Trading What I see !?

[alexmr2]

And I think my entries are dire... I just backed Jacattack in Newcastle 18:15 at 6.8 as I thought it was breaking out if it's range, within a second it was at 8, and then 11 !!!

Not sure where your entry was in relation to the volume but backing made more sense than laying as that was a downtrend. No one can be right 100% of the time, it's like flipping a coin and saying you thought it was going to be heads but it was tails. I've experienced what you just did many times (and often dealt with it badly) it's about how you deal with it that counts in the long-term. I know there are fast moves but try and not give it the opportunity to go so far into the red and hope that the next time the fast move is in the right direction

[Maturin]

No not even that Really, there was a little bit, but just a day of bad choices, as usual the ones that i seemed to get right are about the 1.5/1.8 price, the wrong ones between 5.0 and 7.0, and 5 ticks profit is not too much at 1.5, instead of 5 ticks loss at 6.6

i wont even say i got them right or wrong, think its basically just random for me still

thats the most frustrating thing, im not bothered about the money or the losses as i see it as paying for training, and 6 months down the line i feel like i know so much more than i did at the start, but i clearly dont as nothing changes

c'est la vie

Hi Bubace,

Are you using level stakes here? If so I would suggest altering stakes depending on price, so that tick increments are equal. That way the losers at 6.0 shouldn't so far outweigh the winners at 1.5.

Same question to you Goat - your recent day's P&L. Were you using level stakes? Your big losers may have been at higher odds, and so perhaps were bigger than they 'should' be, and the opposite is true for the winners.

Just something worth considering.

[goat68]

And I think my entries are dire... I just backed Jacattack in Newcastle 18:15 at 6.8 as I thought it was breaking out if it's range, within a second it was at 8, and then 11 !!!

Not sure where your entry was in relation to the volume but backing made more sense than laying as that was a downtrend. No one can be right 100% of the time, it's like flipping a coin and saying you thought it was going to be heads but it was tails. I've experienced what you just did many times (and often dealt with it badly) it's about how you deal with it that counts in the long-term. I know there are fast moves but try and not give it the opportunity to go so far into the red and hope that the next time the fast move is in the right direction

So the problem with fast moves in my favour they usually get caught short by my closing speculative bet, which is good obviously, but given the actual move may have been 1+ odds further I don't get the same gain as my loss with a manual close....

[Korattt]

And I think my entries are dire... I just backed Jacattack in Newcastle 18:15 at 6.8 as I thought it was breaking out if it's range, within a second it was at 8, and then 11 !!!

watch the BA videos on YT, what is the common denominator?, what is the theme?, what provides the profit more often than not?, in other words.. what does Peter do that maybe you’re not?,

didn’t see what happened myself but are you saying that you looked to back something that has been backed since maybe midnight last night?, just surmising but had you been one of many backing the runner that you backed at the bottom of its range last night what would you be doing right now had you been looking to hedge your position?

[smallplayer]

And I think my entries are dire... I just backed Jacattack in Newcastle 18:15 at 6.8 as I thought it was breaking out if it's range, within a second it was at 8, and then 11 !!!

watch the BA videos on YT, what is the common denominator?, what is the theme?, what provides the profit more often than not?, in other words.. what does Peter do that maybe you’re not?

He lays a lot of those drifters?

[Korattt]

And I think my entries are dire... I just backed Jacattack in Newcastle 18:15 at 6.8 as I thought it was breaking out if it's range, within a second it was at 8, and then 11 !!!

watch the BA videos on YT, what is the common denominator?, what is the theme?, what provides the profit more often than not?, in other words.. what does Peter do that maybe you’re not?

He lays a lot of those drifters?

https://youtu.be/hWnNBCZ6_IM

[Bubace]

No not even that Really, there was a little bit, but just a day of bad choices, as usual the ones that i seemed to get right are about the 1.5/1.8 price, the wrong ones between 5.0 and 7.0, and 5 ticks profit is not too much at 1.5, instead of 5 ticks loss at 6.6

i wont even say i got them right or wrong, think its basically just random for me still

thats the most frustrating thing, im not bothered about the money or the losses as i see it as paying for training, and 6 months down the line i feel like i know so much more than i did at the start, but i clearly dont as nothing changes

c'est la vie

Hi Bubace,

Are you using level stakes here? If so I would suggest altering stakes depending on price, so that tick increments are equal. That way the losers at 6.0 shouldn't so far outweigh the winners at 1.5.

Same question to you Goat - your recent day's P&L. Were you using level stakes? Your big losers may have been at higher odds, and so perhaps were bigger than they 'should' be, and the opposite is true for the winners.

Just something worth considering.

HI
yes i do use level stakes, i didnt really think about changing them as i use quite small stakes anyway, but what you're saying does make sense, and something i'll have a go it this week i think

[goat68]

No not even that Really, there was a little bit, but just a day of bad choices, as usual the ones that i seemed to get right are about the 1.5/1.8 price, the wrong ones between 5.0 and 7.0, and 5 ticks profit is not too much at 1.5, instead of 5 ticks loss at 6.6

i wont even say i got them right or wrong, think its basically just random for me still

thats the most frustrating thing, im not bothered about the money or the losses as i see it as paying for training, and 6 months down the line i feel like i know so much more than i did at the start, but i clearly dont as nothing changes

c'est la vie

Hi Bubace,

Are you using level stakes here? If so I would suggest altering stakes depending on price, so that tick increments are equal. That way the losers at 6.0 shouldn't so far outweigh the winners at 1.5.

Same question to you Goat - your recent day's P&L. Were you using level stakes? Your big losers may have been at higher odds, and so perhaps were bigger than they 'should' be, and the opposite is true for the winners.

Just something worth considering.

HI
yes i do use level stakes, i didnt really think about changing them as i use quite small stakes anyway, but what you're saying does make sense, and something i'll have a go it this week i think

I do add a bit for the lower odds sub 2

[Maturin]

HI
yes i do use level stakes, i didnt really think about changing them as i use quite small stakes anyway, but what you're saying does make sense, and something i'll have a go it this week i think

Something like this:

< 2: Odds x 10
2 - 3: x 5
3 - 4: x 2
4 - 6: x 1
6 - 10: x 0.5

You can adjust accordingly, and that would give you even tick increments I think. I can't claim credit for this - I saw it on a post ages ago!

Good luck

[goat68]

No not even that Really, there was a little bit, but just a day of bad choices, as usual the ones that i seemed to get right are about the 1.5/1.8 price, the wrong ones between 5.0 and 7.0, and 5 ticks profit is not too much at 1.5, instead of 5 ticks loss at 6.6

i wont even say i got them right or wrong, think its basically just random for me still

thats the most frustrating thing, im not bothered about the money or the losses as i see it as paying for training, and 6 months down the line i feel like i know so much more than i did at the start, but i clearly dont as nothing changes

c'est la vie

Hi Bubace,

Are you using level stakes here? If so I would suggest altering stakes depending on price, so that tick increments are equal. That way the losers at 6.0 shouldn't so far outweigh the winners at 1.5.

Same question to you Goat - your recent day's P&L. Were you using level stakes? Your big losers may have been at higher odds, and so perhaps were bigger than they 'should' be, and the opposite is true for the winners.

Just something worth considering.

HI
yes i do use level stakes, i didnt really think about changing them as i use quite small stakes anyway, but what you're saying does make sense, and something i'll have a go it this week i think

I'm going to watch some videos tonight (), then tomorrow I'm going to concentrate on one thing, finding reversals only.
Want to join in tomorrow Bubace?

[Bubace]

Hi Bubace,

Are you using level stakes here? If so I would suggest altering stakes depending on price, so that tick increments are equal. That way the losers at 6.0 shouldn't so far outweigh the winners at 1.5.

Same question to you Goat - your recent day's P&L. Were you using level stakes? Your big losers may have been at higher odds, and so perhaps were bigger than they 'should' be, and the opposite is true for the winners.

Just something worth considering.

HI
yes i do use level stakes, i didnt really think about changing them as i use quite small stakes anyway, but what you're saying does make sense, and something i'll have a go it this week i think

I'm going to watch some videos tonight (), then tomorrow I'm going to concentrate on one thing, finding reversals only.
Want to join in tomorrow Bubace?

I'll give anything a go

[darchas]

There's a 100 pages in this thread now, tons of good advice but the whole approach to me looking from the outside in is random. You need to know how to make money in a market to start to understand how you need to improve. Just opening trades over and over again and feeling positive when they're green and negative when they're red just isn't getting anywhere. I know it's hard but i think less time randomly trading and more time researching, delving deeper will pay dividends. I've seen posts saying to just keep on trading - for two years at least, for 8,000 markets. Is this right? I can't imagine this is an efficient use of time.

Like Morbius I play poker, the approach seems equivalent to the poker player playing 12 tables for hours on end hoping that experience will make him play better. It won't. He should play two tables max and think through every decision in as much depth as he can. When he hits a spot where he doesn't know the correct decision he should take this away from the tables and work on this until he understands what's going on. In poker and trading my approach is to focus on what I don't know and to work on that and practice until I do. If I stick a stake in without a plan and end up in green, then that's no good for me, it's random. I need to know where the money is made and that's where I'll work. In poker I study and realise my check back range is unbalanced, so I focus on improving this, in trading I study and recognise recurring scenarios and I step back and think about how I might exploit that. The point is the work is in the study and thinking, not playing mindlessly or opening trades just because a race/match is on.

And this relates to stake as well. I get the idea about meaningful stakes but actually you're learning. The money doesn't matter. If I spot a recurring situation on the ladder I think I can exploit then my practice might involve using 2 quid stakes to get a better feel for things and to record my results. This phase has nothing to do with making money, it's about testing out what I've been working on away from trading. When I have a spot where I know I'm playing well then I'm out of the learning phase and can trade with my usual stakes.

I wish you the best of luck I really do, but I think focus on working smarter and not harder and reflect on how you best use your time so you don't end up two years down the line and doing the same thing.

[Morbius]

There's a 100 pages in this thread now, tons of good advice but the whole approach to me looking from the outside in is random. You need to know how to make money in a market to start to understand how you need to improve. Just opening trades over and over again and feeling positive when they're green and negative when they're red just isn't getting anywhere. I know it's hard but i think less time randomly trading and more time researching, delving deeper will pay dividends. I've seen posts saying to just keep on trading - for two years at least, for 8,000 markets. Is this right? I can't imagine this is an efficient use of time.

Like Morbius I play poker, the approach seems equivalent to the poker player playing 12 tables for hours on end hoping that experience will make him play better. It won't. He should play two tables max and think through every decision in as much depth as he can. When he hits a spot where he doesn't know the correct decision he should take this away from the tables and work on this until he understands what's going on. In poker and trading my approach is to focus on what I don't know and to work on that and practice until I do. If I stick a stake in without a plan and end up in green, then that's no good for me, it's random. I need to know where the money is made and that's where I'll work. In poker I study and realise my check back range is unbalanced, so I focus on improving this, in trading I study and recognise recurring scenarios and I step back and think about how I might exploit that. The point is the work is in the study and thinking, not playing mindlessly or opening trades just because a race/match is on.

And this relates to stake as well. I get the idea about meaningful stakes but actually you're learning. The money doesn't matter. If I spot a recurring situation on the ladder I think I can exploit then my practice might involve using 2 quid stakes to get a better feel for things and to record my results. This phase has nothing to do with making money, it's about testing out what I've been working on away from trading. When I have a spot where I know I'm playing well then I'm out of the learning phase and can trade with my usual stakes.

I wish you the best of luck I really do, but I think focus on working smarter and not harder and reflect on how you best use your time so you don't end up two years down the line and doing the same thing.

That poker analogy isn't quite accurate Darchas if you don't mind me saying so

I used to play between 12-16 tables when I played full time and while it is correct that playing so many tables reduces your capacity to play "A game" poker, there is a trade off between yield and playing quality. Nearly all of the successful online pro's that I knew (cash games) were multi-tabling. If I had played say two tables then my dollar earn per table would be far higher than if I was playing say 12 but there is a diminishing return with this.

So if my 2 table earn rate was $10/hr per table but only $5/hr per table in the second instance then I am earning x3 the money playing 12 tables at $5/hr each. While the second method is not conducive to advancing your game, the only real advantage to playing better poker is toplay higher levels but as we saw, that becomes very difficult to do from say 2006 onwards so most professionals were multi-tabling at lower levels just amassing volume and getting player points/rakeback on top.

In fact it was this multi-tabling that killed online poker because entire networks were packed with grinders

[Tetras]

And I think my entries are dire... I just backed Jacattack in Newcastle 18:15 at 6.8 as I thought it was breaking out if it's range, within a second it was at 8, and then 11 !!!

One of my rules I got from a penny stock trader (Tony Ivanov), he said he always tries to trade into strength, which I take to mean "who else is going to support my position?".

I rarely back, but if I did, 6.8 wouldn't appeal to me, because outside of festivals, there's little strength at these prices. It's a high risk back or lay, because there's no money to hold the price either way and a few big bets can send the price out 10 ticks. The only time I'd consider it is on a horse I know very well, in a feature race or major meeting. I guess if the 1st and 2nd fav were drifting heavily, it could precipitate a gamble (maybe with a strong down trend on the chart to support), but that's rare outside of Irish races or the backend of a card.

If I did take a punt at those prices, I'd be using pennies, relatively speaking.

On the other hand, if a strong fav or 2nd fav drifts in an otherwise weak market (there were two under 5 in this market? I didn't trade it), your back bet will get more support. The problem is getting in before the horde

[smallplayer]

And I think my entries are dire... I just backed Jacattack in Newcastle 18:15 at 6.8 as I thought it was breaking out if it's range, within a second it was at 8, and then 11 !!!

One of my rules I got from a penny stock trader (Tony Ivanov), he said he always tries to trade into strength, which I take to mean "who else is going to support my position?".

I rarely back, but if I did, 6.8 wouldn't appeal to me, because outside of festivals, there's little strength at these prices. It's a high risk back or lay, because there's no money to hold the price either way and a few big bets can send the price out 10 ticks. The only time I'd consider it is on a horse I know very well, in a feature race or major meeting. I guess if the 1st and 2nd fav were drifting heavily, it could precipitate a gamble (maybe with a strong down trend on the chart to support), but that's rare outside of Irish races or the backend of a card.

If I did take a punt at those prices, I'd be using pennies, relatively speaking.

On the other hand, if a strong fav or 2nd fav drifts in an otherwise weak market (there were two under 5 in this market? I didn't trade it), your back bet will get more support. The problem is getting in before the horde

A very useful first post indeed. Welcome.