MoneyTec 2.0 - Online Forex Traders & Brokers Social Networking Community » Trading Talk » General Trading Forum

[awcapital]

Forex trading is NOT gambling !

The market can do ANYTHING so expect nothing. Risk management is the key to sustained long term success in this market. Here's why !

Let's define gambling as the generally acceptable definition to mean all games found in your usual casino.

As you would all come to suspect, the casino has set up the games odds such that it has the upper hand in terms of odds in the long run.

In the forex market, ANYTHING can happen and no one sets the rules or has the ability to contol the market with any consistency (i am refering to the big 5 currencies only )

Here's where risk management comes in.

Take the simple game of roullette. Assume one places bets on red/black only where the payout is 1:1. The problem with this is that one's winnings will always equals one's losses. i.e. risk reward ratio is the same. There is no such thing as limiting your losses. Throw in the number 00 in the works and the odds is suddenly in the casino's hands.

With trading, you can ALWAYS let your profit runs and limit losses. Hence, even if you have a system that has a probability of winning (and losing) 50 percent of the time (like in the case of the black/red roulette without 00), you have the ability to limit losses and let profit runs.
Hence, in the roulette scenario you will have a theoretical profit of $0 (Prob(Wins) = Prob(loss) and Wins($) = Losses($)). But in the forex market (with 50:50 win loss system you can have (Prob(wins) = Prob(loss) BUT Wins($) > Losses($))

So, my definition of gambling is when one knowingly risk $ knowing the probability of winning is less then an even chance. This person hopes to be the outlier in the statistical game where he lies in the winners corner not the losers (the casino still wins overall btw).

With forex trading, you risk a % of your float on a system with certain probability of winnings but have risk management in place such that the payout (on average) will not be 1:1. That's how you can have sustained profitability in the forex market.

It does not mean that you can easily make money in the forex market. But it is possible to do it on a consistent basis.

As mentioned in my other posts, if one can CONSISTENTLY make just 20 pips a day. You can turn $100,000 to $3 BILLION (on a compounded basis) in just over 3 years.

Be wise to claims of 20 30 50 70 PIPS a day profit. If it's too good to be true, it probably is.
My 2 Cents

[ap]

"Take the simple game of roullette. Assume one places bets on red/black only where the payout is 1:1. The problem with this is that one's winnings will always equals one's losses. i.e. risk reward ratio is the same. There is no such thing as limiting your losses. Throw in the number 00 in the works and the odds is suddenly in the casino's hands.

With trading, you can ALWAYS let your profit runs and limit losses. Hence, even if you have a system that has a probability of winning (and losing) 50 percent of the time (like in the case of the black/red roulette without 00), you have the ability to limit losses and let profit runs.
Hence, in the roulette scenario you will have a theoretical profit of $0 (Prob(Wins) = Prob(loss) and Wins($) = Losses($)). But in the forex market (with 50:50 win loss system you can have (Prob(wins) = Prob(loss) BUT Wins($) > Losses($))"


That is not true.
the chart attached is generated by random numbers (0-0.9)

instrument =100;
x =rand();
if x>=0.5
then
instrument = instrument+1
else
instrument = instrument-1

The thing in common in common between trading and gambling is the trend element.

If you had TA software in the roulette table you would be trading.

If you can not have full and timely acesess to all the info about the amounts and enthusiasm of actual buyers and sellers, full info about the intentions and the amounts of those standing aside and waiting to enter the market, a 100% accuracy in your analysis "You are gambling in the markets"

[vision3001]

>Forex trading is NOT gambling !

It's generally unheard of to apply TA onto casino games or lottery, most gamblers treat casino as an alternative to lottery - however, there are specific instances where one apply technical strategies to gain some slight advantage from certain games, eg. blackjacks, pokers and Chinese mahjong and believe it or not [6], even certain types of lottery [1]!!

However, it has been illustrated that TA can be applied to forex and stock market for a profit. It has also been illustrated by Fama and students that one can also consistent make a loss through TA under certain circumstances.

So is gambling (in the form of lottery and casino) and trading (stocks, forex, communities, etc) the same? Having raised that question, in this free world, I think we wouldn't stop you from thinking it is the same if you really wants to, happy decision making.

In further support of AW's proposition, allow me to borrow wikipedia and google:

GAMBLING

Wiki [2]: Gambling (or betting) is any behavior involving riskingmoney or property (making a wager or placing a stake) on the outcome of a game, contest, or other event in which the outcome of that activity depends partially or totally upon chance or upon one's ability to do something.

In extended usage, gambling may also refer to engaging in any high-risk behavior in which decisions occur based upon incomplete knowledge - for example, high-risk stockinvestments (see speculation), difficult and potentially costly business or non-business ventures, or even personal relationships.

Gambling games may predate recorded history, with examples recorded in virtually all of the ancient civilizations.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Google [3]
Definitions of gambling on the Web:

the act of playing for stakes in the hope of winning (including the payment of a price for a chance to win a prize); "his gambling cost him a fortune"; "there was heavy play at the blackjack table"

wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn
Gambling (or betting) is any behavior involving risking money or valuables (making a wager or placing a stake) on the outcome of a game, contest, or other event in which the outcome of that activity depends partially or totally upon chance or upon one's ability to do something.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambling
Promoting, permitting, or engaging in illegal gambling.

ojjdp.ncjrs.org/ojstatbb/glossary.html
The voluntary risking of a sum of money on the outcome of a game or other event.

www.islandcasino.com/articles/casino_glossary.html
Illegal participation in games of skill or chance for money and/or other items of value.

www.aaps.k12.mi.us/aaps.forparents/parents.studentrr/definitions
The Martians gamble at Jetan in several ways. Of course the outcome of the game indicates to whom the main stake belongs; but they also put a price upon the head of each piece, according to its value, and for each piece that a player loses he pays its value to his opponent.

www.erblist.com/abg/jetan.html
The Romans were great gamblers and placed bets on a chariot race or a cock-fight or on the throw of a dice. It became such a problem that games of chance were officialy banned, except during the winter festival of Saturnalia, when most rules were relaxed. However the rattle of dice was still heard in most taverns and public bath houses.

myweb.tiscali.co.uk/temetfutue/glossary/glossaryG.htm
Unlawful engaging in playing, operating, or assisting in operating a game of chance for money or some other stake.

www.state.mi.us/msp/cjic/ucr/ucr_m.htm
participation in betting or gambling

encarta.msn.com/dictionary_1861738639/play.html

-------------------------------------------------------------------
TRADING

Google [4]

Definitions of trading on the Web:

buying or selling securities or commodities

wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn
Trade is voluntary exchange of goods and/or services. Exchanges may take place between two parties (bilateral trade) or amongst more than two parties (multilateral trade). In its original form trade necessarily used barter and the exchange of goods and services and recognized equal value desirable to both parties. Modern traders generally negotiate through the use of a medium of exchange, i.e. money, and rarely through barter: as a result one can separate buying and earning from selling. ...

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trading
services allow clients to locate objects by the services the objects provide, rather than by name. This is similar to the distributed name service in the Network service category.

www.opengroup.org/architecture/togaf7-doc/arch/p3/trm/tx/tx_objec.htm
Water quality trading is an approach that offers greater efficiency in achieving water quality goals on a watershed basis. It allows one source to meet its regulatory obligations by using pollutant reductions created by another source that has lower pollution control costs. Trading capitalizes on economies of scale and the control cost differentials among and between sources.

www.agnr.umd.edu/users/waterqual/resources/glossary.html
Transferring funds from one subaccount to another within an annuity. These transfers are free of load or tax.

www.annuitiesinstitute.com/annuity_terms_and_dictionary.htm
Opening a position in the market, either long or short, with the expatiation of either closing it out at a substantial profit or cutting losses short if the trade does not work out.

www.nirv.com/nirvana/Education/Glossary.htm
The process of buying and selling securities; can be conducted for a firm's account or for its customers; either conducted on an exchange or over the counter.

www.efgi.com/glossary/t.html
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Wik [5]i: Day trading most commonly refers to the practice of buying and selling stocks(or derivatives) during the day such that at the end of the day there has been no net change in position i.e. for every share of stock bought an equivalent share is sold. A gain or loss is made on the difference between the purchase and sales prices. One side effect of this style of trading is that shares are not delivered or received as there are a few days between trade and settlement.

Day trading is not necessarily more risky than any other trading activity. However, the common use of buying on margin (i.e. using borrowed funds) amplifies gains and losses such that substantial losses or gains can occur in a very short period of time. It is commonly stated that "80%" or "90%" of Day traders lose money. An analysis of the Taiwanese stock market suggests that "less than 20% of day traders earn profits net of transaction costs" ^{[1][img]chrome://targetalert/content/skin/internal.png[/img]}.

Day trading used to be the preserve of financial firms and professionals and some savvy private investors and speculators but in recent years has become notoriously common amongst casual traders taking advantage of new facilities offered via the Internet.

The NASDAQ officially defines "pattern day trading" as placing four or more round-trip orders in one day on a regular basis.^{[2][img]chrome://targetalert/content/skin/internal.png[/img]} A pattern day trader is treated differently from other traders: a broker may allow margin levels as low as 25% as opposed to the usual 50% e.g. a day trader can leverage the $100 in his account to buy $400 worth of stock; a broker may require the trader maintain a minimum liquidation value e.g. if the account value falls below $25,000 no day trading is allowed.

Some of the more commonly day-traded financial instruments are stocks, stock options, currencies, and a host of futures contracts such as equity index futures, interest-rate futures, and commodity futures.

References:
[1] http://www.assemblix.com.sg/
[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambling
[3] http://www.google.com/search?num=100...ng&btnG=Search
[4] http://www.google.com/search?q=define%3Atrading&sourceid=mozilla-search&start=0&start=0&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-USfficial
[5] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Day_trading
[6] http://www.ripleysf.com

[BullMarket]

Originally Posted by ap

"Take the simple game of roullette. Assume one places bets on red/black only where the payout is 1:1. The problem with this is that one's winnings will always equals one's losses. i.e. risk reward ratio is the same. There is no such thing as limiting your losses. Throw in the number 00 in the works and the odds is suddenly in the casino's hands.

With trading, you can ALWAYS let your profit runs and limit losses. Hence, even if you have a system that has a probability of winning (and losing) 50 percent of the time (like in the case of the black/red roulette without 00), you have the ability to limit losses and let profit runs.
Hence, in the roulette scenario you will have a theoretical profit of $0 (Prob(Wins) = Prob(loss) and Wins($) = Losses($)). But in the forex market (with 50:50 win loss system you can have (Prob(wins) = Prob(loss) BUT Wins($) > Losses($))"


That is not true.
the chart attached is generated by random numbers (0-0.9)

instrument =100;
x =rand();
if x>=0.5
then
instrument = instrument+1
else
instrument = instrument-1

The thing in common in common between trading and gambling is the trend element.

If you had TA software in the roulette table you would be trading.

If you can not have full and timely acesess to all the info about the amounts and enthusiasm of actual buyers and sellers, full info about the intentions and the amounts of those standing aside and waiting to enter the market, a 100% accuracy in your analysis "You are gambling in the markets"

Ahhh, the great random market fallacy. Your charts lack of any definable trends.

A trend is defined as 3 reaction high/lows. I challenge you to find any on your chart.


Well random charts look like real charts therefore markets must be random!!

Well by that flawed logic….

Smoke looks like steam therefore smoke must be water!!

I KNEW IT!


-Frank

[awcapital]

Originally Posted by ap

"Take the simple game of roullette. Assume one places bets on red/black only where the payout is 1:1. The problem with this is that one's winnings will always equals one's losses. i.e. risk reward ratio is the same. There is no such thing as limiting your losses. Throw in the number 00 in the works and the odds is suddenly in the casino's hands.

With trading, you can ALWAYS let your profit runs and limit losses. Hence, even if you have a system that has a probability of winning (and losing) 50 percent of the time (like in the case of the black/red roulette without 00), you have the ability to limit losses and let profit runs.
Hence, in the roulette scenario you will have a theoretical profit of $0 (Prob(Wins) = Prob(loss) and Wins($) = Losses($)). But in the forex market (with 50:50 win loss system you can have (Prob(wins) = Prob(loss) BUT Wins($) > Losses($))"


That is not true.
the chart attached is generated by random numbers (0-0.9)

instrument =100;
x =rand();
if x>=0.5
then
instrument = instrument+1
else
instrument = instrument-1

The thing in common in common between trading and gambling is the trend element.

If you had TA software in the roulette table you would be trading.

If you can not have full and timely acesess to all the info about the amounts and enthusiasm of actual buyers and sellers, full info about the intentions and the amounts of those standing aside and waiting to enter the market, a 100% accuracy in your analysis "You are gambling in the markets"

I think you are missing the point !

I am not at all debating if the market follows a trend or whether it is a random walk ? Definition of trends are subjective as well. I define trends as prices creating higher peaks and troughs (and peaks and troughs are defined a certain way as well) others might use MACD or other indicators ... the point is WHO CARES !

If one bother reading my previous posting, the difference between gambling and trading is

"in the roulette scenario you will have a theoretical profit of $0 (Prob(Wins) = Prob(loss) and Wins($) = Losses($)). But in the forex market (with 50:50 win loss system you can have (Prob(wins) = Prob(loss) BUT Wins($) > Losses($))"

My advice to all traders out there is to concentrate on risk/money management. There is NO HOLY GRAIL system. The market can do anything !

My 2 Cents

[vision3001]

My implementation his code of 1000 coin toss for a few rounds suggested that the outcome is quite similar to that of a stock market, see attachment for one sample outcome.

HOWEVER, while we can see several convincing head and shoulders, suggesting that the stock market is random walk, it is my opinion that this is a different case. The outcomes of this program is purely computerised. In the stock market, the dynamics of the prices are human oriented even though the transactions are handled by computers, ie. the humans influenced the price movements. Perhaps there will come a time when we have a perfect human, but for now, we know that humans are not efficient, neither are they well-informed.

Data of the chart is as follows:
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 6 7 8 9 10 11 10 11 12 13 12 13 12 13 12 13 12 13 12 11 10 9 10 9 8 7 6 5 6 7 6 5 6 7 6 7 8 9 8 9 8 7 8 9 10 11 12 11 10 11 12 13 12 13 12 11 10 11 10 9 8 9 10 11 10 11 12 13 12 13 14 15 16 17 16 17 18 19 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 23 24 25 24 23 22 21 20 21 20 19 18 19 18 17 18 17 18 17 18 19 20 21 20 19 20 21 22 23 22 21 20 21 20 21 20 19 18 17 16 17 18 17 16 15 14 15 16 17 16 15 16 15 16 17 16 15 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 19 18 19 20 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 16 17 18 19 20 19 18 19 18 19 18 17 18 17 18 17 18 19 20 19 20 21 22 21 22 21 20 21 22 23 22 21 20 21 22 23 24 25 24 23 24 23 24 23 24 23 22 21 20 19 20 19 18 17 16 15 16 17 16 17 18 17 16 17 16 17 18 17 18 17 18 17 16 15 14 13 14 15 14 13 14 15 16 15 14 15 14 13 12 11 12 11 10 11 12 11 12 13 12 13 14 13 12 13 12 11 12 13 14 13 12 11 10 11 10 9 8 9 10 11 12 11 10 11 12 11 12 11 12 13 12 11 12 11 10 9 10 9 8 7 8 7 8 7 6 5 6 5 6 5 4 3 4 5 6 5 6 7 6 5 6 7 8 7 8 9 10 9 10 9 10 9 8 7 8 7 6 5 6 5 6 7 6 7 8 7 8 7 6 7 6 5 6 5 4 5 6 7 8 7 6 7 6 5 6 7 8 9 8 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 4 3 4 3 2 3 4 5 6 5 6 5 6 5 6 7 6 5 6 5 6 5 4 3 4 5 4 5 6 5 6 5 6 5 6 5 6 7 6 7 8 9 8 7 6 7 6 5 6 7 8 9 10 9 8 7 8 9 8 9 10 11 12 11 10 11 10 11 10 9 10 11 10 11 12 11 12 13 14 13 14 13 14 13 12 11 12 13 14 13 14 15 16 15 16 17 18 17 18 17 16 17 18 17 16 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 21 22 21 22 21 20 21 20 21 20 19 20 21 22 21 20 19 20 19 20 19 18 17 18 19 20 19 18 19 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 15 14 15 14 15 14 15 16 15 16 17 16 17 16 17 16 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 12 13 12 13 14 13 14 13 14 13 12 11 12 11 10 9 10 11 12 13 14 13 14 13 14 13 14 13 12 11 12 11 10 11 10 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 15 16 17 16 17 18 17 16 15 16 15 16 17 18 19 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 14 15 14 13 14 15 14 15 14 15 16 17 18 17 18 19 18 19 20 19 18 17 16 17 18 19 20 19 18 19 18 17 18 19 20 21 20 19 18 19 20 19 20 19 18 19 20 21 22 21 20 19 20 19 20 19 20 19 18 19 20 19 18 17 18 19 20 21 20 19 20 21 22 23 22 23 24 23 24 23 22 21 22 21 20 19 20 19 18 19 18 17 16 15 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 19 20 19 20 19 18 19 20 19 18 17 18 19 20 19 18 19 18 19 20 19 18 19 18 17 18 17 18 17 16 15 14 15 14 13 12 11 10 11 10 11 10 11 10 11 12 11 10 11 12 11 10 9 8 9 10 11 12 11 10 11 10 9 10 11 12 11 10 9 10 9 10 11 12 13 12 11 10 11 12 13 14 13 12 11 10 9 10 9 10 9 8 7 8 9 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 5 4 5 6 7 6 5 4 3 4 5 4 3 2 1 2 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 2 3 2 3 2 1 0 1 0 -1 0 -1 0 1 0 1 0 1 2 3 4 3 4 3 4 3 2 3 2 1 2 3 4 3 2 3 4 5 6 5 4 5 6 5 6 7 8 7 6 7 8 9 10 9 10 11 12 11 10 11 10 9 10 9 8 9 10 11 12 11 10 11 10 9 10 11 10 11 10 11 12 13 12 11 10 11 12 11 10 11 12 13 14 13 12 13 12 11 10 11 12 11 10 9 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 4 5 4 3 2 1 0 1 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 5 4 3 4 3 2 1 0 -1 -2 -1 -2 -1 0 -1 0 -1 -2 -1 -2 -3 -2 -3 -2

Originally Posted by BullMarket

Ahhh, the great random market fallacy. Your charts lack of any definable trends.

A trend is defined as 3 reaction high/lows. I challenge you to find any on your chart.


Well random charts look like real charts therefore markets must be random!!

Well by that flawed logic….

Smoke looks like steam therefore smoke must be water!!

I KNEW IT!


-Frank

[Plankton]

Originally Posted by awcapital

Forex trading is NOT gambling !

Thank you for posting this message! It seems the freaks are running the circus here sometimes.

[el cid]

Originally Posted by Plankton

Thank you for posting this message! It seems the freaks are running the circus here sometimes.

Every gambler in a casino needs an excuse to roll the dice,some use vodoo science before rolling the dice


El

[el cid]

Some freaks using Vodoo science trying to convice themselves they are not gambling


"Asset Managers, Hedge Funds/Betting On Horses

Thursday 19 May 2005

UK fund manager Schroders has said that its first quarter pre-tax profits were up from £33.6m 12 months ago to £50.4m. Funds under management increased 3.1% to £108.9bn.

The firm is also parting company with its head of investment, Richard Hollick. Hollick, who arrived three years ago from Fidelity, is stepping down, and will be replaced by Alan Brown, a former State Street Advisors chief investment officer.

Merrill Lynch's latest survey found that managers were a bit down-in-the mouth about the global economy - in fact, global portfolio managers were at their most negative about economic growth and the outlook for corporate earnings since 2001. It was just two months ago that the mood was bullish, but these sentiments soon fell away. The survey said that 'the contrast with the view in early March is truly breathtaking'.

And Citigroup has said that it is forming a joint venture with Pacific Alternative Asset Management. The new JV will offer hedge-fund portfolio management services to high net worth clients.

The Financial Times says that prime brokers and fund managers have indicated that hedge funds are now liquidating positions in the expectation of demands from investors to return funds in July. The newspaper quotes Rob Barker, the head of prime brokerage at CSFB in London, who said that 'rather than be panicked into a situation in June where they are having to raise liquidity, you are seeing it now. People do not want to be waiting until the last minute when they might be forced sellers'.

The newspaper also reports that London-based hedge fund Bailey Coates said Tuesday that it had closed its New York office. The closure comes amid rumours that several hedge funds are currently facing liquidity problems and have sustained trading losses. Bailey confirmed that it has laid people off in the US, but insisted that it was not in trouble.

Finally, Reuters reports that new research published Thursday by think-tank The Centre for Economics and Business Research estimates that the hedge fund industry worldwide has lost around 8% of its value during the last three months. The industry's dire performance in March and April is said to have somewhat improved in May. The news agency quotes from a section of the report which, it claims, says: 'For investors looking for high risk high yield investments, may we recommend horseracing ?'.

[cornellj]

Thanks El cid,

Your post illustrates that even the most consummate professionals have hiccups from time to time. No one is immune. A small fund manager such as myself can only revel in the fact that I am not alone in tough times. It makes me feel one of the group when I see this. It makes me hedge my funds better when I notice the large fund managers making mistakes too. Currently I have funds spread between trading forex, development property and a few outside fund managers for shares, stocks and bonds. We in South Africa are in the lucky position that we have had a 120% growth in the allshare index of the JSE in just over 2 years (7500 to 15500 with an alltime high 2weeks ago of 17000)and our property values have doubled in the past 3 years. Coupled with Forex trading, what you lose on one you can make up on the other.

I trade Forex full time and leave the stocks and bonds to fund mangers. Thus I can compare my trading success with what the other portions of my business generate.

Hedging all my positions is always part of my money management strategy.

Wisemen of old have always said one third of your capital in gold, one third in land and one third in cash.

This statement is still applicable today.

Good Trading to all.

[TraderABC]

Here is a randomly generated pic. Notice it has higher highs and lower lows.

[awcapital]

Originally Posted by TraderABC

Here is a randomly generated pic. Notice it has higher highs and lower lows.

Higher highs and lower lows is called heteroskedasticity (non constant variance)

[tommyfx]

A relation of mine who is about 3 years old draws a lot of randomly generated pictures, after staring at it for a while i see that it is indeed a house (i have no idea if thats what it intended to be) therefore does that mean houses are randomly constructed accomplishments of engineering?

Ok i admit thats isn't quite the same so please dont start claiming i said randomly generated markets are like the baby's scribbles. HOwever strong comparisons are there. When you see a randomly generated chart you instantly think "ah! there is a support line, and theres an upward trend", this is because this is how the human brain works, we find patterns in things based on what we know to be organised, the real markets are organised, there is resistance at a round number because people place their orders around here, if you want to dispute that fact i suggest you give up trading because you are clearly not capable of understanding the basic laws of markets, either that or you are arrogant enough to think you are the one person in the world that knows better than all the multimillion pound hedge fund managers, profession traders and head traders at the world biggest importers/exporters that do actually place their orders at this level. If i was to randomly produce numbers 1-10 occasionaly two numbers would come out next to each other, maybe even three or four, this plotted on a chart would look like a resistance, but this is absolutely no evidence what so ever that because market prices stall at a certain number that it is therefore random.

If you stare at a baby's drawing long enough you will see a house, if you stare out a car window as you drive along you will see a house, just because one is randomly generated doesnt mean the other one is, there is no logic behind that theory

[cornellj]

Hallo Tommyfx,

Look at any of the 4 major currency pairs on a 5min chart.

You will notice a pattern of supports and resistances between 0 and 100 at fixed points. Say Euro between 1.2000 and 1.2100. You will always see the price get to one of these levels, pause a while and then continue or reverse. These points I defined for myself as 0,13, 21,34,55,89,100. Watch your charts for some time and see if this is not so.

I do not think it is random but that around these areas(around the levels I mentioned)are where other traders place their orders. Any order contrary to the market movement will cause a resistance or a support. You will see I quoted Fibonacci figures and a high percentage of traders use Fibonacci, this may be the reason for this happening. I do not know if it is so I am trying to reason it out for myself. Play a game and if the market extends in a direction try and predict where it will show resistance. In more instances than not it will be at these points I mentioned. look particularly at the Euro and the Swiss. I do not think this may help with your trading decisions but it may be interesting to see the pattern I mentioned.

Good trading

[tommyfx]

cornellj,


you seem to be arguing that the markets are not random and following a predictable pattern.
I was arguing the same point.
The numbers you highlighted are numbers that are commonly regarded as locations of orders (people tend to put an order at '50 than '49) so i think you will find your numbers a good tool for learning where to place orders.