New Trader trying to Stop Going In-Play

The sport of kings.
User avatar
JollyGreen
Posts: 2046
Joined: Sat Mar 21, 2009 10:06 am

No, I am trying to get people to think more about where they are joining the market and what is causing the price to be at a level when there is no market activity to suggest it should be there. If a price is higher than it was, why is it high? If it isn't there for a real reason i.e. an error where it's overshot and its been chased in which case it will not be there for long and it will revert as this is not a real reason for the position, it is an error and a temporary position. If however, there is an issue with the horse or if another horse is being strongly supported then that legitimate reason (plenty more you can list) makes it a safer proposition. A price is not going to stay in no mans land without good reason, so unless money suddenly floods in to keep it there it will move. If it is 7 points above your "vwap" then there has to be a reason for that and something has to change to substantiate that position.

EDIT: SOrry for the typos, I am trying to do multiple things and I am not doing well. There bets at Cheltenham all placed this morning, THREE BLOODY SECONDS!!!
User avatar
JollyGreen
Posts: 2046
Joined: Sat Mar 21, 2009 10:06 am

ShaunWhite wrote:
Wed Mar 13, 2019 2:40 pm
JollyGreen wrote:
Wed Mar 13, 2019 1:31 pm
When you are joining a market, ask yourself if you are in new territory or if the market has already ventured that way.
JG
Hi, may I ask, are you advocating being mindful of a reversion to vwap? ...unless there's a reason it shouldn't?
If so the edge must be in being astute enough to recognise those reasons in the moment, because the data in itself doesn't reveal anything conclusive for the general case, well not to me anyway. I hope I'm wrong for obvious reasons and if so I'll sharpen my pencil and keep looking.
Another reply on this subject. You are correct in that there is a fair bit of intuitive behaviour but you need to be aware of why a move is happening. As I said, experience plays a part and I cannot give that to new or novice traders. A lot lose money because their entry point is wrong for most of their activity. They see a move and jump on it without asking why it moved. If they waited and checked why it moved they may prevent themselves from creating an instant loss and then chasing their tails. They may actually spot the true reason (or the wrong reason) and then take advantage of it. They may catch the ongoing drift/steam based on a proper move or they may catch a reversion due to a false move.
User avatar
ShaunWhite
Posts: 9731
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2016 3:42 am

Thanks. I think we agree, context is king. As you say too many people forget the numbers are a window on the world and not just a video game that exists in its own bubble. Every move needs to be accompanied by 'why?'.

I'd taken a hiatus from the forum, but some people are worth quizzing when they show up;)
User avatar
JollyGreen
Posts: 2046
Joined: Sat Mar 21, 2009 10:06 am

ShaunWhite wrote:
Wed Mar 13, 2019 3:48 pm
Thanks. I think we agree, context is king. As you say too many people forget the numbers are a window on the world and not just a video game that exists in its own bubble. Every move needs to be accompanied by 'why?'.

I'd taken a hiatus from the forum, but some people are worth quizzing when they show up;)
We do agree and as you say, context is king!

In these markets there is no free money so if a move occurs and someone made an error it will be swallowed up very quickly. If you are basing your opening order on said error then you will get swallowed up too. Even if you just suspect there is an error and wait momentarily while you decide, you will save yourself money and gain some valuable experience.
iambic_pentameter
Posts: 443
Joined: Wed May 18, 2016 1:24 pm

Great to see you back posting, JG.

Hope you are well and enjoying Cheltenham.

Iambic.
User avatar
JollyGreen
Posts: 2046
Joined: Sat Mar 21, 2009 10:06 am

iambic_pentameter wrote:
Wed Mar 13, 2019 5:12 pm
Great to see you back posting, JG.

Hope you are well and enjoying Cheltenham.

Iambic.
I had bets on the first three races at Cheltenham and they all came second!! Wicklow Brave was caught in the shadow of the post at 33/1 (28/1 SP) :?

I didn't bet in the Champion Chase or the Cross Country but I had Cocoa Beach in the Fred Winter and there are no prizes for guessing where that finished :roll:
iambic_pentameter
Posts: 443
Joined: Wed May 18, 2016 1:24 pm

JollyGreen wrote:
Wed Mar 13, 2019 5:26 pm
iambic_pentameter wrote:
Wed Mar 13, 2019 5:12 pm
Great to see you back posting, JG.

Hope you are well and enjoying Cheltenham.

Iambic.
I had bets on the first three races at Cheltenham and they all came second!! Wicklow Brave was caught in the shadow of the post at 33/1 (28/1 SP) :?

I didn't bet in the Champion Chase or the Cross Country but I had Cocoa Beach in the Fred Winter and there are no prizes for guessing where that finished :roll:
A friend of mine was on Wickow Brave as well so I can understand how you feel there!
luckytrader
Posts: 24
Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2019 11:07 pm

stockdale51 wrote:
Mon Mar 04, 2019 10:14 am
hi i got shot down in flames by some poster that said i can not possibly make 10.00 per trade with stakes of 10.00 pound . but i agree with you i have started useing a bank of 150,00 and i have doubled it within a week. so 100 % profit on my out lay is pretty good imo . but your right even if your liability is your whole bank 30 seconds before the off you still get out . i have set myself between 5.00 and 10.00 loss then i get out regardless of my gut feeling that when race starts inplay it will hit my close trade if its just a few ticks. and am back in green . you learn by your mistakes but it is possible to make 10.00 per race with 10.00 stakes but is there any rule to say thats bad trading useing your whole bank ?
hi
I have been trading for just over a year now and have to confess I have tried the in play after a trade has gone wrong in the early days several times and i think i got away with it maybe twice out of 6 or 7 times the last one cost me over half the bank.

I now can make around 15 pounds per day from a 300.00 bank so not planning retiring just yet. I would say lower your stakes setup a simple excel sheet so you can see your strike rate and average win and loss. If your average win is for example £4.00 then obviously if you are letting your losses go to £20.00 plus that's a lot of trading to get back on an even keel not to mention the anxiety. Cut it out at least £8.00 except the small loss and move on in trading remember you will LOSE some.

I'll bet (No pun intended) if you look at some daily records from an excel sheet as described above you will wonder what the hell was I doing with that kind of money its not till its in black and white in front of you do you realise I'm a trading god or not as good as I thought.

Good Luck
User avatar
brimson25
Posts: 504
Joined: Sat Apr 08, 2017 11:42 am

ShaunWhite wrote:
Wed Mar 13, 2019 3:48 pm
Thanks. I think we agree, context is king. As you say too many people forget the numbers are a window on the world and not just a video game that exists in its own bubble. Every move needs to be accompanied by 'why?'.

I'd taken a hiatus from the forum, but some people are worth quizzing when they show up;)
I have a new post-it on my desk, saying: "WHY is this happening?"
stueytrader
Posts: 863
Joined: Tue Dec 15, 2015 6:47 pm

JollyGreen wrote:
Wed Mar 13, 2019 3:31 pm

Another reply on this subject. You are correct in that there is a fair bit of intuitive behaviour but you need to be aware of why a move is happening. As I said, experience plays a part and I cannot give that to new or novice traders. A lot lose money because their entry point is wrong for most of their activity. They see a move and jump on it without asking why it moved. If they waited and checked why it moved they may prevent themselves from creating an instant loss and then chasing their tails. They may actually spot the true reason (or the wrong reason) and then take advantage of it. They may catch the ongoing drift/steam based on a proper move or they may catch a reversion due to a false move.
Interesting post, which I really wanted to reply to, due to an earlier discussion I had on here.

I remember a similar discussion about the 'why' in market moves, many posters suggested that market moves were often impossible to know a 'why' behind market moves - are we now suggesting that is wrong?

Personally, I agree with the principle that all traders should have an underlying view for why a market drifts or shortens a selection, but I guess we may be discussing fundamentals vs technical analysis here - do we mean a 'fundamental' why or a technical (it's all in the stats) why?
User avatar
ruthlessimon
Posts: 2094
Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2016 3:54 pm

JollyGreen wrote:
Wed Mar 13, 2019 1:31 pm
never let it get 5 ticks away from you.
Euler wrote:
Wed Jul 05, 2017 10:32 am
Noise is a minimum of 5 ticks. If you use that as your stop you will get thrown out by just the noise in the market.
Out of interest, how would you reply to Euler?

Big deviation from two heavyweights. A synergy could be incredibly insightful to a lot of people
eightbo
Posts: 2154
Joined: Sun May 17, 2015 8:19 pm
Location: Malta / Australia

stueytrader wrote:
Tue Apr 09, 2019 2:15 pm
JollyGreen wrote:
Wed Mar 13, 2019 3:31 pm

Another reply on this subject. You are correct in that there is a fair bit of intuitive behaviour but you need to be aware of why a move is happening. As I said, experience plays a part and I cannot give that to new or novice traders. A lot lose money because their entry point is wrong for most of their activity. They see a move and jump on it without asking why it moved. If they waited and checked why it moved they may prevent themselves from creating an instant loss and then chasing their tails. They may actually spot the true reason (or the wrong reason) and then take advantage of it. They may catch the ongoing drift/steam based on a proper move or they may catch a reversion due to a false move.
Interesting post, which I really wanted to reply to, due to an earlier discussion I had on here.

I remember a similar discussion about the 'why' in market moves, many posters suggested that market moves were often impossible to know a 'why' behind market moves - are we now suggesting that is wrong?

Personally, I agree with the principle that all traders should have an underlying view for why a market drifts or shortens a selection, but I guess we may be discussing fundamentals vs technical analysis here - do we mean a 'fundamental' why or a technical (it's all in the stats) why?
Definitely interesting. Here's my view:

As traders we're intending to place bets that have a probability of making us money over a period of time. That means you need to have some foundation of logical reasoning behind any bets you place. Because however in any one particular case the market can produce a very wildly deviating result from any expectancy you have on the trade -- someone can decide to violently push the price in your favour or against your favour randomly. As such the 'real' why for any one particular market can not be known nor should carry too much weight.

If we can identify a concept or idea behind why the market may have moved such as where price broke below 2.0 for the first time, matched heavy volume between 1.99-1.90 before ultimately failing, returning back above 2 then violently carrying on drifting to the upside: We can have the idea that trader's who tried to take the breakout are trapped holding back positions at decent size. Regardless of whether the drift happens or not after price returns back above 2.00, because of the random element, never can we definitively say that we were "right" or "wrong" on our judgment on that particular market. It's about approaching things from a probabilistic mindset and accepting that your view may have be wrong and you may have taken a profit and similarly your view may have been correct and taken a loss.

If we make a habit of considering why the market is moving that allows our brain to begin to identify patterns between all the times you've had similar ideas which can equip the trader with a justification to pull the trigger the next time they get that feeling that the market's about to turn (discretionary/fundamental); particularly in places where they don't have stats to know that type of trade has worked out for them in the past (technical).
User avatar
JollyGreen
Posts: 2046
Joined: Sat Mar 21, 2009 10:06 am

We are talking about slightly different things so the 5 tick rule is pertinent to both arguments. I am trying to help the OP stop going in play so a sensible cut off is 5 ticks, I am not trying to make him cut out of a trade at 5 ticks for any other reason. If he can build discipline into his trading and stop going in play then he can start looking at issues with noise and when he can hold a position. For now, if I was to start talking about noise and holding a position based on it I feel it would simply compound his problems.
User avatar
JollyGreen
Posts: 2046
Joined: Sat Mar 21, 2009 10:06 am

Definitely interesting. Here's my view:

As traders we're intending to place bets that have a probability of making us money over a period of time. That means you need to have some foundation of logical reasoning behind any bets you place. Because however in any one particular case the market can produce a very wildly deviating result from any expectancy you have on the trade -- someone can decide to violently push the price in your favour or against your favour randomly. As such the 'real' why for any one particular market can not be known nor should carry too much weight.

If we can identify a concept or idea behind why the market may have moved such as where price broke below 2.0 for the first time, matched heavy volume between 1.99-1.90 before ultimately failing, returning back above 2 then violently carrying on drifting to the upside: We can have the idea that trader's who tried to take the breakout are trapped holding back positions at decent size. Regardless of whether the drift happens or not after price returns back above 2.00, because of the random element, never can we definitively say that we were "right" or "wrong" on our judgment on that particular market. It's about approaching things from a probabilistic mindset and accepting that your view may have be wrong and you may have taken a profit and similarly your view may have been correct and taken a loss.





You can play things on a pure stats basis and the move below 2.0 and then reverse back above is always a talking point. I take a simplistic view of this matter. If I can see a move below 2.0 is likely I will play that move and be wary of a potential reversal. I never look at it and think it is dangerous and the stats say it is not profitable, I will only play what I see. My experience and knowledge of the markets mean I know where the reverse is likely to occur so I will be eagle-eyed on how the money trades around that point and will be ready to jump ship. I often queue my exit orders around the likely reversal point and will try to determine if I should let them trade or perhaps cancel them if it looks like a strong move. Yes, I do get it wrong at times but I know what I am looking for and know long term I will profit. Sometimes the move smashes my orders and moves through much lower in price....that's all part of trading and I don't get upset by it.
User avatar
ruthlessimon
Posts: 2094
Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2016 3:54 pm

JollyGreen wrote:
Tue Apr 16, 2019 4:09 pm
the stats say it is not profitable

I know what I am looking for and know long term I will profit
Doesn't this discount the use of proving "why"?

The way I've read this (& correct me if I'm wrong) so long as it's profitable; that's all that matters (& the why is labelled as "experience"). I do find that uncomfortable though :)

I take the line that a strategy must be proven in data 1st; then discretion can be overlaid & compared to the "baseline" - but this avenue is extremely limited - because hardly anything gets through the 1st stage (proven in data)
Post Reply

Return to “Trading Horse racing”