Most are of the opinion it is a zero sum game. - page 2
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
Well if you compare it to for example Blackjack then it is good to deal with these question because in Blackjack, when played correctly, it is still very possible to come out on top of it, thus in profit.
Still it is considered gambling, because the game is (usually) played in a casino.
But that is not the point here, the point is in the 'when played correctly' as this separates the fools that don't have a clue about what they are doing, or should do, from the players that exactly know what to do and why to play it like that.
The same concept applies to trading financial markets.
Where lies the border between gambling and playing as a professional ?
Where lies the border between gambling and playing as a professional ?
If the funds are over and there are no more hedge orders then it was a gambling based strategy, like if I was to show a nice martingale equity that fails at the end because I couldn't double any longer. It is still a gambling strategy, whatever increases the risk of each successive trade without control is gambling
It's a lack relative to the strategy itself, any surefire hedging ea if hedging orders not limited is susceptible to broke a day or another, to prevent bad surprise costing 25-50% of the deposit/profit/balance, this one stops after approx. 5 hedges orders aka about 10%, it happens more often.
Does it need improvement ? Yes. Is it gambling ? I even don't know how it could be called so ; I was btw highlighting to the thread author the fact that all those ways, strategies, mathematics, involved in forex trading have nothing to do with the gambler having a tekila-shot before the roulette starts.
Very good question.
Experience.
Experience.
I definitively disagree with "gambling" being related to trading.
Roulette is pure gambling game - you choose black/red, it starts, you win or you lose.
Poker is half a gambling game - you don't chose your card but you still have control over what's happening to you, at any time you can retire.
I would say "car driver in a race" : you have a full control over the car, but you can't decide what's happening in the race, you can retire at any time, you can end it with the max gain bonus or the minimal gain bonus which won't be enough to pay race preparation's cost. Finally you can pass away at the next turn. It seems to me more alike than "gambling".
Interrsting. But can you define it more? Because there must be something essential in the experience that makes the difference. Because there are traders with years of apparent experience that keep losing.
Knowing the game, versus not having a clue about how to play it.
The Blackjack example is simple because you play what is called 'Basic Strategy' a fixed rule-set that tells you what to do for each card score.
Serious players memorize these rules so that playing becomes automatic.
For financial markets it's a bit different, but it does not have to be more difficult, the problem is that there are an endless number of different strategies and not just the (single) basic strategy as in Blackjack.
This does not mean that a simple or a few simple rule-set's exist but the task is more difficult, simply because the trader has to (re)-discover these rule-set's, and then apply and stick to them, which is a complete skill by itself !
I discovered even if you blatantly give them the correct set they will manipulate and change them until they no longer work, and fall back into searching mode, forever searching for the secret seems to bring more satisfaction then applying it... or they have to discover it, themselves, and not being told by someone else... also destiny plays a part in all of this.
So #1 is Experience and,
#2 would definitely be Discipline.
Blackjack I don't know, but there's poker bot making money online :]
Checking ... it seems actually it's about making those bots indetectable :)))))
Knowing the game, versus not having a clue about how to play it.
The Blackjack example is simple because you play what is called 'Basic Strategy' a fixed rule-set that tells you what to do for each card score.
Serious players memorize these rules so that playing becomes automatic.
For financial markets it's a bit different, but it does not have to be more difficult, the problem is that there are an endless number of different strategies and not just the (single) basic strategy as in Blackjack.
This does not mean that a simple or a few simple rule-set's exist but the task is more difficult, simply because the trader has to (re)-discover these rule-set's, and then apply and stick to them, which is a complete skill by itself !
I discovered even if you blatantly give them the correct set they will manipulate and change them until they no longer work, and fall back into searching mode, forever searching for the secret seems to bring more satisfaction then applying it... or they have to discover it, themselves, and not being told by someone else... also destiny plays a part in all of this.
So #1 is Experience and,
#2 would definitely be Discipline.
I agree with #1 Experience and #2 Discipline.
I would define Experience as having finally and fully learnt the Minimum Requirements for when to act (BUY/SELL) in terms of your trading plan rules. A long down candle is not a SELL, per se. A long up candle is not a BUY, per se. There are Minimums before you can BUY or SELL. I call that simply Trading in terms of the rules (minimum requirements). I find that most of my mistakes are simply not applying the minimum requirements, that is, simply not trading properly in terms of the minimum rules.
I also find that a person has to discover the FINAL rules applying the Holy Grail method when you test them in live trading. You have to learn to simply trade them blindly. That seems to me the only secure way to get to the FINAL RULES correctly.
#2 Discipline, obviously is in terms of the rules of your trading plan.
A 3 % per month trader has a different trading plan (set of trading rules) compared to a 3% per annum trader. A 10% per day trader, clearly has a very different set of rules too.
Discipline, at the moment, is for me the difficulty to learn to follow my rules blindly. Because, afterwards, they are 100% correct. Had I been brave enough to follow them blindly, I would easily reach my daily goals. So, I have to simply believe they are Holy Grail rules and trade them blindly. Where I am wrong, I simply refine the rule as required.
Obviously, this assumes I have the right indicators. If I were to have the wrong or useless indicators, I obviously will never succeed in forex trading.
So, the critical factor is the set of indicators.
If they were to be wrong, I am wasting my time.
Obviously, I believe my indicators are useful indicators.
A roulette bot would be designed like a binary option ea without chart analysis : so there's a big money management code part to set there, a very advanced martingale system. but it's more difficult than forex-traded-as-a-gambler as prices follows a logic. none won't see eurusd switching from 1.50 to 1.05 without a crash.