Dec 062010
 

On Monday’s I have to take my daughter to music lessons.  Usually I regret missing my trading but today when I got home I realized I hadn’t missed a thing!

I didn’t take any trades in the first 45 minutes.  I was waiting for 25.50 to get short but it got there in the last 15 minutes and I don’t like to trade then.  But I couldn’t resist taking it on sim.

If you haven’t responded to the survey, please do (even if you’re not interested).  22 people are interested in a trading room during the European morning and half of those said they’d be willing to donate to help with costs (about $99/month for Gotowebinar).

This is something I’ve been wanting to do for a long time now but never felt qualified to “run a trading room”.  And I’m still not but I don’t want that to stop me.  So think of me not as some guru who’s going to call trades (God help us) but rather another guy who’s trying to fit all the puzzle pieces together.  The more I read One Good Trade the more I think some kind of virtual prop firm would be cool.  Just because we’re retail traders doesn’t mean we shouldn’t have access to the synergy of collaboration. At SMB they really collaborate, sharing their research, yelling out good setups, etc.  We can do the same.  As long as it doesn’t get too distracting & chaotic.

Hopefully tomorrow will be a bit more active.  I’m really anxious to get one good trade.  Cheers.

  6 Responses to “ES Results for Dec 6 2010”

  1. hey Michael,
    sounds good!
    i hope the room idea works out.
    it’s definitely worth a try!
    i enjoyed One Good Trade as well.
    i nailed one today in CL – bought the low, sold the high and scaled perfectly in between.
    it was on the SIM, so I only earned psychological capital, but it still felt like cracking a baseball over the fence!
    it struck me as i finished your post…
    is the last sentence an oxymoron?
    : )

  2. Very good idea and this was also something Brett Steenbarger was suggesting several times for retail traders.
    For myself, I am pondering about it. On the one hand it would be cool to collaborate on the other hand it could be distracting. And as my girlfriend says I should know that it will distract me and therefore potentially harm my trading. But a short morning meeting – let’s say at 8.15 Paris time – and a noon meeting would be fine and could help to exchange preparation/hypos and analysis (noon meeting).

    Cheers,
    Markus

  3. I totally agree and that’s my concern as well.

    For the pre-market meeting, I think it’s a great idea. I’m usually not available until 8:30am cause I have to drop my kids off at school. I think it’d be cool if different people presented their ideas for different markets. Like bund, stoxx, euro, es. That would save everyone some time.

  4. Morning Michael,

    Just wanted to say that I like this idea and as Markus pointed out, Brett Steenbarger suggested this several times, for example here: http://traderfeed.blogspot.com/2009/07/teamwork-and-trading-success.html

    Personally, I wouldn’t be able to participate in any sound-based application because my day job would’t allow this. But still like the idea.

  5. I was in a free private chat room for a year with a very successful trader. I was very helpful to see him trade. He knew his stuff. Just like FT71. I believe collaboration would be very useful, but I find myself distracted by others calling entries, wondering why I cannot see what they can.

    I would contribute, but am hesitant for the reason most others are. One can adopt bad habits as much as learning good ones. You need to be careful what you believe.

    God. That sounds so unhelpful. I’d like to help! 🙂

    Adrian

  6. Actually. I should add,

    In our chat room there was a pre-market catchup, discussing pivots, S/R areas etc… that was VERY useful! Wholeheartedly agree with pre-market discussions!

    Adrian

 Leave a Reply

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

(required)

(required)