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)
(I almost went back and deleted my question, I was worried that my question might be seen to have had an implication I didn't intent)
Certainly one can have great insights and be a great teacher and that value is on and of its own- and a great teacher great value. What he says about psychology of trading (I haven't read his book) is not diminished/augmented by his trading success.
The only reason for my question was that I personally will parse out some statements that are not about psychology. I don't mean I will hold them false or true - simply jury is out.
There was in the post I quoted:
"Mark states that there is "no positive correlation" connecting learning a way to have winning trades and being a consistently profitable trader over a long period of time none."
Trading: The one I'm creating in the present....Index Futures mini/micro, ZF
Posts: 2,311 since Nov 2011
Thanks Given: 7,341
Thanks Received: 4,518
It's the same exact thing as making basketball shots basketball free-throw's practicing and practicing for years and years you get very very good at it you know how to make basketball shots you know how to make a free throw but doing it in the midst of the pressure of a game is a completely different animal there's two seconds on the clock and you have to make one point to win
Ron
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
...My calamity is My providence, outwardly it is fire and vengeance, but inwardly it is light and mercy...
The steed of this Valley is pain; and if there be no pain this journey will never end.
Buy Low And Sell High (read left to right or right to left....lol)
I completely agree with what both of you are saying, I have found tons of value from his books.
Trading In The Zone is one of those books you read multiple times and see it each time with a new perspective and gain new insights into one's own mind.
Trading: The one I'm creating in the present....Index Futures mini/micro, ZF
Posts: 2,311 since Nov 2011
Thanks Given: 7,341
Thanks Received: 4,518
Ok so I was busy when I dictated the last quote here just above into my iPhone using TapaTalk at a stop light. Hence the run on and no punctuation.
I wanted to finish the thought now. Basically the reason IMHestO Mark is saying there is "no positive correlation" between finding winning trades and and being consistent profitable or being good at find high percentage market edges or market opportunities and being consistent profitable is because they are different skills sets.
I can stand in front of a mirror home all alone and do Robert De Niro's lines from Taxi Drive better than he can (I'm making a point here....lol.... I can't do it better just equal ) but that in no way means I can do it up on stage in front of 2000 people where those few line are just some of many many more or in front of 35 cast, crew and 3 cameras. Or for that matter withstand the years and years actors go thought of rejection. Waiting tables. The point again is its two (at least) different skill sets. Having the acting skills to pull emotions out of thin air as the director asks (skill set 1) and being able to navigate the craziness of the show biz industry (skill set 2).
Back to trading.... different skill sets and completely unrelated. Finding/creating a trading system (honestly I greatly detest the phrase "trading system"...lol) or market edge creation, finding market opportunities (skill set 1) AND executing those edges in a way that creates consistent profits, reliable. The probability mind set where 6 loser trades in a row does nothing to you or very very little and you just take the 7th edge the market presents no problem (skill set 2).
Another valuable skill set is the research side of trading, number crunching. But again having this skill set does not mean you necessarily have the error free trade execution one.
Ron
...My calamity is My providence, outwardly it is fire and vengeance, but inwardly it is light and mercy...
The steed of this Valley is pain; and if there be no pain this journey will never end.
Buy Low And Sell High (read left to right or right to left....lol)
I'm glad my post about parsing was helpful as a spring board to your thoughts and analogies.
Here is the quote
"Mark states that there is "no positive correlation" connecting learning a way to have winning trades and being a consistently profitable trader over a long period of time none."
If you asked some "consistently profitable traders" if they had no way to distinguish between winning trades and losing trades - what is your opinion on what they would say?
Do you feel they would say - "I have not clue how to tell a winning trade, I just throw money at the market at any time. -usually while I'm practicing free shots and sucking back a few cold ones."?
the point aquarian1 makes is interesting... so Mark Douglas apparently states that there is zero correlation between being consistently profitable and learning a way to have winning trades.
@Blash supports that view by saying it's the live execution that matters (Ron correct me if I'm wrong), because as Lefevre pointed out in Reminiscences of a Stock Operator
I have heard of people who amuse themselves conducting imaginary operations in the stock market to prove with imaginary dollars how right they are. Sometimes these ghost gamblers make millions. It is very easy to be a plunger that way. It is like the old story of the man who was going to fight a duel the next day.
His second asked him, "Are you a good shot?"
"Well," said the duelist, "I can snap the stem of a wine-glass at twenty paces," and he looked modest.
"That's all very well," said the unimpressed second. "But can you snap the stem of the wineglass while the wineglass is pointing a loaded pistol straight at your heart?"
Could this be the answer aquarian1 is looking for? I.e. is the difference all in the live execution?
Could this be the answer aquarian1 is looking for? I.e. is the difference all in the live execution?
Hi Xplorer
Thank you for the thread.
Actually I really wasn't (initially) making a point when asking if Mark was a consistently profitable trader.
It is not that I ever had any question about live execution or not. Really that is all in Ron's posts that he somehow felt I did not understand Mark statement. Of course I did but I'm happy to be a springboard for analogies.
I think that Mark had pushed a learning point to far.
IF he has stated something like" Being a consistently profitable trader requires more than knowing how to spot a wining trade. Several other skills are necessary as well."
- then that's fine.
However, to state that consistently profitable traders have no more ability to spot winning trades than consistently losing traders, would require a survey of consistently profitable traders. That is some research of many traders.
Ron has stated that Mark has no bibliography, and read no other books. On what then does he use as has the basis for such a bold claim? (Note he is not saying that "he thinks there is no correlation", he says there IS NO correlation. That requires statistical data.)
Ron is correct in that there is no bibliography in Trading in the Zone. From my recollection Douglas did that on purpose as a way not to rely on other people's work but to find his own answers by simply asking questions.
I understand what you are saying. If we are to assume that there is no correlation between the ability to spot winning trades and trading profitably on a consitent basis one would need to survey many traders. If this was the test, I'd say probably Mark Douglas met it because in the book he mentions his trade coaching career spanning over 18 years (at the time of writing that book). I think that could be translated into having to deal with many many traders.
However I'd take a step back and first ask the question: when Douglas talks about no relationship as above, does that mean a difference between live trades and sim trades, or was that just my interpretation? Could he be referring to something else?
For instance in the book Douglas tells the story of a guy who was an excellent analyst but a poor trader, citing the lack of psychological flexibility as one of the main obstacles. What we can infer from the anecdote is that analysts can be superb at identifying major support and resistance but they can't necessarily trade them. That was the point of that story, but I'm not yet 100% sure whether it also applies to the case in point.