I'm not bothered about the short term either. The graph above was taken over a 3mth span. But I would've preferred to prove this trend of stagnation much earlier!Bog wrote: ↑Mon Oct 22, 2018 8:07 pmRuthlessimon, how does it help tracking your trades after every race or knowing how much you are up? I find it as an distraction, it's just short term noise.
I don't track anything, I don't care how much I'm up/down in a day, how many races I won, percentages etc. I just trade every race from zero, knowing if I respect the rules all the time I will be fine! Maybe once a day I verify what is the bankroll, most of the time I verify once a week.
I did these changes because I had problems with accepting losses and chasing losses. My results improved.
There's nothing wrong with your approach (if you're happy with your growth). But I always knew aspects of my trading were heinously inefficient (I absolutely believe, like gold, edges have a fineness component). Hence why I've become/became pretty focal, in a couple of data related threads - & so anti psychology. I see the benefits, but I prefer working on edge - learning from those better than me in that department
The problem I had (& kinda still do) - I actually really enjoy trading manually. But it's a "barrage of ideas", some purely quantitative, some purely qualitative. Without keeping check of each trade, it's very hard to see what's working longterm (especially qualitative). Because the p&l alone is very unreliable for a dodgy manual trader (i.e. mixing non-edges, with real edges - then calling everything semi-rosy under the umbrella of "discretion" - then just working on psychology to improve). It never sat well with me that approach.
What I'm doing atm, is an "early (although feels like a never ending ) spring clean" - stripping back everything I can; build a much stronger quantitative base. Knowing that when I trade, I'm defo trading something that works - & could prove why, if pushed. Which currently I can only do on a hand-full of trades