|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Robert,
Thank you for your well reasoned email sent both privately to me and to
the group.
I have responded to the group - I assume that this is your
desire. Please correct me if I am wrong in this assumption
should you again post the same email both privately and to the
group.
May your potential be realised, Ric.
www.traderscalm.com
At 12:36 21/03/02 +0000, you wrote:
While I find much of what you say of interest I find it so often despite the way you communicate it.
My style is deliberate - my target audience is not the 'accept or reject mob'. They cannot be helped much, or at all, until they recognise the problems inherent in their self-limiting reaction style - self-limiting, that is, for their own learning processes.
In their taking personally an impersonal email, they are also arrogant enough to think they are the audience, and I do not normally choose to disabuse them unless they are particularly obnoxious.
It is possible to get through to some of them sometimes using humour or provocation.
Since my style is provocative - some do occasionally write to say they eventually got the message.
To those that can more readily get past my chosen style, at least to some extent, the content of my message gets through.
I do not want or expect agreement or to be liked - I am not in a popularity contest. The fact that some others seek agreement or are in a popularity contest, makes them assume I am.
If they eventually realise I am not out to please, then they assume I am arrogant as that is how they would be if they so acted.
Perhaps a quote regarding audience reaction might help - a bit of humour goes a long way - especially when telling an often unrecognised truth.
'Do not try to convince someone in the audience if you see him looking unconvinced. He may be the only one who is actually listening.'
This of course does not often apply if the reaction is emotionally based.
In your last post particularly you appear to equate people who criticise you with those who lose money in the markets. This theme occurs again and again in your posts: if you do not take a reasonable and thoughtful approach to my comments then you are "the crowd" and a losing trader.
I know that is a common assumption - but only perhaps to those who just assume, not to those who pose your question or understand what is actually occurring.
It is not a matter of their disagreement. It is a matter of their reaction style.
It always amazes me that they react to my intentionally chosen style - assuming it is unintentional - but are unaware what their unintentional style is saying to those who can see past the surface.
If they exhibited strong, emotionally based acceptance I would suspect a problem with my original idea - I would suspect I had inadvertently evoked a cult like response - and this would suggest that what I said was likely to be false as it appealed to emotions.
If they exhibited strong emotionally based rejection, I would suspect that a vein of truth may have been hit and this would suggest there is some merit for some in the original idea.
If they just disagreed or agreed in a rational manner, as you have done in your email to me - I might agree or disagree (or a bit of both, or build on our joint ideas).
But no implication of merit or demerit in the original idea or later ideas can be so inferred by our rational agreement or disagreement or questions made and answers given back and forth.
So it the strong emotional reaction, not the agreement or disagreement I am referencing.
When someone takes an impersonal email personally and reacts with very strong emotions and looks for crowd support, there are several conclusions that can be drawn with a high degree of confidence:
- they are easily upset by impersonal emails,
- so someone else is to blame not them,
- so they do not readily take personal responsibility,
- so they are not in learning mode (personal responsibility is a pre-requisite),
- their reaction style is very emotional and over the top,
- this cannot occur unless some deep insecurity/hidden sensitivity is 'hit',
- their perceptions and processing of perceptions are clouded by emotion,
- they are not secure and confident in their system hence the sensitivity,
- they do not follow their system with confidence and discipline,
- they miss market clues though the fog of emotion,
- they tend to react emotionally to market changes for/against their position,
- their self-trust is low,
- so they do not make a good level of profits or make losses,
- any profits are often returned through self-sabotage,
- they are full of ideas and cannot relinquish any to acquire new ideas,
- or when their perception problems coincide with a big adverse move, they make catastrophic losses.
So yes they are often losing traders for all these things tend to flow from that one thing - strong emotional rejection.
So to reiterate it is in not their disagreement that suggests they lose money, it is the nature and intensity of their rejection.
All this is fairly obvious both from my experience as a traders coach when clients first come to me and is partly derivable from first principles.
Fine. I am comfortable with the psychological approach which holds the perspective that if I resist an idea or a comment couched in reasonable language from a trusted source then it is my problem to work out why it is that I am resisting. However, this technique is also the basis of many cults and religions and can result in purely circular reasoning. You are not necessarily trusted as you would be if you met people on this list face to face. It doesn't take long in the trading business to come across plenty of people who sound like you who should NOT be trusted. Therefore you should expect a highly sceptical, even hostile atmosphere and plan ways round it.
I hear what you say and it makes a lot of sense for the majority of people who judge on their feelings only.
But if you can see through eyes unclouded by emotion and make up your on mind on your reasoned assessment and inner wisdom, trust and respect is earnt by content not style.
If the content is good, makes sense, can only be derived from both practical experience and success, then trust and respect follow automatically. If the content is poor no-one is fooled.
If you reject emotionally, a need for the trader to change needs to be rationalised away - how better than to dismiss based on any excuse - facts are not needed by members of a crowd.
So as my target audience is those that can see and hear my content as they are not too put off by style, my objective, while transparent to others, is achieved.
It is to the wiser I write - usually the minority or at least the less vocal part of the majority.
Few can stand the attacks of the emotional that I can tolerate and so they lurk. Their lack of speaking up is not a sign of their non-existence only of their reticence to join in.
Often, when some clients have offered support I have appreciated their offer but suggested their silence is better. For all that would probably happen is they would get some of the attacks aimed at them - and most cannot take it. The crowd is often very self-righteous.
What people brought up to be independent and assertive hear in your posts is: "if you don't agree with what I say you are wrong".
See above.
There is one more concept that may help you to see behind the surface.
You will note that some are responding to my posts in the way that they do because they are 'full' of ideas and are not prepared to relinquish old ideas to take on new. This group can include those with good old ideas.
The group full of good ideas tend to say, 'too long' or 'why do you have short paragraphs'. Saves having to change.
It is those full of ideas that are known (at a deep level by themselves) to be not working for them, that are the ones who find my ideas uncomfortable and put their heads in the sand.
Saves having to change.
Those who want to change, are always looking for that catalyst that will help them change for the better. It is they who lap up real content, from whatever source and style - if what I and others have to say if it makes sense to them and hits a spot.
The deliberate filtering system works well. Those who can see the content do so and exploit what is relevant to them, some few on the margin are opened up, the majority think it is all directed at them and is an attack meriting a spirited defense by the crowd!
You have the ability to see behind the surface of the comments if you so choose to do so, just look inside yourself - we have all been shallow self-obsessed people, or still are on some topics, or are somewhat shallow on an off day. I know I am all these things. But, being in learning mode I do not need to deny it, for I am learning bit by bit, situation by situation to change, mostly for the better and feel incredibly fortunate to be so lucky to have problems needing improvement. Leaning is fun - a joyful discovery.
Given this environment the response you get to your posts is predictable.
Given the proportion of traders who take personal responsibility (those that are in learning mode) is relatively low, it would be surprising if the reaction was otherwise. That is why 80% to 95% of traders lose money. If the majority were in learning mode they would move out of losing into at least break-even and much less than 80% would lose money.
That is why a majority object vehemently to some of my messages and seek comfort in crowd agreement - it saves having to change. Being part of the crowd is more important than making profits - strange, but true it seems.
I am attempting to get some of those on the margin to see opportunities to change - as one of my clients asked/stated: "You mean I have to change?".
I understand that you enjoy being of service to people but you could reach an even wider audience and help even more if you perhaps changed the tone of your musings slightly - perhaps with non-sarcastic humour or charm or hard headed discussion of particular methodologies
Tried all of this before and other techniques. The emotions are just a symptom of inner tendencies operating - the obstacles to learning are many and wonderful. By deliberately provoking the emotions there is a greater chance of the person with inner tendency problems self-recognising their issues.
or a detailed description of how you coped with your recent short Dow trading for example.
It is common for people to want comprehensive details of a trading system, so:
- they can imitate it,
- thinking is not required,
- no effort is required,
- they can avoid personal responsibility,
- they have someone else to blame,
- ...,
and because they assume understanding is optional. They think that confidence based on understanding and ownership is an optional characteristic for a trader - just a black box is required.
Paradoxically it is only the traders who cannot follow any system with discipline that believe this!
So when it is apparent, by their fear and greed and reluctance to address inner tendencies, someone is not in learning mode, I do not give more details. It would be unkind - it would cause them heartache and losses. It would be cruel. I would rather the confused and emotional accuse me for:
- saying they are not ready,
- confusing them!,
- hiding information,
- being a terrible teacher,
- being an all round evil person.
I can cope with that - but they cannot handle the losses.
Looking forward to reading your posts in future...
Thank you for your interest.
P.S. It might be useful to elaborate by what you mean when you talk about risk-reward ratios. There is no such thing as a commonly defined "risk-reward ratio" except perphaps on an individual entry/exit basis. Other than that the ratio would need to be clearly defined before it means anything to most of us on this list.
True, but most only know of trend-following and reward to risk ratios are relatively well defined for this style.
To any individual who asks I will answer all they ask in a manner, sequence and timing etc. that makes sense for them and me - as long as they demonstrate themselves (by lack of fear or greed or willingness to address inner tendencies) as being ready for the information they seek.
My favourite recently is someone who said one trading system idea had:
- very high profitability,
- too high drawdowns.
So I suggested a smaller trading size.
His response was swift and sure - "I would not make enough then."
From fear of draw-downs to greed for profits in one millisecond for the same highly profitable trading system.
But just being interested enough to ask is considered by some to be sufficient to understand and effectively use an answer.
If you are interested in varying measures for reward to risk ratios for differing styles of trading system, just ask privately. But be aware it takes an understanding of, for example, the use of risk of ruin concepts to sensibly compare trading systems by reward to risk ratios. Just being able to frame the question does not mean the knowledge exists to understand and use an answer, especially if God forbid, the questioner needs to do some homework.
I you want to know how I coped with the DOW rise and am making money every day, then just ask privately. Be aware that just being able to frame the question does not mean that the knowledge and confidence to profitably use an answer exists in the questioner especially if God forbid, the questioner needs to do some homework.
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
|