your productivity compared to others

[darkpunter]

Hgodden seems to have a more realistic view here. To make such a sweeping statement such as "it is impossible not to profit" just ignores all the parameters that are needed to become a successful trader.

And if you look at the poll we have
so far only 6 negatives out of 21 votes.

6 out of 21 people is still 28%. The vote is now 6 out of 24, 25%. There are 752 people on this forum. Extrapolating that out would give 188 people in the negative. People who, in you own words, shouldn't really be here..

(And before those figures get turned around on me, 24 votes out of 752 is not a good representative sample for a survey, even taking into account confidence levels and intervals - I'm just responding to your use of them)

True, there will always be novices learning the 'trade', and some of those will go on to be profitable traders, but others will not, and it seems very short sighted and of closed mind not register that possibility.

Semi-rant over

[hgodden]

hgodden how do you know how many people are struggling out there? nobody knows that. And if you look at the poll we have
so far only 6 negatives out of 21 votes. And all the people I know and works on bf agree to my idea.
There will always be novices that are struggling as there are in any activity.

I've spoken to loads of (intelligent) people who have tried and can't do it, some have been trying for up to 4 years! I just think that there is a misconception out there in many people's minds that this is easy money and that anyone can learn it if they put enough effort in. Trading may well be superior to gambling, without a doubt, but I think that for many people (especially those from gambling backgrounds) it pushes the same buttons in terms of seeking gratification from wins, getting elated after a good result, feeling bad after a bad result... the whole rollercoaster thing, and I think that for many people this gets right in the way of being able to focus completely on the markets. I know from my own experience that when I'm not thinking about my p+l I do much better than if say I start fretting over a loss or if I start cooing over what a good day I'm having. I think that for a few people who are lucky to have the right mentality and the right kind of logical mind learning could be (relatively) easy.
In any case I would never discourage anyone from giving it a go at all, the lifestyle being able to trade gives you is truly great, not just in terms of cash but freedom too.

[gutuami]

darkpunter first I would say it is not a statement. I said "always had the idea"
second the poll is not finished yet.
third I guess there are a lot of 'not negative' traders who simply don't bother voting.
forth I did not say shouldn't be here. I said will not be here. Meaning that as long as you are here you have an interest. And that is to be successful. Think positive and learn with patience if you want a result. Yes you have to be 'short sighted and of closed minded' when it comes to negative thoughts and see that glass half full all the time. Every successful trader at his beginnings had a negative path. In that respect a negative option is always possible...
Anyway I wish you to find that 'light bulb moment' and start using markets in your favor.

[darkpunter]

Gutuami,

1) Fair enough, but from your responses you do still seem to think that.

2) Yes, the poll hasn't finished yet, and I pretty much acknowledged that in my bracketed statement. But you were trying to use the results up until then as justification for your stance.

3) Guess is the right word here, you have no idea who hasn't bothered voting yet, you can't just put it down to "not negative" traders. You are again reinforcing your own ideas here.

4) "Will not be here" read differently in the original post it was made, and the context of the question you asked, which was:

Your productivity compared to others: What percentage of your used bank do you turn into profit on average per day?

What you seemed to be saying was that, as a trader, you would not be on this forum if you were not making a profitable return on your investment. That is why we asked for the negative option (which we got, no argument there) as some of us are here, are trading, and are currently making an average loss.

My remarks about being short-sighted and of closed mind were not about negative thoughts. They were about only having one view of things, whilst not looking at the big picture of all around.

Finally, thanks for the somewhat patronising talk about negative thoughts, positivity, light bulb moments and markets. Gosh, is that where I was going wrong all this time?

[neeeel]

We don't actively get involved in these trading experiments so the results are as random as you can get. We don't over look them or intervene whether it makes a mistake or not. We put a full explanation, results and the P&L in the 'does scalping still work' thread.

Where people tend to fall over is there aversion to risk and / or losses. The market tends to wobble a fair bit and people often panic and exit quickly or stop putting orders in. When you do that it starts to turn negative.

Trading at random in the long term isn't likely to make you money but it's far from being a one way road to losses. If you are struggling it's worth experimenting with it, as it should teach you a lot about the market.

I wouldnt say you put a full explanation. You didnt explain how you were cutting out if the price went against u.
If every trade was put in on a random side, with a 1 tick offset, and a 1 tick stop loss, then that is random, but I dont see how u could profit that way, as a lot of the time the stop loss will be taken even tho the price doesnt really move. If you were deciding when to cut out if the price went against you, then that isnt random.
I guess you must have used a stop loss greater than 1, but then ur strike rate would have to be > 66%. I dont trade at random but my strike rate is worse than 66%.

[neeeel]

I think I will do a similar experiment myself on monday, will use a random number generator i found on the web to flip a coin, heads I will put in a back bet on the favorite at the current lay price, with offset 1, stop loss 2, and once that bet has been taken and won or lost, will do that same again. will do it between 4 minutes to off and 30 secs, as in the betangel test

I will post the results if anyone is interested.

messing about with it today, first 3 races i tried it were all losses.

[Brent]

We don't actively get involved in these trading experiments so the results are as random as you can get. We don't over look them or intervene whether it makes a mistake or not. We put a full explanation, results and the P&L in the 'does scalping still work' thread.

Where people tend to fall over is there aversion to risk and / or losses. The market tends to wobble a fair bit and people often panic and exit quickly or stop putting orders in. When you do that it starts to turn negative.

Trading at random in the long term isn't likely to make you money but it's far from being a one way road to losses. If you are struggling it's worth experimenting with it, as it should teach you a lot about the market.

Even so, there is no talk of how you close out a losing trade, just that you won't start a new one until the net position is at zero.

For a true random experiment, the same paramaters need to be applied for all the sample trades.
I would suggest something along these lines.

Through excel, set up something like:
A random cell, with numbers between 1-1000, rounded. Another cell, if number = even, then true, else false.

Now, in the auto bet parts, you could have if true, BACK, else, LAY.
Starting at 10 minutes pre jump time, first bet fires in. Has a 10 tick offset, 10 tick stop loss, trailling.
At 30 second intervals, a macro is run to clear the bet status, and randomise the number. Then it fires in the next trade. Does this every 30 seconds, up until 30 seconds til start time, when it closes all positions.

Now that is what I would call random trading. There is no human influence, bets are fired in without looking at the market, at timed intervals, with predetermined parameters and rules that can't be broken.
If somebody is in charge of these random trades, then it cannot possibly be random. You are always influenced by what you see in the market, no matter how hard you try not to.

Would be interested to see the results of such a "random" session.

[Bet Angel]

"I dont trade at random but my strike rate is worse than 66%."

Random strike rate is well above 66%. The longer you have the order in the market the higher the strike rate.

We didn't put an explanation about stop losses in, because we didn't use one. We put our full risk into the market with no stop. All we did was back at the current lay price and lay at the current back price. If the position moved away from us and our net stake was above zero. No new orders.

[Bet Angel]

"Would be interested to see the results of such a "random" session."

You have, we automated it so there was no human involvement.

At the end of the day guys, we are trying to help by pointing you in a direction you may not have looked at properly. We are trying to provoke some thought and debate.

[Brent]

"I dont trade at random but my strike rate is worse than 66%."

Random strike rate is well above 66%. The longer you have the order in the market the higher the strike rate.

We didn't put an explanation about stop losses in, because we didn't use one. We put our full risk into the market with no stop. All we did was back at the current lay price and lay at the current back price. If the position moved away from us and our net stake was above zero. No new orders.

If the position moved against you there was no new orders? No stop loss? So how exactly did you trade out of a losing position, if there was no human involvement, no new orders, no stop loss. I am a little confused.

To be honest, I disagree that random trading could possibly turn a profit. It means that you are always taking the best available price at that time, which means you are already taking less than 100%. And there is no possible way your strike rate could be over 66% with random trades. Seems a ridiculous statement to be honest. Can you prove that?

1 thing I would certainly be interested in, is how, with a 2 dollar stake, you could randomly trade, taking 1 tick profits each time, and hedge a 1.58 trade out. I see that as more than highly unlikely.
Another thing, is the same argument about liabilities. I fail to see what 2 pound stakes will achieve. Your results could be boosted by a couple of high odd markets, where the majority of trades was right randomly enough.

Out of interest sake, I thought I would do my experiment. Starting on the :00 or :30 second mark, 5 or 10 minutes before the event start. I would flip a coin first, heads back, tails lay. Set up my liability, in this case I used a 50 dollar liability at the initial odds, then used that stake for the rest of the race.
Set up 5 tick offset, 5 tick trailling stop/loss. Put each bet in, flipped the coin so I knew what the next bet was, and when the timer hit :00, or :30, I placed the bet, taking whatever odds were available. I did this every 30 seconds til 1 minute to go when I placed my last bet. At the 30 second mark, I cancelled all bets, then hedged out.
There is nothing more random than that. The only thing that could have been changed, is the stop loss and offsetting.
But since a man is not a bank, I pulled the pin after only a few races. I don't need my wallet to be affected just to prove a point.


Horse Racing / Ayr 19th Jun : 7f Mdn Stks 20-Jun-09 03:40 20-Jun-09 03:46 -14.79
Horse Racing / Newm 19th Jun : 6f Mdn Stks 20-Jun-09 03:30 20-Jun-09 03:40 -9.37
Horse Racing / DownR 19th Jun : 2m Hcap Hrd 20-Jun-09 03:15 20-Jun-09 03:30 -2.39
Horse Racing / Good 19th Jun : 1m2f Hcap 20-Jun-09 03:20 20-Jun-09 03:27 9.77
Horse Racing / Ayr 19th Jun : 1m Hcap 20-Jun-09 03:10 20-Jun-09 03:15 -4.07
Horse Racing / Newm 19th Jun : 1m Hcap 20-Jun-09 03:00 20-Jun-09 03:10 1.91

6 races, 4 losses, -18.94 using a 50 dollar liability.
I know not a very big number of events to go by, but I don't have the money to throw away on such an example that I think will lose money.

Turned over about 4500 dollars, if it means anything.

[Bet Angel]

"To be honest, I disagree that random trading could possibly turn a profit. It means that you are always taking the best available price at that time, which means you are already taking less than 100%. And there is no possible way your strike rate could be over 66% with random trades. Seems a ridiculous statement to be honest. Can you prove that?"

Trading at random will not turn a profit, else everybody could do it by just turning up and pressing a few buttons with no thought. But if you are negative the high strike rates associated with random trading should show you how little you need to tip things in your favour to turn a profit.

"Can you prove that?"

What information would you want to see? We have tried to put up as much information as possible. Including the P&L's and spreadsheets.

[mugsgame]

This is getting more like the BF forum everyday,

Some people want to provoke debate and help others. Then there are ones who just want to argue. They never contribute anything positive. Just because they can't make it work or they can't understand it.

Sickening really

[SBW077]

Where people tend to fall over is there aversion to risk and / or losses. The market tends to wobble a fair bit and people often panic and exit quickly or stop putting orders in. When you do that it starts to turn negative.

Trading at random in the long term isn't likely to make you money but it's far from being a one way road to losses. If you are struggling it's worth experimenting with it, as it should teach you a lot about the market.

I found this very helpful, thanks for posting it.

[Brent]

This is getting more like the BF forum everyday,

Some people want to provoke debate and help others. Then there are ones who just want to argue. They never contribute anything positive. Just because they can't make it work or they can't understand it.

Sickening really

They can't make it work? How in the hell can you "make" random trading work. That is my point. No I can't make it work. It is random.

If BetAngel want to put up some "random" trades to show their profitability, then I look forward to it. But when there is BetAngel people in charge of trading out these "random" trades, as is the case here, the results really aren't random.

And when software companies are claiming a 66+% strike rate possible from random trading, then yes, I take issue with it.
I had a go at Adam when he posted his "random" trading video to show all potential new subscribers just how easy it really is.

We are still yet to be told how you traded out of your trades. All you have said, is that there was no manual input, no stop loss, and no new trades placed until the trade was closed out.
I find it nigh on impossible, that trades left open until they turn a profit, will result in such small losses every race. A trade that can go against you without input losing a max of 74 cents, but a random trading on a selection with a rule take 1 tick profit, which made 1.58.
It makes absolutely no sense at all to me how this is possible, unless of course the results aren't random.

[mugsgame]

The point is if you trade randomly you won't lose (or win) much. In the long term things even themselves up. If you put in some controls to limit your losses and let the good trades run it helps your P/L. That's it. Simple eh?

Most of us value what Peter and the BA team have to say. If you have met Peter you will know that in terms of understanding how the Betfair markets work he has no equal. When he speaks I listen.

Give it a try