It's good to always be aware of these aspects, to be able to detect them and act in time.
As a former professional poker player, I'm very clear about the importance of psychology in investing/trading.
You can have a very solid strategy, but if the mental aspect fails, everything fails, no matter how good you are.
Thread 👇
It's good to always be aware of these aspects, to be able to detect them and act in time.
This is one of the most important. It can make you get out of a position at the wrong time.
One of the main reasons you can have fear is because you are putting more at risk than you are willing to lose.
Tip: reduce the size of your position until you are comfortable.
Greed can be even worse than fear. It leads you to be overpositioned and to destroy your average entry.
Tip: learn to conform to what you have. Practice gratitude for everything that comes your way. Remember that the most important thing is to stay in the game.
This is well known in poker. There are many reasons why tilt can appear (downswings, injustice, mistakes...)
Tilt takes you away from your perfect strategy. From your A game.
After a losing streak you may think that the market is being unfair to you.
The market owes you nothing.
Tip: focus on long-term results, not temporary streaks. Try to enjoy the process of failing, because every mistake is a lesson.
After a good run, you may think that you are the best, that nothing can stop you, that you have already passed the game. This leads to poor decisions later.
Tip: mantain a cool head and a clear mind. Again, focus on the process and not the results.
Lack of motivation is very common. Never think that you know everything. There is always something new to learn.
Also, never think that you don't know anything or that you are not valid for this. Consistency is key.
More from Trading
You May Also Like
These setups I found from the following 4 accounts:
1. @Pathik_Trader
2. @sourabhsiso19
3. @ITRADE191
4. @DillikiBiili
Share for the benefit of everyone.
Here are the setups from @Pathik_Trader Sir first.
1. Open Drive (Intraday Setup explained)
#OpenDrive#intradaySetup
— Pathik (@Pathik_Trader) April 16, 2019
Sharing one high probability trending setup for intraday.
Few conditions needs to be met
1. Opening should be above/below previous day high/low for buy/sell setup.
2. Open=low (for buy)
Open=high (for sell)
(1/n)
Bactesting results of Open Drive
Already explained strategy of #opendrive
— Pathik (@Pathik_Trader) May 27, 2020
Backtested results in 30 stocks and nifty, banknifty.
Success ratio : approx 40-45%
RR average 1:2
Entry as per strategy
Stoploss = Open level
Exit 3:15 PM Or SL
39 months 14 months -ve, 25 +ve
Yearly all 4 years +ve performance. pic.twitter.com/nGqhzMKGVy
2. Two Price Action setups to get good long side trade for intraday.
1. PDC Acts as Support
2. PDH Acts as
So today we will discuss two more price action setups to get good long side trade for intraday.
— Pathik (@Pathik_Trader) June 20, 2020
1. PDC Acts as Support
2. PDH Acts as Support
Example of PDC/PDH Setup given
#nifty
— Pathik (@Pathik_Trader) June 23, 2020
This is how it created long setup by taking support at PDC.
hopefully shared setup on last weekend helped. pic.twitter.com/2mduSUpMn5
Imagine for a moment the most obscurantist, jargon-filled, po-mo article the politically correct academy might produce. Pure SJW nonsense. Got it? Chances are you're imagining something like the infamous "Feminist Glaciology" article from a few years back.https://t.co/NRaWNREBvR pic.twitter.com/qtSFBYY80S
— Jeffrey Sachs (@JeffreyASachs) October 13, 2018
The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.
Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)
There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.
At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?