It is because most trading strategies assume some losses so the best way to trade those strategies is to put yourself in the right frame of mind, if you can accept those losses are an integral part of trading you therefore dont sweat them, dont revenge trade, and dont chase them, you just accept them and continue according to your strategy. In other words, trade without emotion, " win some lose some its all the same to me" Obviously this assumes the overall trading strategy is profitable.
Too true and well said.
I posted a collection of quotes somewhere in this forum a while back and, as entertaining as they were, the overall message REALLY was that although none of the āfamousā traders quoted agree on trading systems or methodologies, the one thing that they DO agree on is the fact that losses are simply an integral part of the business and itās the WAY that losses are handled (risk and money management) that makes the difference between success and failure. I also seem to recall a famous statement which I THINK was made by Larry Williams (but I could be wrong on this although Iāve seen several other, but not too different, 'versions, of this too) and it goes something along the lines that itās not how much you MAKE in this business but how much you DONāT LOSE. Something like that anyway.
Regards,
Dale.
Well Daleā¦
I appreciate your time on discussing this ājoke of a threadā and ending with it being a debate.
I wish it were so black and white as you paint this to be.
If technical analysis helps the trader to decide on how he trades then the the best TA traders would be reflected in how well they use their TA.
If trading were that easy then the most logical approach would yield profit each time or at least most of the time. But this is not the case. There are some TA enthusiasts that even state and proclaim the trends do not yield any benefitā¦then the random walkers chime in that the chaos theories hold waterā¦lol
Dale , After trading on and off for the last 35 years many different markets and instruments, sometimes full time and sometimes part time, with my money and as a CTA with OPM, I have made some conclusions. I have realized that if you think trading is Gambling or āNot Gamblingā might be a personal issue in which nobody has a right to decide for you. I personally trade Forex as Gambling. Sure I use TAā¦sure I like probabilities.
Dale, Trading forex with longer TFās I surely agree with you about. Intraday movements are noisy and many indicators for TA are not designed for such short samples. Many professional Forex traders trade with fundementals only and merely use TA for entry and exit precision. I can understand them alsoā¦it is so nice to make a trade in one direction with conviction & confidence based on fundemental analysisā¦heck half of the work is done as you only have one directional bias to evaluateā¦
So is Trading Forex Gamblingā¦You betchaā¦If it were easy as logic dictates then we would all be millionaires.
Now some of you are going to post that it is both āGamblingā and āNot Gamblingāā¦It is how you react to what you see determines if you are gambling or notā¦Well folks, you have that right to your opinion on how an unknown outcome might develop alsoā¦but I put you to task to prove that your opinion is correct.
ES
There is no gambling. Its simple you know to trade forex or dont know.
Sure they do. If youāre sports betting, they quote the odds.
If youāre table gambling as in Roulette, Craps, Poker, Blackjack et al, you have to buy their chips, and itās THEIR dealer on payroll.
If youāre machine gambling, THEY set the payout odds on each machine. Ever heard the term āloose slotsā?
Once your money is in the casino, it rarely comes back out.
I know how to throw the dice tooā¦I still do not know the outcome.
The difference is we know that coming into the Vegas gameā¦
The illusion that Forex Dealers give is up to themā¦ unknowingly to the traders that they profit from. There is a big difference.
When the police tells someone to not walk around in that neighborhood because you will be robbed is different than the robber telling youā¦give me your moneyā¦
Its is not attractive to lay out the money for MT4 and just make money off your traders PIP spreadā¦This is not the business model for Forex Dealers, this is why MT4 has plug-ins for Forex Dealersā¦This is a selling point. MT4 is made for dealers not tradersā¦
At least the Casinos tell you the house has the oddsā¦
ES
P.S. Donāt think that non-MT4 dealers are any different. I can guaranty you that Oanda has flood protection and fast moving market routines too! they may or may not be as blatant as other dealers at SL hunting when they bucket their trades, but they also abuse it at times. At the next NFP just watch Oandaās platform go downā¦to later sort out the trades at their own discretion.
Not true. Every broker is required to spell out the risks involved in their full disclosure statement. In which, they also tell you they are on the other side of your trade.
from CitiBankFX
Citi as Principal. Citi acts as the counterparty to all foreign currency contracts executed through CitiFX Pro. Citi is not required to continue to make markets in foreign currency and may refuse to accept any order for any or no reason, including but not limited to the failure of a counterparty to have sufficient funds maintained with Citi to margin the position, market volatility and illiquidity in the related interbank foreign currency market. In particular, during periods of market volatility, it may be difficult or impossible to liquidate an existing position, to assess the value of open positions, to determine a fair price or to assess the exposure to risk. For these reasons, transactions in foreign currency involve increased risks.
So, if you read the fine print, the police have warned you. Theyāve also told told you they can execute your order, or, maybe notā¦
Canāt blame losses on ignorance.
Ahhhā¦So the general disclosure statement makes them no different than the Casinoās thus my point is made. Trading is Gambling.
Tangā¦If you are a trader then you are not making your case very wellā¦
We all realize that what most Forex Dealers do is not covered in their disclosure. They simply are thieves and their business model does not support them. They cannot survive off of a PIP spread aloneā¦it is not enough for their greedy hands. [B]When bucketing their trades they sometimes [U]force[/U] the issue when the market in fact does not reveal the price quote they bucket with. [/B]Their Casino model gives them total illusionary control that lures some traders into their net believing that trading is not gambling.
At the Casino we know we are Gamblingā¦it is much more honest.
ES
P.S. How many of you take the literal 'Enter at your own Risk" to heart. Be careful with Forexā¦it is much more dirty than Vegas would ever be allowed to get away with.
Kā¦ Totally confused.
Iām most assuredly on the āgamblingā side.
It sounded to me like you were saying that there was a difference between casinos, and brokers.
Of course the whole thing turns into a āless fillingā ātastes greatā battleā¦
Kā¦ Back to my beer consumption.
*shakes fist at TalonD 
Ok Tangyā¦But the thread title is āis Forex Like Gamblingāā¦
For me it is and again it is personalā¦but I challenge anybody to make a case that Forex is āNot Gamblingā
ES
At the Casino we know we are Gamblingā¦it is much more honest
ES
In the last big blowup thread on this very topic, the ones that said it wasnāt usually tried to give speculation a reason for existing. And it usually involved religion.
Most religions frown on games of chance.
LOL
ahh weekend entertainment.
Trading is both gambling and not gambling at the same time until itās probability wave is collapsed by an observer.
There! I knew I could find a way to work a little physics into this! 
Physics Shmysicsā¦
Itās only gambling until you learn how to win.
After that, itās not gambling, itās boringā¦ 
Come on SDC, I donāt need much explanation about loses. I used to lose a lot by trading technicaly until I realised that loses are an obligatory part of the trade. So I eliminated the psychology issues from my trading methods and I have incorporated loses into trading. So I search for losing trades and let them run along with winning trades, and finally close everything when winners are more (I find the loser trades before they find me). Thatās why I decided to post in this thread, I believe that the inherent random nature of market can be used for profit.
Good morning everyone.
*shakes fist at TalonD
ROFLOL!!! I know how you feel!!! LOL!!!
Itās only gambling until you learn how to win.
After that, itās not gambling, itās boringā¦
I agree with this too!!!
Seriously though:
First may I say that at least you, ElectricSavant, apparantely have the experience and the knowledge required to contribute to a worthwhile discussion on this topic (for one thing youāve been āat itā for at least for twenty-nine years longer than me although with all the time, effort, blood, sweat, and tears that Iāve put into this it feels like Iāve been āat itā for a century now)!!! LOL!!! The previous thread on this very same topic I suspect (or was at least under the impression that) that the thread starter had just wiped out his first (maybe tenth) account and realy was simply trying to be argumentitive (and pis*ed some jolly decent and credible traders off in the process).
For me itās a diffcult one. I donāt believe trading is gambling but, then again, maybe itās just because I donāt want to perceive myself as a gambler as I think gambling is a dirty business in and of itself (for many years I worked in the IT Department of our largest casino and hotel operator here which is an International Company and I saw first hand what gambling can and does do to a person). Then again: Iāve seen what this business can do to a person too because a while back I ātankedā in the most spectacular of fashions!!!
Hmmnnnā¦ Itās really a difficult debate this to be honest. In my post on the subject yesterday I was saying that by having a few decent technical trading systems (speaking for myself here because thatās the only way that Iāve found that I can be profitable) youāre increasing the āoddsā or probability of your trades being profitbale. After some thought about this this very morning: is this not the same thing as playing roulette using a so-called āsystemā. One that I know if (which Iām almost ashamed to admit that I did try a few years back) is that one of betting on only red of black. The basic idea is that you wait for red to come up a certain number of times in a row and only then do you start betting on black and double up each losing bet thereafter until black does indeed come up. Is that not the same thing as attempting to increase the āoddsā in your favour??? OK: the casinos know this so thatās why table maximums were introduced. In my VERY short āgamblingā ācareerā (which, thank goodness, lasted about one day) I watched red come up on a table EIGHTEEN TIMES IN A ROW. Using the method described you would have reached the table maximum long before black eventually came up. Is this not the same thing REALLY as waiting a certain number of times for resistance or support to be tested??? The ātable maximumā being your account balance??? LOL!!! As I worked for this company for many MANY years you of course get to know āpeopleā and if thereās one thing that I do know and has been proved right in front of my eyes: an experienced croupier can place the ball, if not ON a number sometimes, very darn close to it i.e. at least within a VERY small region of the wheel. It stands to reason that if youāre standing and spinning a wheel day in and day out for many years you simply must get a āfeelā for it. THEN AGAIN: is this not the same thing as trading i.e. after many years of trading you wil also get a āfeelā for it (I like to think Iāve developed SOMETHING that resembles that āfeelā when looking at a chart. No I donāt base any trades on a āfeelingā but I think Iāve developed enough of a āfeelā to enable me to look at a chart and āfeelā to NOT trade that particular instrument at the time and will then apply my technical trading systems on another chart and instrument). Once again, and after the careful thought Iāve put into this reply so far, Iām unsure myself as to the answer now.
As far as markets being random is concerned though: this is something that I myself cannot agree with. Unfortunately: for everyone that says that markets are not random thereās another chap who will āproveā the opposite so Iām not sure that weāll ever have the definitive answer or any agreement on this. My own humble opinion (and please gentlemen: Iām really not āplaying my equities and commodities recordā again here I promise you that): if anything, and if markets ARE random, and Iām not saying that they are, my opinion is that FOREX is, letās say, the MORE random of the markets if, as I say, markets are indeed random, which, as Iāve noted, I donāt agree they are random. I hope that long but hopefully well puncuated sentence makes sense!!! LOL!!! To explain what I mean: letās take the unfortunate events in Australia of not too long ago. Because of the floods: the prices of coal and corn increased considerably. Arguably: the even itself was random but the movements in price were by no means random. However this even didnāt seem to have any impact on the AUD (not that I could see at time anyway). Does this makes sense??? And with equities: youāre dealing with āmarket sentimentā i.e. āreal peopleā behind those trades. Letās just say that for whatever reason the āflavour of the monthā is Citigroup. So as soon as this āflavour of the monthā becomes apparant then traders the world over (equities traders that is) would start buying Citigroup stock and of course, in all probability, youād see a nice rally in the stock. I cannot see that as being random. Does the same apply to FOREX??? I PERSONALLY donāt believe so but I think Iāve had this argument before and quite frankly I donāt remember the outcome.
Now come to think of it (and this just ocurred to me while typing the above so feel free to tell me Iām talking nonsense here) BUT was FOREX trading ever meant to be a ātrading vehicleā??? The reason I ask this (and put in simple laymans terms): all the different countries in the world (before the EUR was introduced anyway) had their own currency. So if I wanted to travel from South Africa to Bulgaria I would go to Rennies Foreign Exchange, exchange my ZAR for BGN, and go to Bulgaria and spend my BGN. If I had any spare change in BGN: upon my return Iād change my BGN back to ZAR. The mere fact that I MAY āscoreā (or 'lose) on this final transaction by a few cents or so is not really a ātradeā in the strict sense of the word i.e. itās more my āluckā (or misfortune). Does what Iām saying here make sense??? The fact that at some point somebody in Wall Street saw this as a āgapā and a viable trading vehicle doesnāt mean that it is INDEED viable (and as many may not know do you know that it is EVEN possible to trade THE WEATHER I kid you not). And please note: Iām only expressing my thoughts as I go along posting here and it is by no means my intention of upsetting FOREX traders. We ALL know how I feel on the subject and hence my own forums as you know.
Is FOREX trading gambling??? Is TRADING gambling??? After all of my very careful input and thought this morning while typing this post Iām afraid Iād have to be honest and say that āI cannot answer the question and āplead the fifthāā!!! LOL!!! Let me put it THIS way though (this at least gives ME some comfort): I was fortunate enough, the other night, to be interviewed on one of our national radio stations (I must be doing something right because it would appear that my reputation preceeds me)!!! LOL!!! Essentially I had a short discussion with a senior representative of our South African Revenue Services. It gave me much solace to know that in South Africa: trading of any kind (be it spot FOREX, equities and commodities trading, etc.) is (and I quote) ālike any other businessā in this country and is NOT considered gambling in any way, shape, or form. Profits are (obviously) declarable and losses are claimable (to a point i.e. basically the guy was saying is that if youāre a bad trader and incur and claim continual consecutive losses over a period of three to five years then things would be ālooked atā differently). But it means that, aside from losses being claimable, any other expenses incurred in the production of your income (profits) are also claimable against your income (profits) e.g. Internet costs, in my case advertising costs, rent, that type of thing. Just as is the case with any other ānormalā business. So I guess the SHORT answer to the question for ME is that as long as Iām trading in South Africa and have a business in South Africa Iām NOT gambling!!! LOL!!!
Regards,
Dale.
I promise I wonāt start this thread again after it dies away LOL. I wouldnāt say Iām at the boring stage yet, Just routineā¦
I tend to treat my trading like this āsometimesā, I donāt pay much attention to pips but do pay attention to floating % gain or lossā¦ I donāt alway stick to that concept but do sometimesā¦ so say if you have several trades on at once and some are in positive territory and some are in negative territoryā¦ If the overall total is positive enough then I may just close them all out and take the gain for the day treating them as a basket of trades rather than as individual trades.
I think it was MasterTang who said that most trades are in positive territory at some pointā¦
Dale mentioned roulette so Iāll have to comment on that but firstā¦ Dale you missed your callingā¦ you should write a novel! 
just ribbing you there a bit.
Anyway I was selling a roulette system on ebay, thatās the only way you can consistently make money at roulette. Here is the system, bet alternating red and black with a martingale double up. Because that way you avoid loosing when you get a long streak of reds or a long streak of blacks since you are alternating your bets. Viola ! a winning system. Does anyone see where this system will fail? Iāll give the answer in another post so you have time to think about itā¦