Well I would naturally assume (perhaps incorrectly in your eyes) that someone who gets it right more than 80% of the time is not basing that figure on 1 afternoon of trading and neither are they going to say I get it right more than 80% but I am just trading wildly and end up doing my brains all the time. Perhaps the poster would confirm if "they he or she" are talking about an afternoon of pure luck or a long term percentage strike rate.
I offer 1.01 it is the latter.
Jeff - I was paying you a compliment about your intelligence. The overall theme was about being profitable and the view was good traders get it right 80% of the time. Therefore by definition a "good" trader with a >80% strike rate is not going to be a "good" trader if he then blows his brains out on the remaining 20% of the trades.
Someone with a small profit but a large stop loss would not be by definition a "good" trader, they would be an imbecile. I would hope that after an afternoon they would spot the 8 wins yielding 8 ticks (min profit) and also note the 2 losses yieldind -10 ticks. This "good" or even "lucky" trader having had the foresight to setup the trades this way would surely have the sense to adjust their stop loss and keep their 80 strike rate and also make a profit.
What percentage do you have to be right in order to make $$$
-
enzabella2009
- Posts: 747
- Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2009 3:58 pm
IF you managed 80% of good trades I suppose It did not happen just with a bit of luck. There may be aknowledge and skills behind the 80% figures. My question is how a skilled trader manage 80% of good trades and he or she is so dump stupid to lose it all when he or she has 20% of bad trades against? How can I not agree with JG?
Before someone shoves their smelly feet in my face I should clarify that what I meant was I can't believe that anyone could turn up to any random market, at a random time and say 'OK the odds are 3.5 now, I think its going to go up' and be right 80% plus of the time.
Obviously if people wait for certain opportunities to arise and dont try and trade every market then of course they can get over 80%.
But I think this 80% figure which has popped up here has come from confusing a traders 'strike rate' (i.e. how many greens vs reds, of which 80% plus greens is certainly achievable) rather than individual market predictions at any one time, which are completely different things. I'm sure most people here realise that for most traders its not as simple as opening and closing one trade per market based on their view of whether the market is going to go up or down at any one time
Obviously if people wait for certain opportunities to arise and dont try and trade every market then of course they can get over 80%.
But I think this 80% figure which has popped up here has come from confusing a traders 'strike rate' (i.e. how many greens vs reds, of which 80% plus greens is certainly achievable) rather than individual market predictions at any one time, which are completely different things. I'm sure most people here realise that for most traders its not as simple as opening and closing one trade per market based on their view of whether the market is going to go up or down at any one time
In that case, thank you, although on this occasion I confess I possibly didn't display the level of intelligence you credit me with.JollyGreen wrote: Jeff - I was paying you a compliment about your intelligence.
I agree!JollyGreen wrote:Someone with a small profit but a large stop loss would not be by definition a "good" trader, they would be an imbecile.
Jeff
There are times in this forum when posters make points based on their own limited strategy whilst others make comments based on the whole range of trading methods and it is understandable that misunderstandings happen.
In defence of Ferru, he was making a general point about a style of trading that is broader in its application. It is perfectly possible to get an 80% strike rate with a "loose" stop loss, where a self imposed tight stop would reduce that %win rate to nearer 50. The question about whether it is a feasible long term strategy is not proven.
In general, scalpers operate a small margin, tight stop method whilst range traders (whether they realise they are using stops or not), tend to look for multiple ticks with a much looser stop loss. Interestingly, swing (trend traders) operate more like scalpers and whilst looking for a large number of ticks, they keep stops pretty tight.
The relationship between (varied) stakes, success rate, stop losses and methodology is many and varied but the calculation of profitibility is quite simple.
As the OP points out, the %age hit rate (for a scalper) needs to be > 55% only if he is looking for a one tick gain against a one tick stop loss. An 80% target figure is certainly achievable with experience and when trades are conducted at specific moments in time.
I do not like using words like "strike rate" as they often convey the wrong meaning unless qualified within a method. I much prefer to use the much simpler measurement of "net ticks won". It is not important what technique(s) one employs, scalping, trend trading etc and what is important is that there is actually a net tick gain. It matters not whether in gaining a net 150 ticks a day that I may lose 10 or I may lose 250 ticks in the process.
In defence of Ferru, he was making a general point about a style of trading that is broader in its application. It is perfectly possible to get an 80% strike rate with a "loose" stop loss, where a self imposed tight stop would reduce that %win rate to nearer 50. The question about whether it is a feasible long term strategy is not proven.
In general, scalpers operate a small margin, tight stop method whilst range traders (whether they realise they are using stops or not), tend to look for multiple ticks with a much looser stop loss. Interestingly, swing (trend traders) operate more like scalpers and whilst looking for a large number of ticks, they keep stops pretty tight.
The relationship between (varied) stakes, success rate, stop losses and methodology is many and varied but the calculation of profitibility is quite simple.
As the OP points out, the %age hit rate (for a scalper) needs to be > 55% only if he is looking for a one tick gain against a one tick stop loss. An 80% target figure is certainly achievable with experience and when trades are conducted at specific moments in time.
I do not like using words like "strike rate" as they often convey the wrong meaning unless qualified within a method. I much prefer to use the much simpler measurement of "net ticks won". It is not important what technique(s) one employs, scalping, trend trading etc and what is important is that there is actually a net tick gain. It matters not whether in gaining a net 150 ticks a day that I may lose 10 or I may lose 250 ticks in the process.
I have no idea what my strike rate is only that over time i can make money.
Don't really see what importance it has in trading to be honest, to many variables.
For example if you looking for 1 tick profits and have a 10 tick stop loss, then your strike rate is going to be very high, but that doesn't mean you going to be making any money if twice a day your going to lose 10 ticks.
seems a pointless stat to me
.
AS it's more than possible to have a 90% S/R or a 10% S/R and win or a 90% S/R or a 10% S/R and lose.
Don't really see what importance it has in trading to be honest, to many variables.
For example if you looking for 1 tick profits and have a 10 tick stop loss, then your strike rate is going to be very high, but that doesn't mean you going to be making any money if twice a day your going to lose 10 ticks.
seems a pointless stat to me
. AS it's more than possible to have a 90% S/R or a 10% S/R and win or a 90% S/R or a 10% S/R and lose.
The significance of an 80% strike rate is that you could lose four times as much as you make and still break even. If you inverted it though it could still work if you make four times as much as you lose when you win. At the end of the day its going to depend on your style.
-
enzabella2009
- Posts: 747
- Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2009 3:58 pm
Donfede, Life is very simple. If you read all the posts here you may want commit suicide.donfede wrote:Elite horseracing traders can correctly predict maybe up to 80% of the time, if the odds are going up or down?
Only by guessing you are 50% right about predicting if the odds of this or that horse will drift or steam.
And if you are correct 50% of the time you lose money, but if you are brilliant enough to predict correctly up to 80% of the time you make good money...
If this hypothesis is right, When do you break even?
just kidding.. 80% in my experience is an excellent achievement as long you have an excellent skill in money management. If I personally achieved 80% a day against 20% a day my profit could be 2,400 against 600 loss= 1,800.
Experts traders or gamblers must know what 80% will bring to their pockets..Now you guys can eat me alive...
good luck today...
unfortuantly it's only from backing at odds of 1.01 
.
-
enzabella2009
- Posts: 747
- Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2009 3:58 pm
If you won 80 and lost 2,000 you call this numbers for a better advice.
Gamcare: helpline 0845 6000 133
Gordon Moody Association: Tel: 01384 241 292
GA (Gamblers Anonymous): Tel: 020 7384 3040
GAM- ANON UK and Ireland: Tel: 08700 50 8880
Gamcare: helpline 0845 6000 133
Gordon Moody Association: Tel: 01384 241 292
GA (Gamblers Anonymous): Tel: 020 7384 3040
GAM- ANON UK and Ireland: Tel: 08700 50 8880
-
enzabella2009
- Posts: 747
- Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2009 3:58 pm
lol.....hahahha... freddy dont worrie if you had no coppers left..I think is free to call
haha
haha