Losing strategies wanted

[Zenyatta]

Zenyatta

Imagine you're at the wheel of a car. The car starts to roll downhill. Do you apply the handbrake, or hope that gravity will be kind to you?

If I'm confident I actually parked the car on the flat, I pay no attention to the apparent move at all, confident and secure in the knowledge that its an optical illusion

Whether you lose a stoploss to exit your trade, or just use wom, you need some mechanism for limiting your losses. BTW, I do think that there's such a thing as exiting your trades too quickly, but I'd rather exit losses too quickly than too late!

Why would I pay any attention at all to a bunch of wallies sitting in their bedroom who have no idea what they're doing? I tell you for a fact, the market (pre-race anyway) is simply the opinions of wallies

[Iron]

I tell you for a fact, the market (pre-race anyway) is simply the opinions of wallies

Have a look at these stats: http://www.probabilitytheory.info/conte ... ge-markets

Either this is a case of a bunch of monkeys producing the complete works of Shakespeare by pure chance, or those wallies are smarter than you think!

Jeff

[mister man]

those stats include in play too though which is different...
pre off is just a lot of people guessing, and manipulators and big players bluffing and shadow boxing...
if it werent 80% of steamers wouldnt lose which they do, and less than 20% of drifters would win which they do.

why are pre off traders so scared to go in play, cos they might lose, why would that be ?? cos they dont know what they are on about with regard to the horses real chances ???.otherwise theyd go inplay and win big....
schimples..

[Euler]

Whether you do those stats in running or not you come to the same concluesion, that the market is very efficient. This is how I know I can do all sorts of crazy things and still, roughly, break even before commission. You can actually improve your strike rate by going in running if you have the right set up.

I'm surprise people haven't come up with more suggestions for really daft strategies. I am actually very keen find some.

[Iron]

The previous strategy I suggested could be refined, given that it probably loses more money:

A. In volatile markets than non-volatile markets.

B. When you're going against the trend.

C. If all trades are closed 60 seconds before the off (given that trends often reverse in the final minute, and volatility is lower in the final minute).

How about this:

A. Trade horses below 3.0 but above 1.5, for which at least 90% of the money previously matched is spread over at least 15 prices. Focus on grade 5 & 6 races only, as they are more volatile.

B. Work out the 200 point moving average on the 1 second chart. If price is above the MA, treat the horse as a drifter. Vice versa.

C. If the horse is a drifter, enter with a back, taking rather than offering money. Vice versa if it's a steamer.

D. If you can take a 1 tick profit by taking money, do so. Otherwise, let the market run its course until you green up or until minute before the off (whichever comes first).

E. Repeat until the a minute before the off.

Jeff

[LeTiss]

I think the reason some people lose money often, is not because of a flawed strategy in terms of selections, it's because of a reckless approach to staking plans

[freddy]

Exactly,
over staking / bank management issues are the biggest reason people fail imo.

Ive known people who have thrown out a winning statagey
simply becuase they had a bad week the very same week they had decided to up the stakes.

[Iron]

There have been times when I've tried to close trades in volatile markets by offering money to the queue. The problem is that you can find yourself chasing a market. If the market is drifting with a vengeance, and you want to lay, it's quite possible that no-one will be interested in taking your offer.

So here's the system.

To maximise our chances of trading volatile markets, we only trade markets:

A. That are < 3.0 and > 1.5
B. Prior to one minute before the off
C. Where money has been matched previously at at least 15 prices
D. That are class 5 or 6

If the market meets those conditions, then we lay if the price is lower than a 200 point moving average on the 1 second chart, and vice versa (so that you're hopefully going against the trend).

Your offset is 1 tick - if it's possible to take a 1 tick profit by taking the available money, do so.

If the spread moves one tick against your position, then try to close by offering money. If the spread moves still further away from your position, keep following the spread with any unmatched money until the trade is closed.

Then repeat, until 1 minute before the off.

I reckon that should lose more than random trading!

Jeff

[rubysglory]

I'm surprise people haven't come up with more suggestions for really daft strategies. I am actually very keen find some.

I wonder if the problem here Euler is that 'system' designs quite often assume an efficient market and base there propaganda results on such. Disregarding the pros and cons of a stop loss, Groovy may be spot on with raising money management as the issue that separate losing traders from winning traders. The inherent strategies themselves are often sound on a break even nil commission basis, but problems arise when a trader losers their nerve and often adopts a hybrid Martingale type approach.

rg

[LeTiss]

Between us, we could post 20-25 betting or trading strategies.

The majority will only fail due to a lack of discipline when it comes to stakes.
Having a staking plan is actually more important than the strategy itself

[rubysglory]

Must say I tend to agree LeTiss.

rg

[Zenyatta]

Also, it occurred to me that all my losses were never based on 'strategies', they were all caused by wild panics and desperate all-in punts

[Euler]

I wonder if the problem here Euler is that 'system' designs quite often assume an efficient market and base there propaganda results on such. Disregarding the pros and cons of a stop loss, Groovy may be spot on with raising money management as the issue that separate losing traders from winning traders. The inherent strategies themselves are often sound on a break even nil commission basis, but problems arise when a trader losers their nerve and often adopts a hybrid Martingale type approach.

rg

This is an interesting thread.

I agree, when I've looked at most 'breakthrough' systems all they seem to be are high strike rate strategies that ultimately lose through loss of commission. At which point they point out that individual selection is critical to a successful strategy. It's sort of like saying, you would have won if you would have picked the winners / winning trades.

When I watch struggling traders it generically feels to me like they are over thinking things, are often too fearfull of downside and not getting enough money through the market. That's what I can see at the moment.

[LeTiss]

When I watch struggling traders it generically feels to me like they are over thinking things, are often too fearfull of downside and not getting enough money through the market. That's what I can see at the moment.

I suspect that's definitely the case with scalpers, who fear that not closing out for a small loss could end up wiping out their profits. Swing traders are more inclined to sit it out

You don't seem to be defining between a betting strategy or trading strategy though Euler?!

IMO, there will be more punters in the 60% PC bracket than pure traders. If somebody has a massive bet at 1.33 on Under 2.5 goals, then greens up at 1.18 15mins later, it's a very grey area to classify them as an out and out trader, because it only takes a second to score a goal, and leave a massive red screen. They are a punter, who likes to hedge their bets

[Euler]

I'd be interested in naff betting as well as trading strategies, but most of my experiance comes from analysing traders at the moment.