The Markets, Trading & Charts Thread

[kevsta]

Investing: Expend money with the expectation of achieving a profit or material result by putting it into financial schemes, shares, or property...

Yes, I see how that wouldn't apply in your case.

the general reaction I'm getting is kind of how I would expect it to be giving a herd of cows a guided tour of the abattoir. but is this really what skepticism is reduced to round here? snarky comments with occasional quotes from investopedia?

having done all my own research for probably 8 solid months of long long days and painstakingingly gathered numbers and practical evidence, I'm a bit surprised, but I probably shouldn't be really eh?

just say if I am right, your job, in fact your whole industry is just one big joke, isnt it. the proverbial lambs to the slaughterhouse. I can see why the shirty reactions, dont worry

pleasepleasepleasepleaaaase.. let it continue

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

the general reaction I'm getting is kind of how I would expect it to be giving a herd of cows a guided tour of the abattoir. but is this really what skepticism is reduced to round here? snarky comments with occasional quotes from investopedia?

having done all my own research for probably 8 solid months of long long days and painstakingingly gathered numbers and practical evidence, I'm a bit surprised, but I probably shouldn't be really eh?

just say if I am right, your job, in fact your whole industry is just one big joke, isnt it. the proverbial lambs to the slaughterhouse. I can see why the shirty reactions, dont worry

pleasepleasepleasepleaaaase.. let it continue

The faces of the fallen....

 

[Fast Eddie B]

regarding my scheme which I said reminded me of his...

no, not really? how does the risk reward work on your example? its not locked in rock solid, like on mine, is it?

When I suggested a scenario where your initial stake could dwindle by 40% before turning around, you proposed that was infinitely unlikely due to your "rock solid" scheme, where more is won than can be lost. Mine had losses maxed out at 5% per investment with unlimited upside - how's that for risk/reward!

Many other schemes have proposed similar "rock solid" gains, yet have failed.

Not to say yours won't work, though I think both history and math make it highly unlikely.

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Not to say yours won't work, though I think both history and math make it highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, highly, unlikely.

I didn't really "fix" your post, just made it more precise.

 

[kevsta]

regarding my scheme which I said reminded me of his...

When I suggested a scenario where your initial stake could dwindle by 40% before turning around, you proposed that was infinitely unlikely due to your "rock solid" scheme, where more is won than can be lost. Mine had losses maxed out at 5% per investment with unlimited upside - how's that for risk/reward!

is it any better than when I'm in a trade with +2% account size already locked in, and its running on? at stoploss zero, risk reward goes to infinity (div/zero) anyway doesnt it? the point is, im going to lock in mine and cash out, and you'll quite possibly just ride it back down again at some point?

many people also dont understand that in trading, zero is not zero either. it is the value of a full win, divided by your risk:reward ratio.

if instead of taking a loss, that would take half a winning trade to win back (2:1) you only take zero instead of the loss, that's an extra half a win you dont have to make up.

r
Many other schemes have proposed similar "rock solid" gains, yet have failed.

Not to say yours won't work, though I think both history and math make it highly unlikely.

yes yes yes but ongoing evidence here says that most probably things are not quite what they seem or we are told.

in the land of the blind, the one eyed kevsta might truly end up king. or at least comfortably off anyway. really comfortably

 

[kevsta]

The faces of the fallen....

that's the second time that line has looped in this thread now, I have no idea what it means, and am not interested enough to Google it.

 

[oifvetforreason]

I've been lurking on this thread for a while. Kevstra, this is what would convince me - I'd be convinced enough to pay the fee for whatever "system" you have been sold.

(I don't have access to "charts," and definitely don't have the time or energy to make this test, but I would imagine there are others on this board who could.)

1. We compile 50 charts from random markets (they could all be Forex, since that seems to be your game), OR one long chart and you must make 50 different decisions.

2. The charts are "revealed" one increment at a time. You seem to think this system holds true for all time scales (which should be your first clue it is a scam), so we'll set it to "reveal" in 1 hour increments.

3. When you see one of the "1,2,3....1" (whatever that means, you have been really shifty about that) set-ups, you must make a prediction about the next movement WITHOUT SEEING IT. (So you can't weasel out, I would even accept CONCRETE hypotheticals, e.g. "If the next two increments are down, the third increment will be up."

4. if you could correctly predict 40 out of 50 movements (that gives your perfect manipulation system a little cushion), I'll sign up for whatever newsletter you're hooked on. And I'll gladly give 100 US dollars for your trouble (and just think, compounded at 5%, month after month, what you could turn that 100 bucks into!!).

By the way, when you say the system only has to be right 50% of the time because of whatever risk/reward mumbo jumbo calculation you use, it DOES NOT make me more interested in the 1,2,3...1 system. It makes me interested in flipping coins. Someone mentioned martingale earlier, and when you say you only have to be right 50% of the time, you are definitely talking about some derivative of the martingale gambling system.

Of course, you can't and won't do this. It would force you to see that this whole idea (and I'm sure it feels powerful, I've been on a great run at a craps table and called 3 numbers in a row before.... I was SURE I had the dice solved) is a scam you are pulling on YOURSELF.

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

I've been lurking on this thread for a while. Kevstra, this is what would convince me - I'd be convinced enough to pay the fee for whatever "system" you have been sold.

(I don't have access to "charts," and definitely don't have the time or energy to make this test, but I would imagine there are others on this board who could.)

1. We compile 50 charts from random markets (they could all be Forex, since that seems to be your game), OR one long chart and you must make 50 different decisions.

2. The charts are "revealed" one increment at a time. You seem to think this system holds true for all time scales (which should be your first clue it is a scam), so we'll set it to "reveal" in 1 hour increments.

3. When you see one of the "1,2,3....1" (whatever that means, you have been really shifty about that) set-ups, you must make a prediction about the next movement WITHOUT SEEING IT. (So you can't weasel out, I would even accept CONCRETE hypotheticals, e.g. "If the next two increments are down, the third increment will be up."

4. if you could correctly predict 40 out of 50 movements (that gives your perfect manipulation system a little cushion), I'll sign up for whatever newsletter you're hooked on. And I'll gladly give 100 US dollars for your trouble (and just think, compounded at 5%, month after month, what you could turn that 100 bucks into!!).

By the way, when you say the system only has to be right 50% of the time because of whatever risk/reward mumbo jumbo calculation you use, it DOES NOT make me more interested in the 1,2,3...1 system. It makes me interested in flipping coins. Someone mentioned martingale earlier, and when you say you only have to be right 50% of the time, you are definitely talking about some derivative of the martingale gambling system.

Of course, you can't and won't do this. It would force you to see that this whole idea (and I'm sure it feels powerful, I've been on a great run at a craps table and called 3 numbers in a row before.... I was SURE I had the dice solved) is a scam you are pulling on YOURSELF.

How dare you show up here and subject us to your "logic"!

This thread is for us rubes to learn about how to make billions in (pretend) money by studying the circles and arrows in random graphs of random events that occurred in the past. Now, if you pay attention, eventually you (and we) will learn how to apply these techniques in the future. Assuming, of course, that future random events perfectly mimic those random events that occurred last week.

Or something.

 

[AdMan]

How dare you show up here and subject us to your "logic"!

This thread is for us rubes to learn about how to make billions in (pretend) money by studying the circles and arrows in random graphs of random events that occurred in the past. Now, if you pay attention, eventually you (and we) will learn how to apply these techniques in the future. Assuming, of course, that future random events perfectly mimic those random events that occurred last week.

Or something.

Or we all learn to fly attack helicopters.

 

[kevsta]

I've been lurking on this thread for a while. Kevstra, this is what would convince me - I'd be convinced enough to pay the fee for whatever "system" you have been sold.

hello, and thanks for joining in. ok, to start with there's an error here. I don't consider $300 for a a lifetime's membership and ongoing free support for something until you get it, (or give up) "sold". for this, in fact that was a gift.

"shown", I could go with, but being as I then taught myself HOW and at much greater depths than I was shown.

I charge more than that for 2 hours of my professional time as an SEO consultant, and I spend more than that at a restaurant any evening, so I was not "sold" anything ok?

(I don't have access to "charts," and definitely don't have the time or energy to make this test, but I would imagine there are others on this board who could.)

1. We compile 50 charts from random markets (they could all be Forex, since that seems to be your game), OR one long chart and you must make 50 different decisions.

2. The charts are "revealed" one increment at a time. You seem to think this system holds true for all time scales (which should be your first clue it is a scam), so we'll set it to "reveal" in 1 hour increments.

just like a live chart which I have been trying to get everybody to try then? what DO you think trading is? you think they give us charts that are already filled in

3. When you see one of the "1,2,3....1" (whatever that means, you have been really shifty about that) set-ups, you must make a prediction about the next movement WITHOUT SEEING IT. (So you can't weasel out, I would even accept CONCRETE hypotheticals, e.g. "If the next two increments are down, the third increment will be up."

this is quite funny really. when I am sitting at my trading station, the situation you describe is EXACTLY the game I am playing. I see the chart, right hand end is moving, I have to make a prediction. WITH MONEY. EVERY DAY.

THE PRICE MOVES. CONTINUALLY up and down, and painstakingly slowly to the right. it fills in one bar at a time, and I predict which way next.

4. if you could correctly predict 40 out of 50 movements (that gives your perfect manipulation system a little cushion), I'll sign up for whatever newsletter you're hooked on. And I'll gladly give 100 US dollars for your trouble (and just think, compounded at 5%, month after month, what you could turn that 100 bucks into!!).

that would be an 80% win rate, very high, mostly unachievable, I only need to win 50% of trades.

By the way, when you say the system only has to be right 50% of the time because of whatever risk/reward mumbo jumbo calculation you use, it DOES NOT make me more interested in the 1,2,3...1 system.

thats not about 1,2,3 that is just basic risk reward +4, -2, +4, -2, +4, -2?

mumbo jumbo? END DAY 2, +7% (3.7% cashed out, +3% still live)

so sorry I havent explained it very well, but it isnt mumbo jumbo and its incredibly simple. and Im not scamming myself, because it works.

and when we have a verified €1k account here going up like this too, you are all going to have to start re-thinking, aren't you.

It makes me interested in flipping coins. Someone mentioned martingale earlier, and when you say you only have to be right 50% of the time, you are definitely talking about some derivative of the martingale gambling system.

no, no its not. you are simply incorrect. if every time you win, you win 2, and every time you lose, you lose 1, how often do you have to win, to be up?

Of course, you can't and won't do this. It would force you to see that this whole idea (and I'm sure it feels powerful, I've been on a great run at a craps table and called 3 numbers in a row before.... I was SURE I had the dice solved) is a scam you are pulling on YOURSELF.

a scam whereby I used to lose money all the time, but have now worked out how to win?

the level of understanding (lack of) is a bit of problem here. the basic point IS what do you think I'm doing in front of moving Forex charts all day? they dont come pre-drawn so I can add the lines and trade in hindsight using time-travel you know the last few AUS & CAD charts I have drawn lines in first and price then filled in the gaps. So I am doing EXACTLY what your test suggests on a daily basis, and winning more money than I lose at it now, consistently, at will.

so I'm really not trying to sell anybody anything, I am trying to SHOW you something, quite why now, is becoming unclear.

be under no illusions, learning this, is no easier to learn than flying an attack helicopter, and you wouldn't think you just get in one of those and fly it now, would you.

so whilst I understand we would all like pointless academic theoretical tests, I'm already onto the practical.

 

[oifvetforreason]

So, let's be clear. You don't think your obvious 123 whatever can be right 80 percent of the time. You think it can be right AS OFTEN AS A COIN WOULD BE RIGHT. So much for that secret system.
The real "weird trick" (this sounds more and more like one if those bad google ads) is that you only have to be right as often as a coin would be right!
Your system is based on being right as often as chance, but you think you have figured out a way to manage your risk so that a 50/50 shot is a winner. Good luck.
Also, I saw you say earlier that this is a zero sum game. Please elaborate. That statement flies I the face of what little I know about economics and trading.

 

[kevsta]

So, let's be clear. You don't think your obvious 123 whatever can be right 80 percent of the time. You think it can be right AS OFTEN AS A COIN WOULD BE RIGHT. So much for that secret system.

The real "weird trick" (this sounds more and more like one if those bad google ads) is that you only have to be right as often as a coin would be right!
Your system is based on being right as often as chance, but you think you have figured out a way to manage your risk so that a 50/50 shot is a winner. Good luck.

??? I have always stated that win loss rate is not so important, what is important is your risk reward ratio? how can you not understand that if I set my stoploss to say €20 (a 2% loss) and my take profit to €40 (4%) and walk away, and then win 50/50, that I'll be up?

see, because, every day, I am did you click into the statement that shows the actual numbers? -20 +40 -10 +40 etc?

it is an incredibly simple concept, Im not sure why we are struggling with this?

I will tell you the difficulty in it though, its knowing WHERE to take trades from, so that you HAVE the 40 pips in front of you. If youre facing the wrong way all the time it will move 10pips your way then come back and steamroller you the other.

so whilst the maths is utterly kintergarden, understanding where the high risk:reward trades are, is THE key

Also, I saw you say earlier that this is a zero sum game. Please elaborate. That statement flies I the face of what little I know about economics and trading.

It's a simple fact, if you and I trade something and the price changes, however much you win by, is my loss. for me, add the spread to the loss too (a few pips) and for you, deduct the spread out of your winnings, but otherwise, for every loser there is a winner, and vice versa.

edit, this visual sums risk:reward up rather well, all the reds are losses (stopped out) yet up +20% in 6 weeks. all the Nikkei trades taken IN THIS thread are on there.

because you dont understand it, doesnt mean it cant be true people.

and I'll add, that as this is the demo testing account, as I have stated before, I take earlier and more aggressive entries on this than I would on live, so there are a lot of *unnecessary* losses here, primarily of the "execution fail" trade type.

and still, with all that, over time, they all just go up, nowadays, anyway.

 

[kevsta]

S&P

Ok, lest we forget, I actually said that my system (along with retail world) called a long on it here with the price at 1631 at the time. unfortunately all the images are expiring now, but they're all worthless anyway, aren't they. still trying to decide whether this is worth $30 or not. that's about 12 minutes paid time for me.

however Thursday followed by Friday's re-re-re test low and close at new level 1 again, now has me supposed to be looking for manipulation at lower levels to get in long

at the top I talked us through the distribution cycle and marked out the "Perfect Entries" which are now into significant profit, and told you where the floor was, and that when it broke, 1651, was the next level, did I not?

I pointed out in fact that we had just seen the exact same thing happen to the Nikkei, prior to its rolling over

On the big scale, this looks like a screaming sell, IMO. I think this era will be looked back at fondly like 1920 in gold, for a while at least anyway.

Buy Low Sell High is the idea isnt it? definitely out now then. Because, once again we have parabolica charts hugely extended away from reality, and that will correct. Even if price is to head significantly higher into the future, it WILL NOT do it from the top of a parabolic spike, that is just NOT how markets move.

what it will do is sag lower for a while, pound though the new range floor, and reverse from there

 

[Fast Eddie B]

this is quite funny really. when I am sitting at my trading station, the situation you describe is EXACTLY the game I am playing. I see the chart, right hand end is moving, I have to make a prediction. WITH MONEY. EVERY DAY.

I'm confused...

Are you doing this now with real money?

If so, what was your opening account size, and where is it at now?

 

[Fast Eddie B]

The real "weird trick" (this sounds more and more like one if those bad google ads) is that you only have to be right as often as a coin would be right!
Your system is based on being right as often as chance, but you think you have figured out a way to manage your risk so that a 50/50 shot is a winner. Good luck.

That is what to some here made it reminiscent of as "Martingale" system, which I only learned the name for in this thread.

 

[Fast Eddie B]

how can you not understand that if I set my stoploss to say €20 (a 2% loss) and my take profit to €40 (4%) and walk away, and then win 50/50, that I'll be up?

That sounds pretty much exactly like my simplistic "sell down 5%, hold on upside and bracket up waiting for a future 5% pullback to sell". That has the advantage of not limiting upside to 4%.

Schemes like that have been around for the 40 years of so I've been investing, and probably for centuries. They sound good, but I don't think any has been shown to be profitable over time.

 

[kevsta]

I'm confused...

Are you doing this now with real money?

If so, what was your opening account size, and where is it at now?

I really worry about your memory amigo. I have both live accounts and parallel demo accounts. and as I told you only yesterday a few posts back

so the only way to settle this being as I am not prepared to share my personal financial details ongoing live with the whole internet, nor put my real trading under any kind of extra performance pressures than it already comes with, is as psionlo suggested I think, with a brand new small but very high leverage account, which I will plug into one of these online verification services so it can be permanently inspected by anybody at any time.

If, instead of using €10k @ 100x leverage and 1% per trade risk, I use €1000 and 500x leverage at 2% per trade risk, for the exact same trade strategy I should be able to replicate the same kind of figures as with 10k @ 100x leverage?

Because while I am not happy (and getting less every day frankly - I AM NOT A ****** FIGHTER PILOT ALRIGHT!!?!!!) about sharing ongoing results with stroppy strangers on the internet, I am more than confident enough AND NEED TO TEST the 500x leverage model live anyway, and so will plug the account into an online stats verification site so it can be fully visible to anybody interested.

presumably this will be acceptable for a live demo? the same results from a 1000 account as I'm getting from a 10k account currently ?

because if I can generate the same amount of income from 1/10 the size account using higher leverage, my real accounts will also be going that way, and it will be an even sharper demo, wont it.

If that isnt good enough for you then you'll just have to wait for the annual kevsta report.

 

[Fast Eddie B]

Reducto ad absurdum thought exercise...

kevsta has found a way to profit from a 50/50 outcome by structuring his bets.

Now, as proof of concept, he tries it against a neighbor, to prove its as ironclad as he thinks. They are going to use a physical coin, and before each flip they can each determine their own bet according to whatever scheme they choose.

Problem is, his neighbor got wind of kevsta's scheme, and decided to mirror it exactly.

Paradox - if the scheme is ironclad, what happens when everyone starts using it?

 

[Fast Eddie B]

I really worry about your memory amigo. I have both live accounts and parallel demo accounts. and as I told you only yesterday a few posts back

My memory is not what it was.

But you commonly use terms that I don't recognize. I did not know what "forex" was, nor "pips", etc.

And I did not equate "live account" with "real money account".

So...

...how many live accounts to you have? This is important to avoid cherry picking and the file drawer effect.

When were they opened and with what amounts?

And how is each doing, both in actual and percentage gains.

Please be concise and clear - this is the "proof of the pudding" that many of us have felt your posts were lacking.

And, for clarity, from this point on maybe only post the results of live accounts - the rest is to east to post hoc rationalize to be very convincing.

 

[kevsta]

Reducto ad absurdum thought exercise...

kevsta has found a way to profit from a 50/50 outcome by structuring his bets.

Now, as proof of concept, he tries it against a neighbor, to prove its as ironclad as he thinks. They are going to use a physical coin, and before each flip they can each determine their own bet according to whatever scheme they choose.

Problem is, his neighbor got wind of kevsta's scheme, and decided to mirror it exactly.

Paradox - if the scheme is ironclad, what happens when everyone starts using it?

yes these kind of thought exercises are always good aren't they.

NOTHING to do with reality however, from what I can see. If maybe 1 in 10,000 even had the potential to retrain their emotions to be good at this, how many of those, are likely to stumble across it, and take it by the horns?