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: aldrums who wrote (8841)	6/11/2000 12:31:00 PM
From: Dan Duchardt	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 18137

Alex, I respectfully disagree with you on points 1 and 6. After paper trading for some time with reasonable success, then living through a similar experience to LF (absent the making money phase), I believe strongly in limiting risk while learning how to trade effectively, but I also think that eliminating all risk and eliminating the real interface with the market by paper trading is going too far. A far better alternative, IMHO, is to trade small, but live. There is no substitute for actually pulling the trigger and experiencing the reality of missed executions when your timing is off. I believe the hard record of executions actually received is a far better indicator of your skill than any hypothetical record from paper trading. The cost of commissions is an obvious concern. I looked for a long time for a decent broker that provides direct access at a low cost. I found one, and there are a couple of others I've heard of that charge far less than the typical RT3 or Cyber based systems. At $.01 per share ($1.00 minimum), I can trade even 100 shares, live, and make or lose real money on every trade without ever thinking about how much I need to make to cover commissions. As Alan said, the point is not to make money, but to trade well. But there is no good reason to pay high overhead and lose a lot of money in the process. Dan

To: aldrums who wrote (8841)	6/11/2000 3:42:00 PM
From: Apakhabar	Respond to of 18137

Does anyone think "paper-trading" is a misnomer? IMO it's not trading unless you actually are demonstrating the ability to get shares. What "paper-trading" really seems to be is "system-testing". I bring this up because my "system" is not really a system; I simply rely on conservative money management and the reactionary instead of predictive approach. Perhaps I have simply not been trading long enough to have a meaningful perspective, but it seems to me that while I now have the ability to make a modest to decent living from trading, in order to really improve my results I might need to develop a more codified system. My question is this, do the successful traders here make a distinction between "trading rules" and a "trading system"? If so, do you feel a "system" is essential to your success? Finally, any thoughts on the shelf-life, so to speak, of their system?