The most common problem faced by day-traders and it's easy solution which is extremely difficult to implement.
A thread.
( uses concepts I have discussed many times before in separate threads)

Problem : I have a good system, I understand charts and/or price action, but I simply can't make money. I hold my losses too long or ( this is most common) I get out of profitable positions too fast and cannot sit for the whole move
At many firms at NASDAQ, day-traders are seen as elite sportspersons playing in a difficult taxing game. That's why, they have regular sessions with sports psychologists. They are advised to follow the basic routine of sportspersons.
Train ---- Play tournaments --- Rest
The cycle repeats
We retail day-traders here neither rest nor train.

Rest = taking time off markets
Train = trading in markets in training mode

Understanding REST is easy, simply take time off markets and spend time with family or do something you love
But what about training ?
Paper trading or trading on a simulator is never good training as it never gives you the same psychological issue while actual trading. Deep down you know this is fake, you are not making or losing actual money
As you are never making or losing money, you will not be able to be in the same psychological state / pressure which comes in actual trading. Your decisions while paper trading or simulated trading will be vastly superior or actual trading
The solution:
Trade 1 lot ( I am speaking about intraday options trading, cash traders can do this with a simple share of any stock) following your system/process for one month. This sounds easy, right?
Try implementing this, you will understand the massive psychological discipline and strength it requires. Majority fail to do this over a month and go back trading their normal volumes and thus face the same issues all over again
If you are in a trading slump for long and aim to claw back, give yourself 3 months.
First month = 1 lot
2nd month = 2 lots
3rd month = 4 lots
4th month = follow money mgmt/position sizing with a small bet per trade
I have used this "one lot" rule twice in my trading career to resolve my psychological issues while trading. In my time on twitter, have advised this method to probably hundreds and thousands of traders over the past few years.
So far, very few traders ( around 5 or 6) have followed this method diligently as I have outlined and come back to me with the results. Not surprisingly, all of them were profitable to various degrees
There is no short-cut solution is you are facing the same problem. No guru, no webinar/seminar/handholding/setup/system will be able to solve this issue.
As one of my students rightly said " when we go to a gym, the trainer can show us all the moves. But it's us who have to appear at the gym everyday and do the exercises if we have to improve our body"

Same with trading. Best of luck ! 🙏
Anthony Saliba, the only options trader to be interviewed in the first Market Wizards book was the original one lot trader. Indian fintwit has nicknamed me also as one lot, what a great title ! Thanks

https://t.co/oqCwSz8kfW

More from Subhadip Nandy

More from Finance

Ivor Cummins has been wrong (or lying) almost entirely throughout this pandemic and got paid handsomly for it.

He has been wrong (or lying) so often that it will be nearly impossible for me to track every grift, lie, deceit, manipulation he has pulled. I will use...


... other sources who have been trying to shine on light on this grifter (as I have tried to do, time and again:


Example #1: "Still not seeing Sweden signal versus Denmark really"... There it was (Images attached).
19 to 80 is an over 300% difference.

Tweet: https://t.co/36FnYnsRT9


Example #2 - "Yes, I'm comparing the Noridcs / No, you cannot compare the Nordics."

I wonder why...

Tweets: https://t.co/XLfoX4rpck / https://t.co/vjE1ctLU5x


Example #3 - "I'm only looking at what makes the data fit in my favour" a.k.a moving the goalposts.

Tweets: https://t.co/vcDpTu3qyj / https://t.co/CA3N6hC2Lq

You May Also Like

A brief analysis and comparison of the CSS for Twitter's PWA vs Twitter's legacy desktop website. The difference is dramatic and I'll touch on some reasons why.

Legacy site *downloads* ~630 KB CSS per theme and writing direction.

6,769 rules
9,252 selectors
16.7k declarations
3,370 unique declarations
44 media queries
36 unique colors
50 unique background colors
46 unique font sizes
39 unique z-indices

https://t.co/qyl4Bt1i5x


PWA *incrementally generates* ~30 KB CSS that handles all themes and writing directions.

735 rules
740 selectors
757 declarations
730 unique declarations
0 media queries
11 unique colors
32 unique background colors
15 unique font sizes
7 unique z-indices

https://t.co/w7oNG5KUkJ


The legacy site's CSS is what happens when hundreds of people directly write CSS over many years. Specificity wars, redundancy, a house of cards that can't be fixed. The result is extremely inefficient and error-prone styling that punishes users and developers.

The PWA's CSS is generated on-demand by a JS framework that manages styles and outputs "atomic CSS". The framework can enforce strict constraints and perform optimisations, which is why the CSS is so much smaller and safer. Style conflicts and unbounded CSS growth are avoided.