|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
As a discretionary-style trader, I disagree. What's the difference? If
you can't make your account numbers go up you can't trade. This is true
whether you're using a mechanical or discretionary approach. Paper is
perfect for showing if your approach will make the numbers get larger or
smaller. Emotions should be the same for both arenas because paper tests
your abilities just like the real thing. Only fools believe that while
they might fail on paper, their ability would somehow magically transform
itself if only they were trading real money. I find it hard to believe that
a person's so-called gut or discretionary instincts breakdown so severely
when they're trading on paper that it renders it useless as an indicator of
how well they would really do.
If anybody can demonstrate a fallacy or shortcoming with this logic, please
speak up.
Brian.
-----Original Message-----
From: Thomas Brun [SMTP:TDBRUN@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, June 03, 1998 10:25 AM
To: omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Can someome tell me
I think there is a major point to be made about paper trading. If you
are going to trade a Mechanical system than paper trading should be an
effective way to test your system and yourself. There should be very
little difference in the results. If you can't trade on paper than you
should not trade for real $$$, using a mechanical system.
With that said, If you are going to be a discretionary trader than
paper trading may Not be an effective way to test your system.
I can't answer for discretionary traders but I think that seems to be
where the dispute of paper vs. actual trading exsists.
Mechanical traders advise it and discretionary traders find it of little
value.
I didn't want to start a whole new issue for discussion, I just wanted
to clarify one already on the table.
Regards,
Tom....
|