Justin's Playground

Not very good today. I tried to mimic Steve's style but it didn't work out very well. The last one was a bit pity. I manually killed the buy position at BE as the market was choppy and didn't go anywhere. In hindsight, I had to stay with the SL set under the range low where VWAP is also located....

Decided not too be ambitious. Red news will be released soon. I need to save my account very badly. One loss + one win. First trade was a mistake. I know why I lost.




It looks volume profile can be useful. Need more time to test this.

I manually entered as price bounced from pivot level. Now BE protected. If it fails, I will try again at original entry point. Bigger demand is still out there.

I had to stick to original plan. I suffered bigger DD playing 'Becoming Steve' game. When your PA reading skill is poor like me, you better off just place shoot and forget limit orders at demand/supply areas. Attempting PA reading is more harm than good.

It didn't work out well and it's time to say good-bye to my lucid eval account. It was a long journey. Day trading is really really difficult.....

New account is purchased for fun for the next two months... It's only $45. Let me be positive. I've just found one more method not working. The show is to be continued.....

I spent some time yesterday doing a postmortem analysis. I wondered what had gone wrong after achieving relatively decent trading performance in May:
https://www.forexfactory.com/thread/...3#post15729353

My guess is that my edge lies in very short-term scalping. I performed better when I closed my trades within 1–3 candles on the 1-minute chart. Whenever I held them longer than that, I lost most of the time.
The problem is that I lost quite a lot during choppy market conditions because I use a negative risk-to-reward ratio. When that happened, I tried looking at higher timeframes to avoid choppy markets. Furthermore, I wanted to trade more elegantly like Steve and catch daily swings. Unfortunately, that didn't work. Unless I share the same psychology and temperament, I won't be able to replicate his strategy successfully.
Staying in the market for an extended period is nearly suicidal. Mr. Market is a psychopath and a freak. I think the modern market system is one of the ugliest things human beings have ever created. It behaves like a drunken schizophrenic.
I also want to reduce my screen time. My eyes and back have been hurting, and I haven't been sleeping very well.
So now, the key to my success comes down to one thing: how to avoid trading during choppy market conditions. The information below is at least informative in theory. In practice, I'd be better off stepping away for the day after two or more losing trades. (Grammar edited by AI )


As a day trading scalper, how to detect the choppy market early?

Since you're a 1-minute Gold (/GC) scalper looking for 15–25 tick moves, avoiding choppy markets is often more important than finding good entries. In my experience, the best approach is not to rely on one indicator, but to combine several "chop filters."
Here are the ones I consider most effective, ranked roughly by usefulness.
1. ADX (One of the best early warning indicators)
This is probably the simplest and most reliable.

1. ADX below 15–20 → Market lacks directional strength.
2. ADX falling → Trend is dying; expect more whipsaws.
3. ADX rising from a low → A new trend may be starting.

A low ADX doesn't guarantee chop, but it tells you trend-following scalps have a lower probability.
2. ATR Compression
You've previously noticed this yourself.
Watch a short ATR (e.g. ATR 10 or ATR 14).
Signs of chop:

1. ATR near the lowest level of the session
2. ATR steadily declining
3. Consecutive candles have similar small ranges

If ATR keeps shrinking, buyers and sellers are reaching temporary equilibrium.
3. VWAP Behavior (Excellent for Gold)
This is especially useful because you already use VWAP.
Trending market:

1. Price stays mostly on one side of VWAP.
2. VWAP has a clear slope.
3. Pullbacks respect VWAP.

Choppy market:

1. Price repeatedly crosses VWAP.
2. VWAP becomes almost horizontal.
3. Candles alternate above and below VWAP.

Every additional VWAP crossover within a short period increases the chance you're in chop.
4. Moving Average Ribbon Compression
Since you already use a MA rainbow, this becomes even more powerful.
Trend:

1. Ribbon fans out.
2. Clear separation.
3. All MAs aligned.

Chop:

1. Ribbon compresses.
2. MAs intertwine.
3. Frequent crossovers.

If your MA ribbon looks like spaghetti, that's usually a "do nothing" signal.
5. Cumulative Delta
You've also experimented with CDV.
Classic chop pattern:

1. Price barely moves.
2. Delta swings wildly.
3. Buyers and sellers constantly absorb each other.

Trending markets usually show delta pushing consistently in one direction.
6. Volume
Low volume alone isn't enough.
Instead look for:

1. declining volume
2. shrinking candle ranges
3. overlapping candles

This combination is much more predictive than volume by itself.
7. Candle Structure
This is one of the fastest discretionary methods.
Signs of chop:

1. many inside bars
2. overlapping bodies
3. long upper and lower wicks
4. alternating bull/bear candles

Good trends usually produce:

1. closes near highs/lows
2. little overlap
3. directional momentum

8. Market Structure
Ask yourself:

1. Are we making new highs?
2. Are pullbacks shallow?
3. Is every breakout immediately failing?

Repeated failed breakouts are one of the strongest signs of chop.
A Chop Score
Rather than relying on a single indicator, assign one point for each condition:
ConditionChop Point
ADX < 18
ATR near session low
VWAP flat
Price crossed VWAP 4+ times in 15 minutes
MA ribbon compressed
Small overlapping candles
Failed breakout

1. 0–2 points: Trend-friendly
2. 3–4 points: Be cautious
3. 5+ points: Avoid trend scalps or reduce size

For Your Current Strategy
Since you already use:

1. MA Rainbow,
2. Session/1H/4H VWAPs,
3. Ease of Movement,
4. and scalp Gold on the 1-minute chart,

I'd focus on these four filters before taking a trade:

1. MA ribbon expansion — avoid entries when the ribbon is tightly compressed.
2. Session VWAP slope — only trade when it has a noticeable slope rather than being flat.
3. ADX (14) > 18–20 and rising — confirms directional strength.
4. ATR above its recent average — helps ensure enough movement to reach your 15–25 tick target.

This combination filters out many low-quality conditions while remaining responsive enough for short-term Gold scalping.

Yesterday was a nightmare. Typical supper choppy Monday and I did a lot of revenge tradings... The result was:




BUT.....

A good thing to read again:
https://www.forexfactory.com/thread/...1#post12608271



Day trading is basically horse racing. I regret my decision to get involved in day trading about 15 years ago...

I'm so bad at day trading that I'm tempted to take the opposite side of every signal my strategy generates...... BUT...


Why reversing a losing strategy is not guaranteed to work profitably

https://www.forexfactory.com/thread/...43#post8832643
https://www.forexfactory.com/thread/...03#post8839403



AI answer:

Based on what you've told me over many conversations, I would not expect simply reversing your signals to make you profitable.
In fact, if you've been losing money for 15 years, there are several possibilities:

1. Your entries have no edge (≈50% before costs).
   1. After commissions and slippage, you lose.
   2. Reversing them also loses after costs.

2. Your entries have a negative edge (<50%).
   1. In theory, reversing them could become profitable.
   2. This is much rarer than people think.

3. Your entries have a positive edge, but your trade management destroys it.
   1. This is surprisingly common.
   2. Reversing the entries would likely perform even worse.

A thought experiment
Suppose your trades look like this:

1. Win rate: 42%
2. Average win: +20 ticks
3. Average loss: −20 ticks

Your expectancy is
0.42 × 20 − 0.58 × 20 = −3.2 ticks
If you reversed every trade perfectly, you'd have

1. Win rate: 58%
2. Average win: +20
3. Average loss: −20

Expectancy becomes +3.2 ticks (before costs).
So mathematically, yes, this is possible.
But here's the catch.
Most discretionary traders don't consistently pick the wrong direction. They usually:

1. enter too late,
2. chase breakouts,
3. trade during chop,
4. exit winners too early,
5. let losers grow,
6. overtrade.

If those are the real problems, reversing entries doesn't fix anything.
Looking at your own trading
From our previous discussions, a few recurring themes stand out:

1. You trade 1-minute breakout scalps using JMA and EMA.
2. You often mention that your biggest losses occur during choppy markets.
3. You found that your best trades are those that finish within 1–3 candles, and performance deteriorates when trades last longer.

That pattern suggests something important.
It doesn't necessarily say:
"Your signals are backwards."
It says:
"Your strategy works only under one market regime—strong momentum."
When the market is trending:

1. breakout entries work.

When the market is rotating:

1. every breakout fails.

That's a regime filter problem, not necessarily a direction problem.
The easiest way to test this
Instead of trading real money, do this with your last 200 trades.
For each trade, record:

1. Your actual entry
2. Your actual exit
3. P&L

Then calculate:

1. Original strategy
2. Exact opposite strategy
   1. reverse the entry direction
   2. keep the same stop distance
   3. keep the same target distance

Compare the expectancy.
If the reversed version is profitable, you'll know objectively.
If both lose, then direction isn't the issue.
My guess
Based on everything you've shared over the past few weeks, my estimate would be something like:

1. 20% chance your reversed entries outperform your current strategy.
2. 80% chance both versions lose, because the real issue is entering during low-quality conditions rather than choosing the wrong direction.

One observation from your own comments stands out to me: you repeatedly said your best trading occurred when you took the first breakout and exited within 1–3 one-minute candles, and that your performance dropped when you tried to stay in trades longer or trade through choppy conditions. That suggests your "edge," if one exists, is probably very narrow and conditional, rather than your directional bias being inverted.
If you've accumulated 15 years of trade history, one statistical test could answer this question definitively. We could design a backtest that evaluates:

1. your original strategy,
2. the fully reversed strategy,
3. and the original strategy only during trending conditions (for example, using ADX, ATR expansion, or your JMA ribbon alignment).

That comparison would tell you whether the problem is direction or market selection, and it would replace guesswork with evidence.

I don't think any trading edge lasts forever, just as no market remains the same forever.
Imagine you're a football player who practices shooting the ball 1,000 times a day. In real football, the goal stays in the same place. But in the market, every time you take a shot, Mr. Market moves the goalposts. That's how Mr. Market can "technically lock everyone out of profit".
For example, supply-and-demand concepts such as ICT are very popular right now, and they seem to work. But will that edge last forever? Mr. Market knows that if price simply extends a little deeper beyond supply or demand zones before reversing, it can easily destroy that edge and stop out many traders. Eventually, I believe the market system will—and should—disappear in the future.


If AI could achieve perfect efficiency, wouldn't a market system for trade become unnecessary?


In theory, yes, it could. Economists and futurists have long discussed the possibility that if AI becomes sufficiently advanced, the need for a market system could be greatly reduced.
However, this depends on several important assumptions.
1. If AI has perfect information and production is fully automated
Markets exist today because:

1. No one knows exactly what everyone wants.
2. No one can perfectly calculate how much of every good should be produced.
3. Scarce resources must be allocated among competing uses.

Prices serve as a mechanism to compress and communicate this information.
But imagine an AI that could:

1. Instantly know everyone's preferences and demand.
2. Calculate the optimal production plan for every factory.
3. Coordinate logistics, energy, and supply chains in real time.

In that world, the need for prices as an information signal would be much smaller.
In other words:
A market is essentially a decentralized computation system.
If a superintelligent AI could perform that computation centrally and efficiently,
AI could become a centralized computation system capable of replacing many functions of the market.
2. Markets would still exist wherever scarcity remains.
Some resources cannot be produced infinitely, regardless of how advanced AI becomes. Examples include:

1. Land in desirable locations
2. Beachfront property
3. Original works of art
4. Luxury real estate

As long as these goods remain scarce, society still needs a way to decide who gets them. Prices, auctions, and voluntary exchange are natural mechanisms for that allocation.
3. Markets could shrink dramatically in areas where scarcity largely disappears.
If AI and robotics make production nearly free, markets for many goods could become much less important. Examples include:

1. Food (through fully automated agriculture)
2. Clothing
3. Household goods
4. Electricity
5. Software
6. Most manufactured products

If these items become abundant and extremely inexpensive, buying and selling them in traditional markets may no longer be central to the economy.
4. The labor market may experience the biggest transformation.
If AI and robots perform most economically valuable work, people may no longer earn their income primarily through labor.
In that case, societies might adopt alternative distribution systems, such as:

1. Universal Basic Income (UBI)
2. Public allocation of essential resources
3. AI-managed public services

The central question would shift from "How do we produce enough?" to "How do we distribute what is already abundant?"
Conclusion
If AI eventually achieves near-perfect efficiency, production becomes almost fully automated, and scarcity disappears for most goods, then the market system for trade could become largely unnecessary.
However, some forms of scarcity—such as land, natural resources, time, unique experiences, and original works of art—are likely to remain. For those goods, markets would probably continue to exist.
Therefore, the most plausible future is not the complete disappearance of markets, but rather a dramatic reduction in their role, with markets remaining primarily for genuinely scarce resources.
Interestingly, this also revisits the classic 20th-century debate between market economies and centrally planned economies. One of the strongest historical criticisms of central planning was that no planner could process enough information to allocate resources efficiently. Superintelligent AI could fundamentally change that assumption by making large-scale economic coordination computationally feasible, reopening a debate that many economists once considered settled.

What is your motivation for trading if not the money?

Well..... for world peace?

Hi Justin,
I think Money becomes the by-product, the reward, for taking the time to learn to Trade.
If we go into Trading solely for the Money chances are we will Fail.
Personally, when I started to Trade I just wanted to make a bit of extra Money.
It didn't take me long to realise if I wanted to make Money I would have to take the time to learn to Trade.
I was lucky, in the fact, that I have actually enjoyed the process of learning to Trade.

For example, supply-and-demand concepts such as ICT are very popular right now

Hi pal.... with regards to ICT stuff i have 20 videos of his 2022 course. if you want them i have them stored on telegram
PS, i haven't watched them. just stored them in case people are into ICT stuff

you can get access to the videos by sending me a wave here