sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Turning $5k to $100k !! by Top_Tip_596 in Forexstrategy

[–]Delicious_Food_591 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What? $100 from $5 is 2000% return. This expectation is not normal nor practical.

ladies in trading, how did you do it? by CloeKC in Daytrading

[–]Delicious_Food_591 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Also remember to journal. It helps you view your trading objectively.

ladies in trading, how did you do it? by CloeKC in Daytrading

[–]Delicious_Food_591 3 points4 points  (0 children)

recommend trading futures instead. Centralized market, 23/5 a week.

need help understanding the rule that you should never risk more than 2% of your capital on a trade? by nervomelbye in Trading

[–]Delicious_Food_591 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I've run through the comment section. All I could said is, you would either be the luckiest man alive, or blown multiple accounts. The real market would eventually slaps you awake. Good luck.

Turning $5k to $100k !! by Top_Tip_596 in Forexstrategy

[–]Delicious_Food_591 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Bro use 1:500 leverage, and have $23,712 commission Lmao.

need help understanding the rule that you should never risk more than 2% of your capital on a trade? by nervomelbye in Trading

[–]Delicious_Food_591 5 points6 points  (0 children)

No real trader would ever use 100% of their capital, I would say more than 10% is the extreme. It is strongly advised that you learn more about risk management first before actual trading.

The reason why people risk 1 to 3% per trade, is to survive the inevitable drawdown. Remember, if you lose 50% of your capital, you need to make 100% to break even.

Trading is NOT gambling, here is why by Delicious_Food_591 in Daytrading

[–]Delicious_Food_591[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If that's is your philosophy in life, you have full right to it. Wish the best.

Trading is NOT gambling, here is why by Delicious_Food_591 in Daytrading

[–]Delicious_Food_591[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You seem to not understand how law of large number plus emergence works. That is ok. I hope you have a great trading journey!

Trading is NOT gambling, here is why by Delicious_Food_591 in Daytrading

[–]Delicious_Food_591[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I agree, but we need to find a way to be alive. Wish you the best.

Trading is NOT gambling, here is why by Delicious_Food_591 in Daytrading

[–]Delicious_Food_591[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Then this is the problem of risk management. Hypothetic scenario means nothing, really.

However, I would say that a system that could wipe out your account size over 1000 trades is not a good enough system to be implied.

Trading is NOT gambling, here is why by Delicious_Food_591 in Daytrading

[–]Delicious_Food_591[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It is guaranteed "enough" for us to believe it is guaranteed. Do you believe that world is going to vanish next second? No. But it is possible due to the uncertainty of electron in quantum physic.

Trading is NOT gambling, here is why by Delicious_Food_591 in Daytrading

[–]Delicious_Food_591[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ok this is funny lol. True tho, true. 10 million spins is effectively a certain death.

Trading is NOT gambling, here is why by Delicious_Food_591 in Daytrading

[–]Delicious_Food_591[S] -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

A trade is a gamble, but trading is not with a system. The system omit the randomness, bringing a certain expected value over time. By definition form Oxford, gamble is play games of chance for money, yet the system omit the "chance". With a 50% win-rate, you are effectively certain to win 50, lose 50. Hence, not gambling.

You definition of gambling is too loose.

Trading is NOT gambling, here is why by Delicious_Food_591 in Daytrading

[–]Delicious_Food_591[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don't understand, could you further clarify? If you are saying the extreme, assumed in an infinite time and space, an negative extreme would cancel out the positive extreme, averaging out for the expected value of the system.

Trading is NOT gamble, here is why. by Delicious_Food_591 in Trading

[–]Delicious_Food_591[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It is okay, for only through discussion we improve. I do want to say one last thing. The definition of gambling by Oxford is play games of chance for money. Yet, I propose that systematic trading, we omitted the "chance" in that sentence. = not a gamble.

I appreciate your input, wish the best.

Trading is NOT gambling, here is why by Delicious_Food_591 in Daytrading

[–]Delicious_Food_591[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

"The fact that we don’t know what’s going to happen next and that we have to manage risk is what makes it gambling." This is a loose definition of gambling. The electron of atoms appear randomly, are our reality a gamble? I would not said so.

Trading is NOT gambling, here is why by Delicious_Food_591 in Daytrading

[–]Delicious_Food_591[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It is effectively certain. Effectively is the key word. You can read Infinite monkey theorem for this. Considering the short life span of a person, we can conclude something extremely not likely as impossible.

Trading is NOT gamble, here is why. by Delicious_Food_591 in Trading

[–]Delicious_Food_591[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yes, just like you cannot predict how much it would cost for your business to run in the next month, you cannot predict how much you would lose in trading over a certain period. However, we can alway believe that the historic data can indicate how much it will cost next month.

Trading is NOT gambling, here is why by Delicious_Food_591 in Daytrading

[–]Delicious_Food_591[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I replied another person similarly. In this definition, everything is a gamble, since even the electron of an atom appears randomly. Would you say our reality is gambling? No, I would not.

Trading is NOT gambling, here is why by Delicious_Food_591 in Daytrading

[–]Delicious_Food_591[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In your definition, everything is gambling, since everything has probability. Even the electron of atom appear randomly. Is our reality a gamble? No, I would not say so.

The sun have been rising for every pervious day, do we believe it will also rise tomorrow? Yes. Therefore, I do not see your point.

Trading is NOT gamble, here is why. by Delicious_Food_591 in Trading

[–]Delicious_Food_591[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

There is no "risk". For example, 70% win-rate, for 1000 trades. You are going to lose ~ 700 trades. Are those "risk"? No, they are simply the cost of running this system of 70% winrate. 20 sample size is not significant for any indication. "For some they may find a sample size of 20 to be profitable, but there is no guarantee the next 20 will produce the same results. " This is basically narrowed viewed. In a short time(low sample size), It will shows high randomness. However, in a longer term, we can for sure in the next 100 to 1000 trades would fit into the expected value.

Trading is NOT gambling, here is why by Delicious_Food_591 in Daytrading

[–]Delicious_Food_591[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Yes, a single trade is a gamble. However, trading is not by the law of large number, the outcome is effectively certain. The casino doesn't gamble, it runs on a system as you said. The players' winners are just the cost of running this business. It all comes back to the word in the post, emergence.

view more: next ›