by MightyMouse »

But, because of the competiveness of the intraday markets, successfully taking intraday short term trades in one market on a consistent basis is very difficult. Trying to do it in multiple markets is suicide ... you are trading other traders who eat, sleep, and breath the oil market, S&P, Euro, etc and will eat you alive if you do not eat, sleep, and breath that particular market and get on the wrong side of their trade. Their behavior is nothing short of predatory and I would strongly recommend that people master one market especially if you are new to short term futures trading.

We've discussed this before when you first appeared here in this thread. I do not know the where or why of how you came by your view of the "competitiveness of the intraday markets," but my opinion is that you are damaging your own prospects by using such a view to organize your trading. I have no desire to change your mind. You will no doubt continue find this thread preposterous, and you will persist in feeling that those posting their blotters here stretch credulity so long as you hold the view that you do.

My own view is that I compete against no one but myself. What follows from this is that I believe that when I lose, it is not because another "predatory" trader bested me by virtue of viciousness (vice is, afterr all, no virtue). When I lose, it is for one of two reasons: 1) Price acted other than I anticipated, and I lose. No problem, losses happen, or 2) I screwed up. No problem, so long as I realize my error and I take steps not to repeat the error in the future.

I also believe that I can step into any freely traded, liquid market and be consistently net profitable. I do not need to know the instrument I am trading.

I've attached some charts of recent trades - each profitable (though some more than others). I re-snapped them so as to hide the instrument, the date/time, and the price scale. Each of the trades was a long trade based upon a breakout above recent resistance. There are five charts, and in no particular order represent the 10 year note, S&P emini, the Euro, Crude, and Soybeans. Each is a fifteen minute chart.

I eat, sleep and dream no one market - but I am obsessed with price charts. Give me a chart, and I will trade it. And whether I win or lose has nothing to do with anyone other than myself. But I'd bet I win more often than lose, and that when I do lose, I lose much on average than my average win.

Whether you believe that or not matters not to me. But you are concerned with presenting balanced views. I agree. I thought that a post balancing your view of predatory traders preying upon one another, with my view where one's success or failure is the result of the discipline and emotional control of the trader might be useful to new traders stumbling upon this discussion.

Best Wishes,

Thales

[MightyMouse]

Originally Posted by sevensa »

As I said.. you are missing the point and apparently unwilling to see it. No point to take this further as the thread has been derailled too much already.

I make a statemnt that it is dangerous for new traders to trade 6 markets. That was the point. I still stand by it. Which was a community spirited statement. How you get from that to me being bitter about not making money trading is some irrational leap. Your point, then has nothing to do with anything.

[Kiwi]

Clearly you are either lucky or cherry picking your trades Thalestrader.

Or is it that you have specialized in a behaviour that occurs in many markets and when it does entrains participants to a reasonably limited number of options?