Hi Silverbear, Trades, Others
What do you think of this approach ?????????
To keep this simple, you have a setup with two accounts, computers etc. that you can trade simultaneously. Go long one contract, short the other.
When things "prove themselves" close the losing position. Clearly you are out one RT commission and in my case it is $10 or less. Recognizing that you are now back at "square one" on the trade and minus one RT commission, but by now you should have been able to identify that the "winning position" has legs and you stick with it !!!!
Clearly you cannot do this from one account.
I guess it would require a "calendar spread" if say the front month and the next month were trading in "lock step" to implement from one account.
Ignoring the complexities of implementation, I suspect the "two account, precise implementation" may have substantial merit on say Ng report day where there can be wild price swings but shortly after price settles out in one direction or the other. Now you are "on board" and close the losing position.
What is the potential advantage/gain ??? This is what I am looking at. Clearly you could put on the "new position" when you decide to close the "looser" but that takes time, and has to fill and you don't want to be at the mercy of "market orders" !!! You can "set up" the closing order ahead of time, even as a "stop limit" if you have enough confidence to pick the number ahead of time, or just do it at the time - but that takes time !!
Once the initial "large whipsaw" is over, you are in a trade(s) that you can effectively manage. At times the market will not whipsaw, but continue in a consistent direction. As soon as you can identify that and "close the loser" you are on your way as well.
Chase me on this, including telling me "I am nuts" !!! But if so, offer reasons !!
The Key Point here is that you can "think through and set up the trade" well ahead of time, and only have to "react to events after the fact". The "reaction" is a "simple close" of a position, no number crunching, typing, etc. You have already done that work.
Thanks, Lee
