Welcome to NexusFi: the best trading community on the planet, with over 150,000 members Sign Up Now for Free
Genuine reviews from real traders, not fake reviews from stealth vendors
Quality education from leading professional traders
We are a friendly, helpful, and positive community
We do not tolerate rude behavior, trolling, or vendors advertising in posts
We are here to help, just let us know what you need
You'll need to register in order to view the content of the threads and start contributing to our community. It's free for basic access, or support us by becoming an Elite Member -- see if you qualify for a discount below.
-- Big Mike, Site Administrator
(If you already have an account, login at the top of the page)
This might be the first time I saw someone mention this about Roger . I was in his room and am a member of FT for life although Im not in his room recently . I learned a lot from this guy and the indis werent what I came away with from my experience in the room . Roger is able to see things from a very broad scope . His insight in regards to whats making sense "right now" is what you should seek from this guy . Just learning to review ( how and why ) the markets before the day begins was alone worth the price of admission .
Can you help answer these questions from other members on NexusFi?
It appears The Seeker actually gets it...success doesn't come in a can. Good software can help a lot, but it's only as good as the trader behind it pushing the buttons.
Let's assume you're designing a trading method. You like trading counter-trend so you look for divergences. In a single day, on a single chart, you get 60 divergence signals...all shapes and sizes. 40 are losers, 10 have some profit potential and 10 become runners. Taking all signals, you would lose. So you spend a few years studying divergence and you begin to get a good idea of what common characteristics make a great signal. But in order to identify greatness, you must look at form, volatility, momentum, volume and market condition. Then you must look at what is happening on 2 or 3 other larger timeframe charts of various types. Now you want to make sure you avoid OB or OS areas as well as areas of strong S & R. You need to be able to instantly gauge trend strength, channel width and slopes. Over the years of study, you create some excellent indicators on your own that perform very well in helping to identify high probability areas of market reversal...some things nobody has ever thought of before. Cool huh?
Well, now you try to trade it and you find that after a short time you brain is toast. Measuring this, watching that, calculating these and anticipating that...pretty soon you're mentally fatigued and making all sorts of mistakes. Even with terrific signals with tons of profit potential, I can easily show you how to lose on practically every one. No system is worth a dime if you don't know how to manage trades and control risk.
About this time you realize that you're missing many great opportunities to go with the trends. So you hit the drawing board and develop some of the best "with trend" entries you've ever seen...but you also get a lot of trash trades, too. A few years of extensive testing and some proprietary indicator development and you have some super filters to help idenitfy those goldmine trades. But, now there's double the things that you need to monitor to find the good stuff. You end up with about a dozen different signals and you have the means of identifying the best of the best. Your entries are 100% mechanical and the vast majority have good to high profit potential. Your ship has finally come in, right? Not so fast....
Today's markets are complicated and it takes a sophisticated system to stand any chance of lasting success. The old days of pulling daily profits with a pair of crossover moving averages are long gone. Sophistication can deliver tremendous power and accuracy but it can also require complexity. Most traders struggle to keep "all the plates spinning", so to speak. It's time to start coding.
Whether you do it yourself or hire the best talent you can find, your system must be coded before you wind up broke or in a padded cell. My system has taken nearly two years of coding...8 to 10 hours a day...6 to 7 days a week. But the result was worth every minute and every penny invested...but it's just a tool, not a ticket to vast riches. I'm still the operator. I make the final decision. And I must manage every trade myself because trade management is where computers always get stupid.
My car is a wonderful machine. With it, I can go anywhere there's a road. But no matter how many times I go to the store, my car still doesn't know the way. It could be programmed, but now you're talking complexity. If you want to get there without crashing into someone else, you're talking even more complexity. You want it to be able to take you places on icy roads, still more complexity. But why all the work and expense??? Let the car do what it does best, and you do what humans do best. Same for coded trading systems.
Let computers do their job...you can't begin to compete. And computers can't compete with you in Trade Management because they are always trying to apply the "cookie cutter" approach. They can't think.
The point is, if you're going to be a trader, then trade. Stop expecting programs and indicators to do everything for you. They are tools to be used in the hands of skilled traders who know how to manage trades like a pro. That takes training and not every trader gets it because trade management requires mental mastery (including patience, discipline and unshakable confidence). If you're looking for the Holy Grail, you'll find it between your ears.
Like all educators, I've had my share of students that failed. But it wasn't because the system failed and it wasn't because I failed to be there with professional mentorship anytime they asked for it. They failed because they lacked the ability to overcome the mental demons that all traders must master. This is the main motivation for hiring a very talented PhD in Psychology (who understands the mental side of trading) to help give traders the best chance at lasting success. They're not cheap, but I'll gladly foot the bill if it helps as much as I suspect it will.
Yes, he is a Ph.D (Doctor of Psychology). He is also a Pastor so has a lot of experience in counceling. He spent a number of years working in a psychatric hospital. But the area of psychology he really enjoys is working with traders. He will be coming on board probably around mid December. I believe he will provide a vital service to our trading group so we're excited about this new addition. I'll keep everyone posted when he conducts public seminars.
As I have stated so many times before, I have tried moderating both with a live account and in simulation. For teaching purposes, simulation is much more effective and it's the way my students requested I teach. When I trade my live account, I am totally serious, totally focused and totally quiet. Students learn little... only what they see. I don't answer questions. I only take two or three trades in a three hour span. It's very boring and a lousy way to teach.
If anyone thinks that they are going to enjoy tremendous success simply because their moderator is trading his live account, then by all means go find one. You need a showboater, not a mentor. It is far better to have a mentor that can teach than to have a live account trader who cannot.
I have had two conversations with our staff psychologist on this topic and he actually pointed out a couple of more good reasons why my trading a live account would be counter-productive.
So, let's stop the criticism and simply go our separate ways. We'll never agree on this. I don't let people who don't have a clue what or how I teach dictate my methods and I'd lose respect for any instructor that did. If someone can teach...and teach well...it doesn't matter which mode is traded as long as the system and rules are followed.
Also, I don't need "exposure". I do not want to teach the world how to trade. I keep my group relatively small and manageable. That's why we never advertise. A large group would be a lot of work and I'd certainly be less effective.
Seems everyone missed the point of my questions. I'll try to be clearer.
I assume that there are no magic indicators. I assume that much of the success of the Felton Trading room is about Roger Felton (I clearly said as much). So I asked questions precisely to see if its possible to determine a) just how much is attributable to the driver of the car (to use Roger's analogy) and how much to the car (DivergencePro software) and more to the point b) how likely is it that a serious dedicated student can learn what Roger knows and is trying to pass on to his students. The point of all this is to assess the connection between trading education and trading success.
Having been a college professor for many years I can say that if most of my students failed to attain appropriate levels of knowledge after being in my courses and I insisted that the failure was always with the students because they are lazy and lacking dedication or motivation I would have been fired from my job.
So my question remains: how many of Roger's students graduate into successful traders? If the answer is "very few" the the inescapable conclusion seems to be that Roger's program is a lottery. The message seems to be as follows: The indicators might help. You might pick up enough skill from Roger but most likely you will not. If you don't its not the car (indicators) and its not the driving instructor (Roger). Its you." If its true that its highly improbable (by actual historical stats) that you will successfully learn to trade then in my view honesty should compel us to make that clear up front. If we know that the odds are that people are wasting money and time buying services from us then we should make sure that they know that they are playing a lottery.
You are correct, there are no "magic" indicators yet that seems to be what the majority of traders seek. I am always upfront and honest about me and what I do. I teach traders how to trade the system I personally use.
If you think the success of the trading room is about me, that clearly shows you've never been in the room or paid attention to the student chat.
As a former college professor, I'm intrigued that students who sign up for your class...who have no desire to learn...who refuse to study...who won't do the work or complete assignments....students who won't let you help them even though you make yourself available during most afternoon, evenings, weekends and holidays and (surprise!) fail your course, their failure is all your fault?? You would be fired if you stated otherwise? That's an incredible statement.
Ok, so we're fair, I need for you to give me the exact percentage of your students who took your course and went out into the work world and became a success. I would submit that you have no way of determining that nor does any other professor I know of. Do you see the ridiculousness of what you are asking?
I not only teach my trading method inside and out, I teach traders everything I know about trading. I consider that to be my solemn duty. They know exactly what I look for, why I look for it and what I do once I act on it. I verbalize my every thought during every moment I'm in a trade. I withhold nothing. There are no secrets.
But learning is work...and lots of it. Magic indicator seekers aren't going to buckle down and do the work until they realize that their fantasy quest is futile. I've had students who "failed" and then tried again...and again...and then finally got it. Not because the system was complicated to learn, but because they didn't have the discipline to trade successfully. When I would go over their trades with them, I didn't have to point out their mistakes to them, they'd point them out to me. They knew exactly what to do and their fear prevented them from doing it. They were allowing that fear to sabotage their success.
You seem to assume that traders who failed did so because they didn't receive the knowledge they needed to succeed. That perhaps I was teaching a methodology that only I could understand and follow. I suggest that you come in to the trading room and present that question to the students. I think their answers might surprise you.
I don't make students send in reports to me or copies of their trading statements. I tell them to be sure and let me know if they have any problem whatsoever. That's all I can do. I can tell you that, in my opinion, more students fail, at least initially, than succeed. Most traders are also unwilling to do the hard work necessary. I contend there's a connection. I can give the knowledge but I can't force anyone to learn it. If you're looking for an easy ride, this isn't it. We're more comprehensive with more depth than any other course I know of.
So I think the more appropriate question would be, "Of the serious traders who have the passion to work hard, attend the trainings, ask for help and not give up, how many succeed?" The answer would be easy...nearly all of them. Unlike college, trading is a course where you either get an "A" or an "F". There's nothing in between. I don't make the rules, the market does.
It seems we are condemned to talk past each other. I did not say that I took personal responsibility for all of the students who might have failed my courses and I certainly did not take responsibility for the failures of the shirkers. On the other hand, if most of my students failed then my dean would certainly not have accepted the argument that they were all shirkers.
The analogy between a college degree and career success and success after trader training is limited at best. There is a much tighter connection between training and desired outcome in the case of training traders. But even colleges track their alumni and do statistical correlations between earning a degree and career success. So there is nothing ridiculous about finding out how students make out after college. Its done all the time -- all over the world. In your case it would be trivial to survey your students without demanding brokerage statements. Methinks the mentor doth protest too much and too loudly.
A better analogy would be specific technical training that is skill based. I currently work in the IT industry. Not everyone who takes training from me on large enterprise software systems gets it. But 80% of the people in my courses do pass the course, where the conditions for a pass is the demonstrated capacity to install, configure, and administer the systems in question. Apparently trading is different. Most trading students pay good money for instruction and fail to succeed as traders because by your account they are shirkers. Another serious possibility is that the skills are just not transferable.
The problem with your proposed question is that its a "heads I win tails you lose" proposition. How will we define serious dedicated students? Well they are the one's who succeed, of course. So the answer to your version of a good question is that all of the real, dedicated, committed students succeed and the ones who fail, well they just didn't try.
I'm simply asking a basic statistical question: In a given population we have to assume shirkers, workers, dummies, geniuses and so on. We can gerrymander the results by proclaiming the successful ones as the workers and the rest are the shirkers. But this is a self-serving and self-authenticating argument.
Instead we just do the math: we offer a specific course of study. In this case training in a specific task and methodology. If 5% get it and the others do not some of the failures will be attributable to shirking, etc. Some of the success will be attributable to natural genius, etc. Some of the success will be attributable to the training. But in the end a very low success rate can only be attributable to a knowledge transmission failure. The method is teachable only to a select few and the odds of being among the few are very poor. It's simple mathematics.
No one is suggesting that you don't offer quality instruction. But the evidence seems clear: assuming that you have good software, that your mentoring is first rate, that only some of the failure can be written off as lack of effort and commitment then the conclusion seems obvious -- successful trading can be taught to a select few and investing your money in the unlikely prospect that you will be one of the few (if only you try hard enough) is equivalent to buying a lottery ticket.
Let's put it this way: In the first 30 days of training, a minimum of 98% of students understand the method completely. The majority could probably teach the course. They watch me trade every day following the same rules they have been taught. They get the knowledge and it is taught very well. I get lots of kudos and zero complaints.
So, why do traders fail? Volumes have been written on that topic. Big Mike has webinars on the psychology of trading. It seems you are oblivious to the dramatic negative influence that emotions play in trading. I suggest that you try reading some of the hundreds of books written on trading psychology. Trading in the Zone by Mark Douglas might be a good start.
The nasty effects of human emotions has always been a subject I discussed extensively...but I'm not a trained psychologist. That's why I hired one and I fully expect that to be a big factor in the success rate of my students.
Exiledgoblin -- or should I say Professor Exiledgoblin:
It seems like you're wanting to hear that people are IMMEDIATELY seeing positive results from Felton students after signing up with Felton Trading or you are considering that it's just simply a lottery ticket. Nothing could be further from the truth IMO. I've been with FT now for about three months. Do I have any regrets about signing up? Absolutely not. Have I become a trading millionaire yet? Certainly not. Have I become a better trader showing better results than when I walked in the door? You bet I have!!
There's a lot of training that's involved and a rather -- well, I won't say too "steep" of a learning curve, but there's definitely a learning curve, as Jillzy has mentioned previously here. There is a LOT of data to absorb and lots of things to take into account in the software that's provided. There's some tweaking involved. There's a good amount of SIM trading involved to test out the new "tools" that Divergence Pro and the entire system offers. Do I stumble occasionally in my trading efforts? You bet I do. But the camaraderie of the trading room, the training involved, being able to watch a trader with umpteen more hours behind the screen than I do is worth the price of admission in my opinion. I guess I'm not at my 10,000 hours yet.
I can't seem to understand why you keep insisting this is a lottery ticket that's purchased by the students without even having been in the room at all. Is that correct? Or have you? Any particular reason you just haven't signed up as a guest to come in instead of sparring here with Roger?
I'm just a student, but I'm personally inviting you to come by and check it out. I see you're an Elite member so you can come in as long as you like. From my experience and from what I can tell -- as I don't know any of the fellow students personally -- but I'd venture to guess that a hefty percentage of the students have been trading for a while but haven't seen the results they thought they were going to have seen by now so they've landed at Felton. I'll loosely call them "frustrated traders." Perhaps YOU, too, are a "frustrated trader."
Like you, I also have a professional career that I practice after trading in the morning. I'm grateful and lucky that I live on the west coast so it allows me that opportunity. I'm also grateful that I have AT LEAST 10,000 hours under my belt at that craft and perform it like a master, as Roger does with trading. No, I haven't quit my day job yet, but that's definitely my goal -- and it's a much more realistic goal thinking about it in the last three months.
Hope to "see" you in the room, Doc. (You are a Doc; right?)
I think that only Traders who are beginners or frustrated ones will ever say, "If someone can trade successfully then why would they waste their time teaching thier method? Shouldn't they keep it a secret and just trade?" Here is an example of a successful trader who gets pleasure out of helping others. Computers aren't good companions. Eager students are. Sharing success satisfies one of those basic human needs. After all, we are social animals. Many methods work, but most of us can't figure a new one out from scratch without much time and money wasted. It is better, faster and less frustrating to have a coach. I like my own trading method, but if I was shopping around for a mentor, this guy would be on my short list.