|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
<x-html><!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META content=text/html;charset=iso-8859-1 http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META content='"MSHTML 4.72.3612.1700"' name=GENERATOR>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV>
<P><FONT face=Garamond size=3>Tom my apologies to you, Sam and Manning.
Earlier today I inferred there might be a connection between Sam and Manning
since at one time they collaborated together on a speaking seminar. Sam I
believe also programmed TD indicators for Omega. I have been informed that
Manning is not a shill and is also not necessarily that close with
Sam.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT face=Garamond size=3></FONT>Dan</P>
<P> </P>
<P> </P>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>-----Original Message-----<BR>From: Tom DeMark
<tomdemark@xxxxxxxx><BR>To:
Michael Stewart <<A
href="mailto:MPST@xxxxxxxxxxxxx";>MPST@xxxxxxxxxxxxx</A>>; <A
href="mailto:omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx";>omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx</A> <<A
href="mailto:omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx";>omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx</A>>; <A
href="mailto:tomdemark@xxxxxxxx";>tomdemark@xxxxxxxx</A> <<A
href="mailto:tomdemark@xxxxxxxx";>tomdemark@xxxxxxxx</A>><BR>Date: Friday,
April 09, 1999 9:33 PM<BR>Subject: Re: 4-8-99 Thursday comments for
Friday<BR><BR></FONT></DIV>
<P><BR>:in retrospect, it amazes me how much wasted venom, energy, and
diatribe<BR>:some of these potentially valuable members of this group exert.
a<BR>:chronology from the misguided e-mail to my son is reported blow.
note<BR>:how it involves the same individuals who have usurped control of
your<BR>:forum to elevate their small statures and large egos.<BR>:<BR>:NOT
UNEXPECTEDLY, mark brown was first to attack and smear, not<BR>:necessarily the
content of mymessage since it was uncertain of its<BR>:accuracy, rather he chose
to critique my motivation which only i know,<BR>:not he. soon afterwards
"pete sp broker" was quick to fire off "Dont<BR>:start this SHIT
again, asshole.....", then a couple of members--chesler<BR>:for
one--attempted to draw a connection or a diabolical purpose<BR>:implicating sam
tennis--the creator of ez language--manning stoller--a<BR>:quality researcher
and individual of high integrity--and me. for what<BR>:purpose i dont know. i
have never met manning stoller and have only<BR>:spoken to him many, many years
ago on the telephone. i have read his<BR>:articles and am impressed with his
market savvy, research experience,<BR>:and knowledge. as for sam tennis--i
havent spoken to sam in many, many<BR>:months but i can tell you one thing he's
an exceptional programmer and<BR>:individual and certainly no Machiavelli. Each
possess qualities many of<BR>:this forum's critics could only hope for and
something these critics<BR>:certainly lack. how could some of these members
extrapolate from an<BR>:innocent response i sent to manning ulterior motives is
beyond me.<BR>:nevertheless two members accused me of using the excuse that
i<BR>:inadvertently sent a response to manning to the group when it was
the<BR>:message to my son which I admittdly misdirected.
<BR>:</P></DIV></BODY></HTML>
</x-html>From ???@??? Fri Apr 09 22:02:37 1999
Received: from list.listserver.com (198.68.191.15)
by mail02.rapidsite.net (RS ver 1.0.2) with SMTP id 15862
for <neal@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Sat, 10 Apr 1999 00:51:11 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by accessone.com (8.8.5/8.8.5/PIH) with SMTP id VAA14826;
Fri, 9 Apr 1999 21:50:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp1-alterdial.uu.net (alterdial.UU.NET [192.48.96.22])
by accessone.com (8.8.5/8.8.5/PIH) with ESMTP id VAA14721
for <REALTRADERS@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Fri, 9 Apr 1999 21:49:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from g6450 by smtp1-alterdial.uu.net with SMTP
(peer crosschecked as: 1Cust217.tnt7.west-palm-beach.fl.da.uu.net [153.36.40.217])
id QQgkhf06509
for <REALTRADERS@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Sat, 10 Apr 1999 04:48:54 GMT
Message-Id: <001301be830d$6a501800$d9282499@xxxxx>
Date: Sat, 10 Apr 1999 00:48:44 -0400
Reply-To: "Dtrader" <dan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: owner-realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
From: "Dtrader" <dan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: RealTraders Discussion Group <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: was {Re: 4-8-99 Thursday comments for Friday}
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0010_01BE82EB.E285D660"
X-To: "Real Traders List" <REALTRADERS@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3155.0
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3155.0
X-Listprocessor-Version: 8.1 -- ListProcessor(tm) by CREN
X-Loop-Detect: 1
X-UIDL: 8aa9db4a80c39db272654ddeb090bfd8.06
<x-html><!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META content=text/html;charset=iso-8859-1 http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META content='"MSHTML 4.72.3612.1700"' name=GENERATOR>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV>Tom DeMark,<BR><BR>Are you REALLY all that surprised by the -- to use your
words -- "wasted<BR>venom, energy, and diatribe" directed at you by
members of this (or any)<BR>list?<BR><BR>Have you ever stopped to consider that
maybe -- just maybe -- the problem<BR>lies with you, and not with the
group?<BR><BR>You also "accidentally" sent a similar message to the
Omega list just a few<BR>short months ago.<BR><BR>You must admit that it is not
so remarkable if people on this list assume<BR>the possibility of an intentional
'accident' rather than an actual<BR>'accident' given your prior
record.<BR><BR>However, EVEN if you did send this message by accident, which I
will not<BR>deny is possible since I have done the same thing myself in the
past, you<BR>should not be totally surprised by the reactions YOU elicit in
US.<BR><BR>WHY?<BR><BR>Attitude baby. It's all in your ATTITUDE.<BR><BR>I
for one believe that you probably do have something of value to contribute<BR>to
this and other lists. However, you seem to be so concerned with
making<BR>people aware of your associations with famous TRADERS that much of
what you<BR>*might* have to share with us gets DROWNED OUT.<BR><BR>You bemoan
the lack of "content and substance" and you also talk
about<BR>"sharing my experience and research" in your letter (the long
one you sent<BR>to the list on Friday night, see below).<BR><BR>Funny, when I
asked you to discuss your TD Rebo several months ago, you<BR>immediately became
defensive and confrontational, hurling accusations at me<BR>as quickly and in
the same manner as people have been hurling them at you<BR>here today. And
heaven help anyone who wants to know what your motives were<BR>for including
"selction options" in your book which is billed as a<BR>collection of
"New..Timing Techniqes."<BR><BR>When asked simple questions about your
books, you immediately assume you are<BR>being attacked rather than first trying
to respond with thoughtful (let<BR>alone insightful) answers.<BR><BR>When you
are pressed on certain points about your research, you hedge<BR>yourself and say
that you are not permitted to discuss these details due to<BR>your financial
relationships and CFTC registration and all kinds of other<BR>similar
occupational related excuses.<BR><BR>When you talk so generously about sharing
your research with us, the best<BR>you can muster is to share with us your
opinions of your own indicators.<BR>Have you ever shared any hard data that
supports your empirical views? Or<BR>should we just simply take every word
that comes out of your mouth as<BR>gospel?<BR><BR>When others do finally test
your indicator and arrive at a negative<BR>conclusion, you dismiss these
individuals outright as being either<BR>incompetent boobs or somehow desirous of
criticizing you (as if they have<BR>nothing better to do).<BR><BR>You say you
believe this forum should be an educational experience for new<BR>traders.
After reading your material, even some of the brightest traders<BR>have had
difficulty following your descriptions of market set-ups and other<BR>details
about your indicators. Do you really think that NEW traders would<BR>want
to enter this same quagmire of jumbled and confusing thoughts?<BR><BR>EVEN if
these ideas are the BEST and MOST FANTASTIC ideas ever to be exposed<BR>to the
trading community since the invention of the BAR CHART, if only a<BR>small
minority of people can understand them (like Paul Tudor Jones and
Leon<BR>Cooperman), how can that help the NEW trader?<BR><BR>If you are
unwilling to explain these ideas clearly and in simple terms, if<BR>you are
unwilling to take a little constructive criticism in the process,<BR>how can
that help the new trader?<BR><BR>And how can you honestly and expect our
sympathy when you say, "I have<BR>absolutely nothing to sell"?
Your indicators are FREE now? Since when?<BR><BR>Some inward
reflection on your part may possibly reveal the answer to the<BR>question of why
people react the way they do whenever you appear on
these<BR>lists.<BR><BR><BR><BR><BR>**********************************<BR>tom's
message begins below this
line<BR>**********************************<BR><BR>-----Original
Message-----<BR>From: Tom DeMark <<A
href="mailto:tomdemark@xxxxxxxx";>tomdemark@xxxxxxxx</A>><BR>To: Michael
Stewart <MPST@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; <A
href="mailto:omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx";>omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx</A><BR><<A
href="mailto:omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx";>omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx</A>>; <A
href="mailto:tomdemark@xxxxxxxx";>tomdemark@xxxxxxxx</A> <<A
href="mailto:tomdemark@xxxxxxxx";>tomdemark@xxxxxxxx</A>><BR>Date: Friday,
April 09, 1999 9:33 PM<BR>Subject: Re: 4-8-99 Thursday comments for
Friday<BR><BR><BR>:<BR>:<BR>:Michael Stewart wrote:<BR>:><BR>:>
Tom,<BR>:><BR>:> looks like you might have nailed the low - wonder if you
will call the<BR>high<BR>:> ?<BR>:<BR>:<BR>:THANK YOU for your kind words,
michael, however, my memo was intended<BR>:for review ONLY by my son. yes, you
are correct the projection made<BR>:yesterday for the S and P low for today was
indeed 1343.90--- a MERE one<BR>:tick less than the ACTUAL low of 1344.00. Also
you are correct that the<BR>:projected high of 1362.90 which was also made
yesterday was a MERE 4<BR>:ticks from the ACTUAL high of 1362.50. Obviously, NO
ONE is capable of<BR>:forecasting the future with success but the odds of
someone<BR>:statistically predicting a trading day's low within 1 tick and the
same<BR>:day's high within 4 ticks is not incredible if one has both LUCK and
a<BR>:few time-tested techniques to support the forecasts. it's amazing
that<BR>:despite this report's unintentional delivery yesterday to this
forum,<BR>:some of the members choose to attack the messenger--me. the market
did<BR>:perform just as described but this was not intended as my
recommendation<BR>:to the forum members since they were NOT my audience.
surprisingly, one<BR>:member did respond to a member by the name of Seth to
notify him that he<BR>:did in fact traded 25 S and Ps based upon the
forecast--although it<BR>:would have been profitable, i'm sorry to read that
since it was<BR>:certainly not my intention. I HAVE INCLUDED AT THE CONCLUSION
OF THIS<BR>:LETTER PROOF OF THE ABOVE MARKET STATEMENTS, NEVERTHELESS, JUST
TO<BR>:PREVENT THESE SAME INDIVIDUALS FROM TWISTING THE FACTS ONCE
AGAIN.<BR>:<BR>:in retrospect, it amazes me how much wasted venom, energy, and
diatribe<BR>:some of these potentially valuable members of this group exert.
a<BR>:chronology from the misguided e-mail to my son is reported blow.
note<BR>:how it involves the same individuals who have usurped control of
your<BR>:forum to elevate their small statures and large egos.<BR>:<BR>:NOT
UNEXPECTEDLY, mark brown was first to attack and smear, not<BR>:necessarily the
content of mymessage since it was uncertain of its<BR>:accuracy, rather he chose
to critique my motivation which only i know,<BR>:not he. soon afterwards
"pete sp broker" was quick to fire off "Dont<BR>:start this SHIT
again, asshole.....", then a couple of members--chesler<BR>:for
one--attempted to draw a connection or a diabolical purpose<BR>:implicating sam
tennis--the creator of ez language--manning stoller--a<BR>:quality researcher
and individual of high integrity--and me. for what<BR>:purpose i dont know. i
have never met manning stoller and have only<BR>:spoken to him many, many years
ago on the telephone. i have read his<BR>:articles and am impressed with his
market savvy, research experience,<BR>:and knowledge. as for sam tennis--i
havent spoken to sam in many, many<BR>:months but i can tell you one thing he's
an exceptional programmer and<BR>:individual and certainly no Machiavelli. Each
possess qualities many of<BR>:this forum's critics could only hope for and
something these critics<BR>:certainly lack. how could some of these members
extrapolate from an<BR>:innocent response i sent to manning ulterior motives is
beyond me.<BR>:nevertheless two members accused me of using the excuse that
i<BR>:inadvertently sent a response to manning to the group when it was
the<BR>:message to my son which I admittdly misdirected.<BR>:<BR>:some character
by the name of jim paris thought he was a real detective<BR>:by proving the
routing to manning and the omega users group were done<BR>:surreptitiously and
simultaneously--i never denied this, or ever would<BR>:i, because i intended to
do that. he(JIM) ruefully
wrote:<BR>:
Fwd: your mailing list<BR>:
Resent-Date:<BR>:
Fri, 9 Apr 1999 08:04:00 -0700<BR>:
Resent-From:<BR>:
<A
href="mailto:omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx";>omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx</A><BR>:
Date:<BR>:
Fri, 9 Apr 1999 11:01:48 EDT<BR>:
From:<BR>:
<A
href="mailto:JParris@xxxxxxx";>JParris@xxxxxxx</A><BR>:
To:<BR>:
<A
href="mailto:tomdemark@xxxxxxxx";>tomdemark@xxxxxxxx</A><BR>:
CC:<BR>:
omega-list@xxxxxxxxx<BR>:"Perhaps
you do not realize how transparent this tactic is. I am<BR>:forwarding
it<BR>:back to you to give you some perspective. Why do you have to get a
nice<BR>:guy like Manning involved in your spam schemes? *I am not copying
the<BR>:whole list on this*. It could give other people ideas and that
could<BR>:really jam up your already malfunctioning e-mail."<BR>:<BR>:he
immediately sent this message to the entire group contradicting what<BR>:he
wrote. i defy this purported sleuth to prove ulterior motives with<BR>:the
correspondence I intended for my son. then just to antagonize me he<BR>:sends a
copy to the group. he certainly doesn't have time for market<BR>:research or
trading, does he? but he had time for the
following<BR>:volleys----<BR>:<BR>:Tom<BR>:<BR>:I am sorry. I accidentally *did*
copy the list when I forwarded your<BR>:e-mail<BR>:back to you. I meant to send
it to my brother.<BR>:<BR>:Jim<BR>:<BR>:You believe me - don't you ??
*****Unfortunately, jim i do believe you<BR>:even though circumstances suggest
otherwise.i'll give even you the<BR>:benefit of the doubt.<BR>:<BR>:in defense
of jim, alan myers had the same anlysis regarding my e-mail<BR>:to manning but
once again the error was my communication with my son<BR>:which no one can
dispute.just like jim he claimed my goal was to spam<BR>:and sell products--they
can't seem to get it that I HAVE ABSOLUTELY<BR>:NOTHING TO
SELL.<BR>:<BR>:<BR>:then this individual by the name of phil lane who likes to
imply feats<BR>:of market greatness takes his swing "Well I had some good
trades too,<BR>:but I'm not coming on here with a 3 page post to brag about it.
Even by<BR>:accident. I thought we had gotten rid of the talking heads."
Phil,<BR>:doesn't understand. whereas he may boast after the fact of his
assumed<BR>:accomplishments, i did not boast and my work was IN ANTICIPATION of
the<BR>:next day's trading--something a true trader and technician are
trained<BR>:to do. my visit was inadevertent and if he transfers his streak
of<BR>:stubbornness and boasfulness to the markets, the market will
certainly<BR>:make him humble if it hasn't already by now. i actually wonder
whether<BR>:he or the others of his ilk even trade or even have time to trade
given<BR>:their preoccupation with empty banter and accusation.<BR>:<BR>:THINK
SENSIBLY for once, would i be crazy enough to intentionally send<BR>:something
to this group in advance of trading? fortunately the forecast<BR>:was in fact
correct but i was attacked and ridiculed for other reasons<BR>:which are empty.
despite what some of your members may say.i am not<BR>:selling the members
anything and have never sold them anything. in the<BR>:past, i was merely an
observer of this group, hoping to glean some<BR>:market wisdom. that goal is
forever undermined by the viciousness of the<BR>:few who ridicule poor
contributors. thank god my instructors never<BR>:humiliated me the way members
are on this site.<BR>:<BR>:then there are the apparent "lackeys" who
express the same venom as<BR>:their presumed heroes but are empty-headed.
assuming as i said my notice<BR>:to this group was inadvertent, why does neil
weintraub fantasize my<BR>:intention to incite an intraday trading rebellion
within the ranks of<BR>:the members...HE WROTE "Tom one chapter does not
make a book. The fact<BR>:is" staying long this market and not day trading
would have the right<BR>:thing to do>" Remember it is called Trade
Station not investment station<BR>:and I believe that Omega does not even trade
or have a model<BR>:portfolio.You do the public a diservice by promoting day
trading, since<BR>:89% lose most of their money.Further, your signals are no
better than<BR>:flipping a coin. Sometimes they work sometimes they don't. Or as
the<BR>:commercial says,"sometimes you feel like a nut, sometimes you
don't."<BR>:How do you feel today?** i never promoted day trading,
weintraub,<BR>:because this e-mail wasn't intended for you and how do you feel.
does<BR>:attacking me make you feel bigger or better.<BR>:<BR>:obviously,
content and substance are not the goals of some of the<BR>:purported research
geniuses of this site. given the errant message's<BR>:prediction of a projected
market low today one tick from the actual and<BR>:the projected high 4 ticks
from the actual. NOT ONE has asked for any<BR>:explanation. a true researcher
would be inquisitive. my appetite for<BR>:this knowledge was so voracious that
had it been food i'd be many pounds<BR>:heavier. this is a research site. why
aren't people asking how and why?<BR>:i know why people aren't sharing because
of the potential of attack and<BR>:ridicule.<BR>:<BR>:I CHALLENGE YOU GUYS TO
REDIRECT YOUR EFFORTS TO ACCOMPLISH THE INTENDED<BR>:GOALS OF THIS FORUM. MAKE
IT AN EDUCATIONAL EXPERIENCE FOR THE NEW<BR>:TRADERS AND EXPERIENCED ONES AS
WELL. CONTRIBUTE AND MAKE THIS A<BR>:VALUABLE SITE. I HAVE A FULL-TIME JOB IN
THE INVESTMENT BUSINESS AND<BR>:LOVE FOLLOWING THE MARKETS JUST LIKE MOST OF THE
MEMBERS OF THIS GROUP.<BR>:I WOULD NOTHING MORE THAN TO HAVE A SITE TO SHARE MY
EXPERIENCE AND<BR>:RESEARCH WITH YOU AS I'M SURE OTHERS WOULD AS WELL. BUT TO BE
ATTACKED<BR>:AND ACCUSED OF HAVING ULTERIOR MOTIVES DOES NOTHING TO ACCOMPLISH
THE<BR>:COLLECTIVE GOAL OF EFFECTIVE RESEARCH AND PROFITABLE TRADING. TO
BE<BR>:FRIGHTENED OF RIDICULE FOR THE SAKE OF A SIMPLE QUESTION
IS<BR>:UNPRODUCTIVE. OBVIOUSLY, THIS WAS DESIGNED TO BE AN OMEGA SITE
BUT<BR>:RATHER THAN WREAK HAVOC UPON THEIR PERSONNEL, WHY NOT INVITE THEM
TO<BR>:PARTICIPATE.<BR>:<BR>:MY MISGUIDED COMMENTS SENT YESTERDAY AFTERNOON
WERE:<BR>:<BR>:> >tj, any comments,suggestions, or questions would be
appreciated. thanks.<BR>:> ><BR>:> >4-8-99 Thursday comments for
Friday<BR>:> ><BR>:> >The market is finally making it to my 1363
objective level. Had it been<BR>:> >accomplished today, the upside would
have likely been revised to<BR>:> >1430-1432—another 5.56%.{ACTUAL
HIGH TODAY 1362.50}<BR>:> ><BR>:> >Preliminarily, if the market
opens below 1360 tomorrow and then trades<BR>:> >above 1362.90, then it
would be a sell and I encourage you to get timing<BR>:> >down with 1
minute sell.{1 MINUTE "13" CAME AT EXACT HIGH} The market<BR>should be
up in the morning and itshould be followed by a pullback which<BR>will be
succeeded by another rally to higher highs just about
your<BR>lunchtime(12:45-1:45est). .....<BR>:> ><BR>:> >The
differential says higher high tomorrow than today before a lower<BR>:>
>low.{TODAY'S HIGH WAS IN FACT ABOVE YESTERDAY'S HIGH}.........<BR>:>
><BR>:> >The stocks which were recommended as breakouts yesterdsay
similar to LU<BR>:> >last week—JPM, IBM, etc.—all followed
through today.<BR>:> ><BR>:> >MO and DAL fell short of their buy
signals by only 1 tick each.<BR>:> ><BR>:> >Numerous other stocks on
the list such as QTRN, AEE, AFFX, KEA gave<BR>:> >signals which worked. MU
was a buy into weakness and performed only for<BR>:> >a short period of
time. KEA could be explosive like PER upside—it has<BR>:> >the same
pattern.<BR>:> ><BR>:> >The WLA "13" buy has worked well
since being confirmed and the entry was<BR>:> >postponed preventing
opportunity costs.<BR>:> ><BR>:> >The projected high and low for
tomorrow are 1369.70 and 1343.90{ACTUAL<BR>LOW 1344.00} and the momentum value
is 6.30.<BR>:<BR>:<BR>:> >Although I have repeatedly warned of a sell
signal and presented<BR>:numerous upside price objectives along the way... Two
months ago, I<BR>:calculated a 1362.90{ACTUAL HIGH 1362.50] objective and
believed it to<BR>:be the ultimate market high. ...........current proposition
is certainly<BR>:incongruous for a market high tomorrow.> >Consequently,
let me give this<BR>:scenario as a alternative possibility.> >Tomorrow,
provided the S and P<BR>:opens below 1360(most definitely 1362.80)> >and
then trades above<BR>:1362.90, the price objective will have been fulfilled. The
fact that the<BR>:market had rallied significantly off its lows today implies
that this<BR>:breakout above 1363.00 is "disqualified".Therefore the
market should<BR>:fail to close above 1363.00 tomorrow.[FACT}<BR>:<BR>:THIS IS
NOT MEANT TO IMPLY THAT THIS FORECAST WAS FOR ANYBODY'S<BR>:CONSUMPTION
OTHER<BR>:THAN MY SON'S. PAST PERFORMANCE IS CERTAINLY NOT INDICATIVE OF
FUTURE<BR>:RESULTS. THERE IS A RISK OF SUBSTANTIAL LOSS TRADING ANY
MARKETS.<BR>:<BR>:> ><BR>:<BR>:<BR></DIV></BODY></HTML>
</x-html>From ???@??? Fri Apr 09 22:02:28 1999
Received: from list.listserver.com (198.68.191.15)
by mail05.rapidsite.net (RS ver 1.0.2) with SMTP id 24957
for <neal@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Fri, 9 Apr 1999 23:47:39 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by accessone.com (8.8.5/8.8.5/PIH) with SMTP id UAA11231;
Fri, 9 Apr 1999 20:47:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mcfeely.interaccess.com (mcfeely.interaccess.com [207.208.133.3])
by accessone.com (8.8.5/8.8.5/PIH) with ESMTP id UAA11087
for <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Fri, 9 Apr 1999 20:45:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from oemcomputer (d144.focal11.interaccess.com [204.148.145.144])
by mcfeely.interaccess.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) with SMTP id WAA18450
for <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Fri, 9 Apr 1999 22:45:42 -0500 (CDT)
Message-Id: <003101be8315$290fb640$909194cc@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 9 Apr 1999 22:44:10 -0700
Reply-To: capstone@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sender: owner-realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
From: "Peter M. Beckwith" <capstone@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: RealTraders Discussion Group <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Making $$$ from Trading
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-To: <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3155.0
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3155.0
X-Listprocessor-Version: 8.1 -- ListProcessor(tm) by CREN
X-Loop-Detect: 1
X-UIDL: 7b370fd046363bc260a3268b03d6147a.01
When I look at all of the ways that a trader can fail, it is sometimes mind
boggling. Some traders fail because they jump into the arena with little or
no knowledge of money management. Others fail because they purchase a black
box system take all of the signals, but fail to learn how to manage the
trade. Still others fail because their ego trades the markets, instead of
their eyes.
I value much of the discussion that takes place on this forum because it is
readily apparent that most traders on this forum have had some significant
experience in the markets. Most people here have taken the normal path of
reading from books, experimenting with TradeStation, taking their lumps in
the markets and hopefully finding their own "holy grail".
I would say that if 95% of all beginning traders fail, that 90% of that is
due to all of the misinformation that circulates through much of the
literature that is available on the subject of trading. Most of the books
that beginning traders pick up are so geared towards technical analysis with
little focus on price action and trade management. If there is a book
available that really gets into the "nuts and bolts" of real trading, then I
have yet to read it. Some of Joe Ross' works are about the closest it gets
to discussing price sensitive trading.
Another factor in the downfall of many traders, I believe, is that they set
very rigid and unrealistic monetary goals from the outset. From personal
experience and from conversations that I have had with other traders, I
often hear things such as, "all I want to do is make x dollars per day". It
sounds great, but it is very unrealistic because it forces you to force the
action on the markets. Granted, I believe that it is entirely possible to
average "x" dollars per day trading, but I would tend to think that any
solid trend following system would have a larger variance than that.
One trader that I have come to know over the past few months has a truly
phenomenal approach to the markets. Let's just say that he trades with his
lenses clear and doesn't fall into the camp of "opinion trading". I have
witnessed the phenomenal numbers that he puts up on a daily basis. I would
say that the "secret to his success" is the fact that he takes a very simple
approach to the market and does not try and force the action. On days with
a constricted range he will keep it small and try and "test" the waters
knowing that a sharp movement in either direction might stop him out. On
range expansion days, he will build a bigger position and pyramid his
position into something that might be 10 times the size he has on the inside
days. At all times, he is readily aware of the counter-move or the pullback
and he has a very simple technique to hedge his exposure.
The reason that he can continually pull big dollars out of the markets is
because he understands what he calls "the math of trading" which is that you
take only what the market is willing to give you, you don't force the action
and most importantly you have a "what if" game plan that gives you the
flexibility to reverse your position if the markets trend should change. He
is mainly an spoos trader and as we all know this market can test the best
of traders. It is his ability to see this market in its most honest form
that makes him a huge success.
After witnessing his approach for the past several months, I would tend to
believe that it truly is an environment where only 5% of the trading
population can survive and prosper. There is so much honesty, real
self-honesty that is needed to trade. There is no room for opinions, no
room for it will come back, no room for any of that. Many beginning traders
fail to grasp that concept. Many beginning traders tend to listen to the
media or listen to their buddy. Most beginning traders don't have the inner
self-confidence to take the set-ups that the market offers on a minute by
minute basis. And even more still many beginning traders fall prey to the
many emotions, the self-doubts that overcome them when they take those
initial entries.
I look forward to a continued debate about this fascinating subject.
Best Regards
Pete Beckwith
-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Majewski <ram@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: RealTraders Discussion Group <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Friday, April 09, 1999 5:40 PM
Subject: Re: Making $$$ from Trading
>Humphrey,
>
>Unfortunately most people having a go at trading do not have
>a realistic expectation. The fact of the matter is that most
>people who have a go at trading fail, somewhere around 95%.
>But they fail in different ways. In futures it's usually a
>quick destruction of capital within 6 months and trading
>stocks it may be a protracted slow decline.
>
>One of the frustrating things about trading is that the
>normal attributes which make one successful in other
>professions such as intelligence, education and hard work are
>no guarantees of success in trading. It requires what Edward
>De Bono has described as lateral thinking ability - the
>ability to see the truth without personal biases and to see
>opportunities that other people do not.
>
>The trading arena is full of vendors using smoke and mirrors
>trying to convey the impression that trading can be a
>relaxing and profitable pastime. Nothing could be further
>from the truth. Ralph Vince who has authored a number of
>important books on money management and has worked with many
>of the trading greats has described successful trading as the
>equivalent of a street fight. The winner still finishes up
>with a bloody nose.
>
>However there are people who have developed the right
>skills/methodologies to profitably trade the markets but they
>are very much in the minority.
>
>Best of luck in your pursuit of trading success.
>
>--
> ,-._|\ Richard
> / Oz \
> \_,--.x/
> v
>
>
>
>Humphrey D Geiseb wrote:
>
>> having lived in RT land for over one year. I am
>> wondering whether I am trading as a hobby or making
>> ends meet with this thang. In fact, I am concerned by
>> the recent posts on this forum on Larry Willaims et al
>> and numerous other posts where people dismissed
>> non-trading analysts.
>>
>> Now the question: Are there REAL people, with
>> spouses, kids, 2nd hand cars, mortgages, etc out there
>> who earn a 2nd income from trading. Or do we, as a
>> trading specie, keep in the game without any end-game
>> scenarious. I am puzzled as I fail to justify my
>> screen hours after making 0$ from trading in the past
>> 14 months.
>>
>> For example, I am paper trading a "system" which
>> produces marginal gains in 1/5 cases. If I have put
>> my real money in the market on these stocks, I am sure
>> the losses would have skyrocketed. The Key: I am only
>> selecting stocks getting buy signals by being above
>> 50-day high of close. How can I optimise this 50-day
>> holy grail.
>>
>> hum
>>
>> _________________________________________________________
>> Do You Yahoo!?
>> Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
|