Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : DAYTRADING Fundamentals -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: re3 who wrote (7374)	3/13/2000 10:58:00 AM
From: Proton	Respond to of 18137

so, then, doc, what are YOU doing? Applying the defibrillator to the Efficient Market Hypothesis! :-) This is a good question. "ahhaha" is obviously erudite. He raises some excellent points, but I think he overstates his case. Trying to game small point moves ("momo" or "day" trading) does place traders in the Schroedinger conundrum ("try to take advantage of what you see, and what you see won't be there" <g>). However, sector rotation, seasonality, and even swing trading strategies have made a hash of the EFH. "ahhaha's" lumping of all trading strategies together is fallacious (note to "ahhaha:" if you have discerned among various trading styles and timeframes, my apologies). Let me present an important observation here: *Most traders should listen to ahhaha, and get out of the casino!* I can't remember if it was Ed Seykota, but there was a beautiful analysis of the odds against traders in Market Wizards. In any highly competitive endeavor, there are many losers and a few winners: professional sports, Amway distribution, trading, or sea turtles heading to the ocean. The failure of the many is necessary to the success of the few: 1. You wouldn't tell Michael Jordan not to devote his life to professional basketball. 2. You're not Michael Jordan. 3. You might be Kevin Garnett. 4. Choose your own path. I also think "ahhaha" doth protest too much about the role of the public in spread setting, etc. One wonders if this was his party line before the $1 billion Nasdaq market maker fine. <VBG> I also take issue with "ahhaha's" comments on the inevitability of psychological (and even karmatic) breakdown in traders. Increased risk-taking and deteriorated discipline are not inevitable: they are well-understood and defined issues. They are problems, and problems can be solved. Just not by everyone. Forgive the hit and run post: I'll not be back. However, I have found this discussion provocative and fascinating. Thanks. P.