Where to put my next 2-3k?

[jpg7n16]

Hey, fair enough. I understand where you are coming from as far as doubting a stock pick. I won't post again about it until I sell, probably in a month or so. We'll see what happens to it. In the meantime I will leave this forum alone.

g

By all means, keep posting - just not about suggesting that we buy the specific stock you happen to own.

There are several threads that you can give good advice to without advocating a specific company.

[gambler2075]

By all means, keep posting - just not about suggesting that we buy the specific stock you happen to own.

There are several threads that you can give good advice to without advocating a specific company.

OK, I guess since you gave me 'permission' I will post again :P

Anyways, I totally see your point... there is no way that you would know me from Adam... I will say that it is very rare that anyone can beat the markets, but I do believe it is possible. I beat it last year, with a +542% performance, basically speculating on bios. Note that this is about my 8th year trading, having made probably over 2000 trades or so in total (spent 20,000$ in commissions this year already... so it's not like anyone can just waltz in, open an etrade account, and be profitable)

I am clearly biased with regards to CHTP, as I own a relatively large position in the stock (for me, 80K shares), and have since I bought at about 3.00$ a couple of weeks ago. So take everything I say with a grain of salt. It has run up a ton already and needs to consolidate a bit, but I do believe that buying bio stocks with runups into FDA events is probably the best strategy out there.

All I am saying is that I believe that the statement 'nobody can beat the markets' is a bunch of bull. What I believe is true is that most people cannot beat the markets, trading as individual traders, but if one has the right temperament, and survives the initial period of a few years when everyone loses, then it may be possible to trade profitably.

good luck,
g

p.s. this post is not investment advice
p.p.s. I will post pics/proof when I get to 15 posts and am allowed to post links.
p.p.p.s. If you care to see my track record, go to google and search for "gambler's biotech thread" click on my hotstockmarket thread, and then read all 286 pages of it :P

[gambler2075]

So I figured that, while I would not post any more individual ticker symbols (as requested) I would still post my research on CHTP that shows why I bought, since the horse is already out of the barn and I had already posted the ticker symbol. I figured I would do this so I could show the level of DD I usually do, and how a biotech trader thinks/plays bio stocks. Remember that I have already bought CHTP at 3 so I am hugely biased and I could sell on the next runup. I do think I may hold some/all? through the phase 3 results, but I am not sure now.

What is annoying is that I cannot post links, so I cannot refer to the actual documents/press releases that CHTP has put out. Essentially I am doing DD to try to decide if the 301 trial that CHTP is having will be positive. Certainly nothing is guaranteed in the stock market, especially not in the bios.

If you want to find the original posts I made, with links, google search for "CHTP: You want DD?"
and click on that link. Also click on "Replies (1)" on the top right for the second page of DD (due diligence)

Also remember that I am heavily biased here, since I bought at 3, but the stock is behaving like I expected, which is consolidating in that 4$ level for a few days, after which point I would assume it would continue upwards as people start anticipating the 301 trial results more.

Note that in the last CC, they said that CHTP would be releasing the 301 results in "mid to late september", whereas the media is saying "september" which is why I think the stock has run up early. If you care to read it, go to seekingalpha, search for CHTP, and read the last transcript.

************************************************** ******************************
First, refer back to my posts from the date of the fall...

-link deleted-

then read part 2

so I have been trolling the ends of the digital world trying to find any data from the 301 trial, that would help me predict the outcome...

-link deleted-

-from end of 2009, they had an open look at the 301 data, and reported 1 bit of data, which was the dizziness score, at the end of the dose titration, and then again after 1 week of washout.

"In looking ahead, we believe these results will be evident in the results of Study 301 expected this quarter. Further, we believe the outcome of Study 301 may be enhanced by the washout period included in that study. This belief is supported by open-label data from Study 301 that demonstrate a marked return of symptoms prior to randomization. The increase in average dizziness score from 1.0 following dose titration to 5.4 after a 7-day washout period in Study 301 suggests a reduction in the carry-over effect that appeared to follow sustained drug treatment prior to randomized withdrawal in Study 302."\

So dizziness is item 1 of the OHDAS and in the 301 trial, it went

a) take all comers, enrich for those who respond to drox by titration, escalating doses

(measure item 1 score of dizziness, which was 1.0 (see above)...

then washout for 7 days

(measure item 1 score again, which was 5.4).

Remember that the OHDAS is a 11 point scale (0-10) and so a difference of 4.4 (5.4-1.0) is highly significant.

If you look back at slide 13 of the CHTP pitch, we can compare the results from the 302 trial

-link deleted-

Dizziness in all comers (101, light blue bar) was only 0.6 or maybe 0.7 units improved over placebo.
Remember that this was

a) titrate
b) treat EVERYONE for 1 week
c) randomize to placebo or continue treatment
d) measure difference after those 2 weeks.

as an aside, I believe that since the OHDAS is a QUESTIONNAIRE, the higher placebo effect was probably due to people thinking back when they were answering item 1 (see my attachment)

"yeah, you know, over the 2 weeks, I wasn't all that dizzy" (even as placebo), because during the first week or so out of the 2 weeks they were still having some carryover effects of being on drox for a week. So that probably skewed their answer towards "not that dizzy".

-from the PR
-link deleted-

Study 302 was an enriched, double-blind, placebo controlled withdrawal-design study in which all patients underwent an initial open-label dose titration. Patients demonstrating both a symptomatic benefit and blood pressure improvement following titration continued on open-label Droxidopa for a 1-week run-in period prior to being randomized on a 1:1 basis to continue on active drug or be withdrawn to placebo. The 101 patients enrolled in the blinded study had a mean score on Item 1 of the OHSA scale of 2.1 at randomization. At the end of the 14-day blinded treatment period, patients in the placebo arm had an average OHSA score of 4.0, or a mean change (increase) of 1.9 units from randomization. Patients in the Droxidopa arm of the trial had a mean score of 3.5 at the end of the two week treatment period, reflecting a mean change from randomization of 1.3 units resulting in a 0.6 unit difference (p=0.51) between arms.

-So as you can see, when they were randomized (i.e. titrated, treated for a week, THEN randomized) then the score was 2.1. The placebo of course got more dizzy over their 2 weeks as the drug was not given (since they were placebo) but the score only increased to 4. The Drox group that CONTINUED treatment, still got dizzier (remember, higher Item 1 scores =more dizzy) but the score only rose to 3.5.

So, this points out 2 things to me.

1) the best time to measure the effect of drox is the soonest possible after starting. Now, putting 2 and 2 together, looking at data from the 301 trial (top of email), the dizziness score was 1.0 at titration. Remember the 301 trial does not have the extra week of treatment right after titrating for response, that the 302 trial does. Now looking at the 302 trial, the score was 2.1, AFTER titration, and AFTER 1 week of treatment (because remember that all patients, right before they were randomized, had 1 week of treatment).

Now if you think about it, the 2.1 score is about what you would expect for those that you titrate, then randomize to the treatment group. Because in the 301 trial, those receiving treatment are titrated, then washed out for 1 week, then treated for a week. The difference however, between this group and the 2.1 score, is that the treatment patients in the 301 trial are additionally washed out for a week.

2) So if you say "well, we will expect about a 2.1 on item 1 (dizziness) for the treated group in the 301 trial" then what score would you expect for the untreated group? Well, looking at the top of this email, the score was 5.4, after washout. Since the placebo is not getting any more treatment, I would expect that their score would be at LEAST 5.4, because they are washed out for a week, then have an ADDITIONAL WEEK to not get any treatment. And get more dizzy. But if we use 5.4 as the score, then we can predict a difference of 3.3 units on the item 1 score of the 301 trial, comparing placebo to drox.

3) Chelsea is being sneaky (or maybe savvy) in shortening the trial length to 1 week of treatment in the 301 trial, as compared to the 302 trial, which had 14 days of treatment. Note that in the 302 trial, the dizziness score ROSE from 2.1 to 3.5, after 2 weeks, suggesting to me that there was some desensitization to drox. By shortening that to 1 week, imo, the score would probably be better.

Last point... looking at the CHTP pitch, you can see the slide 13, showing the difference of 0.6 units in item 1 in the 302 trial.
-link deleted-

From my extrapolation above, about the score going from 1 (at titration) to 5.4 (after washout) in the 301 open look, I would expect the treated group in 301 to be, say at 2.1 on the dizziness scale (see #2 above). So that would make a difference of 3.3 in the item 1 score of the drox trial. The caveat is that the 301 trial is an COMPOSITE of 10 items, but if you look at slide 13 you can see that they are almost all much better in the treated group. And remember that the results were statistically significant between placebo and drox in the 302 trial, if you used OHQ. So I think it is a reasonable assumption to say that if the item 1 score difference going from 302 to 301 went from 0.6 to an estimated 3.3, then the OHQ would comparably follow and be highly significant.

Caveat Emptor.

Forgot to add that baseline OHDAS item 1 score is about 6.3-6.6

-link deleted-

Change Change Change from Change from from BL to from Rndm BL to End of End of BL to End of End of End of (BL) Titrtn Titrtn Rndm Rndm Study Study Study ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------

Droxidopa (n=50) Item 1 OHSA 6.6 1.5 -5.1 2.1 -4.4 3.5 1.3 -3.1 Standing SBP 87 109.1 22.6 106.3 19.4 98.8 -10 12.5 Supine SBP 130.1 144.8 15 143.3 13.2 138.7 -4.6 8.6

Placebo (n=51) Item 1 OHSA 6.3 1.5 -4.9 2.1 -4.2 4 1.9 -2.3 Standing SBP 88 112.4 25.5 101.1 12 96 -5.2 8.2 Supine SBP 133 142 8.7 138.5 5.7 132.1 -7.7 -0.9

---So going back to 5.4 is almost complete return of dizziness symptoms.

-link deleted-
slide 15 is key here. If you looks closely, they are giving us the OHQ score from the 302 trial. If I am interpreting the data correctly, the OHQ score at baseline was 6 at the beginning of the 302 trial (far left of the chart). This improved to under 3 after 1 week of treatment, which was ridiculously significant (p <0.001). The reason why the 302 trial failed, was because the placebo groups never returned to baseline levels, after 2 weeks of non-treatment. The item 1 scores (not the same, but imo a rough estimate) were only back up to 4.0 after 2 weeks, not up closer to mid 5's, as is the case in the 301 trial.

Now I believe the 6 score for the OHQ as a whole (all 10 items) is similar to the 6.3 or 6.6 as seen above in the placebo or drox group. So I am going to assume a rough correlation between item 1 scores and OHQ scores.

So if we know that the item 1 score returns to 5.4 after 1 week of washout in the 301 trial, then I would guess the OHQ score would return to somewhere around that level. Looking at slide 15, looks like they did the OHQ after 1 week, and checked where everyone was at. Apparently just under 3 in the treated group. Now remember that the 301 trial does have a washout, but it also is only 1 week long of treatment. So I am going to guess the 301 trial is going to have similar results to this ~3 that we see after 1 week in the 302 trial. The only difference is that the 301 trial has the extra week of washout. Which should not affect results of the treated group that much, imo. I would expect the final results from 301 to show a difference of the OHQ between drox and placebo to be around 2.5 points (5.4 minus under-3), which I am guessing will probably have a p value of <0.01, maybe even 0.005.

FWIW he confirmed in the transcript that it would be my scenario "b" below, meaning that the responders are determined immediately, and NOT kept on drox for a week after that determination. So remember that 302 trial had high placebo carryover effect, but that those placebos had drox exposure as follows

1) initial titration to determine responders

2) THEN, keep them on that drug for 1 week.

... then and only then would they go to placebo for 2 weeks.

Now in the new trial, the placebo group has drox exposure as follows

1) initial titration to determine responders

Boom, then on to washout and placebo.
************************************************** *****
So here is the argument as to why the 301 trial should succeed, where the 302 trial did not

#1) The 301 trial does not keep the patients that end up being 'placebo' on drox for that extra week. The only exposure they get to drox is the initial titration

#2) Furthermore, the placebo patients have an additional washout week after that titration exposure

#3) Most important: They are using the COMPOSITE hypotension questionnaire score, in the new 301 trial, whereas they used just item #1 in the 302 trial (dizziness). If you recall, had the 302 trial used the composite hypotension questionnaire score, it would have been statistically significant.
-link deleted-
slide 13 shows that it was significant as a COMPOSITE score in the 302 trial, with p< 0.05 in all comers, and <0.01 in the parkinsons subset

#4) Remember that they are 'de-risking' the 301 trial further, with their modification to ADD more patients, which of course makes any p values likely to be even more favorable... Now they have 167 patients, instead of just 101 in the failed 302 trial
-link deleted-

During the fourth quarter of 2009, we met with the FDA to obtain greater clarity about our options for completing the planned clinical and registration program for Northera after the failure of Study 302. The FDA agreed for us to change the primary endpoint and increase the enrollment of Study 301, our other ongoing pivotal Phase III trial being conducted under a Special Protocol Assessment, or SPA. The primary endpoint of Study 301 is now the relative improvement in the Orthostatic Hypotension Questionnaire, or OHQ, composite score between Northera and placebo. The FDA agreed that the revised primary endpoint reflects a more comprehensive global assessment of the clinical benefit of Northera for the treatment of symptomatic NOH in primary autonomic failure, a heterogeneous population consisting of patients suffering from Parkinson's disease, multiple systems atrophy, pure autonomic failure, dopamine-?-hydroxylase deficiency and non-diabetic autonomic neuropathy and would therefore be suitable for supporting a symptomatic claim. Although we had already enrolled 126 patients, exceeding our initial target enrollment of 118 patients, in Study 301 by September 2009, the results were not unblinded. To further de-risk the study and maximize the potential significance of the outcome, we decided to increase the power of the study to greater than 80% by reopening enrollment at select North American centers to randomize

an additional 24 patients. The FDA subsequently confirmed that the SPA originally awarded to Study 301 in 2008 remained in effect following the protocol amendments approved by the FDA in December 2009. By the end of the second quarter 2010, we had successfully enrolled the full 150 patients targeted for the study. In early July 2010 we randomized our final patient into the trail with final enrollment of 167 patients. Top-line data from the study is expected in the third quarter of 2010.

#5) Venrock...
They got into a deal with NBIX at 2$ per share (Dec 2009)
-link deleted-

and NBIX tripled from that point.

Now they are in a deal with CHTP, for 18M$, (in february, 2010)
-link deleted-

Note that NBIX had venrock do the deal about 6 months before it started to explode.
Note that CHTP had the venrock deal in feb, 2010. 6 months later is aug, 2010.

*** In summary:
CHTP has a good shot at this 301 trial succeeding, with like 60% more patients, less exposure of placebo to drox, an additional 1 week washout and the composite questionaire score. Additionally we have insider buying, Venrock buying, and oh, btw this is a phase 3 trial, whereas the NBIX success in endometriosis was just a phase 2. I would expect a successful phase 3 trial would cause the PPS to probably hit at least 8$, possibly 10$.

g
p.s. Remember, do your own due diligence. This post is not a recommendation to buy. It is just outlining my thought processes when it comes to bios. As said above, I own this stock from much lower, so I am heavily biased here.

[gambler2075]

Lightened my position somewhat today. Sold 30K at 4.05 from my 3.01 buy on Aug 10th. +33,000$ on that. Still holding 50K from 3.01. I would be very surprised if this falls below 3.80, but not that surprised if it falls below 4. I think there is a decent chance of a secondary runup closer to the mid september date. Had to free up cash to buy another speculative bio (which I won't mention, as it is thinly traded and a small amount of money moves the stock substantially). We'll see what happens.

g

[gambler2075]

Just wanted to say that I am appreciative that nobody is jumping down my throat how trading is impossible, blah blah blah. For those of you that are thinking of getting into trading I must say that the road is long, and probably not worth it for most, especially because nothing is guaranteed. I can say that you will almost certainly lose for the first few years, at least, as all the characteristics that are virtuous in the real world (stubbornness, conviction, getting along with others) are actually fatal flaws when it comes to trading.

If I were to say what is the most important characteristic a trader can have, it is knowing when to be flexible, and knowing when to be persistent in the face of adversity. Also to be a contrarian. People need to realize that the masses are misled ALL THE TIME by the media... BP at 26$ was a classic example... the masses could not have been more negative, which, if you think about it, means that nobody was left to sell. On the flip side, when everyone is talking about buying a stock and the janitor is giving you stock tips, that is the worst time to buy. Obviously nobody is left to buy, and any sentiment change is going to smash the stock. And if you think about it, a contrarian is going to be at odds with the masses, by definition, which is why 'getting along with others' is a hindrance in trading, if you want to be a contrarian. However, I do not trade contrarian 24-7. As I got more advanced, I realized that the true money was made in going with the crowd, until it became too overextended (either long or short). Then I flipped to be contrarian. It did take a long time to develop that sense of crowd psychology and sentiment but I finally became more comfortable with it, and became a better trader.

Anyway, in summary, daytrading is very difficult, but not impossible. I would say for the first 6 years I was net negative, and over the past 2 years have much more than made up for those losses. I would also say that it takes a long time to train yourself to be a trader and overcome the mental flaws that you have that are assets in the real world, but deadly to a trader.

I also have to say that for some reason, daytraders are reviled and ridiculed among investors, and blamed for everything from crashing the markets to having their 401Ks cut in half. Traders are not responsible for that, the broader fiscal policies of the country are. The big banks are 1000 times worse than daytraders, plus they have analysts that are designed to screw the public. Why do you think they are upgrading a stock? To sell into the strength. Why are they downgrading? To scare everyone into selling and collect cheap shares. Keep that in mind next time you hear about a upgrade or downgrade from an analyst.

Trading is a skill, essentially crowd psychology applied to the financial markets. Yes, occasionally I would apply fundamental analysis, but only as a contrarian. IMO one of the worst things you can do as an investor is look to fundamental analysis when you are justifying why you are buying a stock that has already run up. IMO FA should be used to convince yourself to buy (as a contrarian). This is also because FA is put out there, BY ANALYSTS. They are telling you what to by, WITH AN AGENDA, which is to sell their shares they have collected cheaply, in most cases.

Anyway, sorry for the long-winded post. Good luck in the markets.

Now that I can finally post pics, I have attached my P/L from the past couple of weeks for CHTP in my smaller account. Still holding ~50K at 3.01 average.

http://img831.imageshack.us/img831/3554/82810chtp.jpg

g

[gambler2075]

I think in the interest of full disclosure I will start numbering my trades so there will be no highlighting just the winners, and forgetting about the losers.... All trades will be accounted for. This will also force me to slow down on my trades so I am swing trading more, which I believe is where my strength lies.

Trade 1: CHTP. 80K, 3.01 or so. Sold ~30K at 4.05, holding 50K
Trade 2: ****. 83K position, will not list ticker symbol as it is very thinly traded. However, I will list enough identifying information that someone who REALLY wanted to, could do enough research and buy the stock. But more importantly, you could tell in retrospect that this was my pick. Diabetes Phase 3 results due "before mid september". Currently up 10% from entry price a few trading days ago.

g

[Relmiw]

thanks for the advice. it looks like i will either put the extra 3k into 3 year CDs or a safe bond if i am able to find one

[gambler2075]

CHTP holding in there decently. Still holding 50K from about 3.01 average. Like I said, I am biased because I am holding it from lower than where it is now, 4.17. I am waiting for a pullback to add some more, but we will see...
Added a pic of one account, the other has 4.9K of CHTP in it.

http://img291.imageshack.us/img291/1153/9110chtp.jpg

Basically focusing on bios, and dispensing with the fundamental analysis for the most part. That was responsible for my getting killed from may-july, losing about 300,000$ on a stock in those 2 months. Still up about 180K on the year. This includes realized profits (~112K) and unrealized profits (68K). Of course, nothing is finalized until you sell.

Still holding my other speculative bio with imminent phase 3 results in the next 9 trading days. We will see how that goes. Could be good or bad, hopefully good.

g

Edit: Added my 542% return chart from last year, which was one of the easiest trading years to be a bull, of course.

http://img718.imageshack.us/img718/4029/2009perf.jpg

[gambler2075]

FDA un-withdrawing midodrine

FDA backtracks on drug removal - St. Petersburg Times

may cause a little weakness with CHTP early next week when the PR hits yahoo finance, but if so I'd probably add on that. On the one hand, Shire doesn't make a ton of money on midodrine, but having more competition for northera would of course, reduce the potential earnings of northera. I think it is pretty obvious that an alpha agonist would help hypotension, but if you think about it, the way to treat a shortage of norepi would be to either give norepi (which is why "Leave 'em dead" increases bp, big surprise) or to give a metabolic precursor. Giving a precursor of norepi (drox) requires that the body metabolize it to norepi would make sense that that limiting factor would prevent excessive hypertension.

g

[gambler2075]

There it is:

FDA relents from midodrine withdrawal plan - Yahoo! Finance

[gambler2075]

Some interesting volume today... perhaps some buying in anticipation of the conference next week (9/15 for CHTP presentation). I think traders are thinking that this may be the phase 3 results presentation... personally, I doubt it, but who knows...

+4.5K today mostly trading 10K of OVTI for 30c bounces... of course this is a rare profitable daytrading day...

http://img192.imageshack.us/img192/5650/91010et.jpg

g

[KTP]

gambler, how easy/hard is it to get into the swing trading? What is the minimum you need to have to get started (where broker fees don't eat up all of the trading profits)?

I bumped my $2000 IRA up to over $31000 now by doing a lot of short trades in a ton of stocks (the latest move was Mcdonalds at $52 and getting out at $75, that made a tidy profit) but I don't think this is what you mean by swing trading...

[gambler2075]

gambler, how easy/hard is it to get into the swing trading? What is the minimum you need to have to get started (where broker fees don't eat up all of the trading profits)?

I bumped my $2000 IRA up to over $31000 now by doing a lot of short trades in a ton of stocks (the latest move was Mcdonalds at $52 and getting out at $75, that made a tidy profit) but I don't think this is what you mean by swing trading...

Well, I think it is very easy to get into swing trading... (just push the 'BUY' button) but the hard part is being profitable

Buying and selling the same day is not swing trading, it is daytrading. Swing trading is usually anywhere from the timeframe of maybe days to weeks, or months.

The tough part, of course, is finding setups that are profitable that are not just lucky...

As far as how much you need, it really depends on what type of move you are looking for. Looking at commissions of, say, 20$ round trip, you need to probably shoot for at least profits of 200$, so it depends on the volatility of what you are trading, as well as the relative magnitude of the position you are trading.

Of course, there are so many nuances to trading that cannot be learned without, well, trading, but if there is any piece of advice I would give with regard to swing trading, it would be to be a contrarian. That is, you absolutely cannot take the same position as the masses... and you cannot listen to analysts. They are there to rob money from retail traders, either by getting them to sellout cheap, and then unload to them at high prices... for the most part.

And if you think about it, they are pretty much the best contrarian indicator out there. If EVERYONE is convinced to sell, by these scummy analysts, then there is nobody left to sell... Any little change in sentiment will cause the masses to reverse position, and then the price will swing back in the other direction. Intuitively, it just makes sense. The classic example was BP. It was disgusting how the media was throwing around rumors of bankruptcy to get the lay public to sell... BP bounced over 50% off the bottoms...

The tough part is getting your sense of timing down, of course... and trusting yourself. There is absolutely no way you will be able to trust yourself to be a contrarian unless you have traded enough to know you will be right the majority of the time.

What I do is look at the yahoo MB sentiment as a contrarian indicator... and look at the analyst downgrades and negative articles about a stock. Then realize that this change in sentiment will usually take a little while to take effect, and most of the time, I am early.

Anyways. Good luck with swing trading (although a 1500% profit is great!). As always, don't play with more than you can afford to lose. I am fairly fortunate in that I have a good paying job that I can fall back on if I lost everything, and I am fairly young (35) so I can afford to take controlled risks.

g

[gambler2075]

...but if there is any piece of advice I would give with regard to swing trading, it would be to be a contrarian. That is, you absolutely cannot take the same position as the masses... and you cannot listen to analysts.

...let me just add a caveat to this, and that is that the reason I would say that you cannot run buy when the masses buy is that the masses usually buy in late... Typically, the reason why new traders lose money is this

-take a stock like CHTP. It was puttering around the 3$ level for quite sometime, until early/mid august. Interest had waned.

-meanwhile, behind the scenes, smart money is loading up, but they are doing it either quietly, or they are actively bashing the stock (putting out bad pr's about the company, etc) and soaking up available shares

-all of a sudden, the FDA, which had been making some rumbles about pulling the competitor drug, decides to do so.

-now, the smart money is loaded up, and they start pumping out good news articles about the company.

-new traders at first hesitate to buy, say at 3.25 or 3.50, but then, when the price is at 4, the greed factor takes over, and they finally decide to buy... Those cheap shares that were just 3$ a week ago.

-now I am not saying that CHTP is a bad buy at 4 (I do own a moderate sized position), but rather that it would have been a much better buy at 3.

And as a new trader, you either have to decide to play contrarian, or, if you decide to run with the masses, you have to do it EARLY, and then get out as optimism peaks. The reason most new traders fail is that they get information the last, AND, often times they hesitate, which makes things even worse.

I usually make a decision early to get in... either I decide then and there to get in, or I don't get in at all and play contrarian.

As I have gotten better at trading, I have been able to recognize high likelihood setups, and start to sniff out stealth accumulation... when prices of a stock are showing unusual strength (take a look at the price action of when CHTP ran from 3 to 4 starting about Aug 13:


Aug 23, 2010 4.10 4.47 4.10 4.15 1,080,400 4.15
Aug 20, 2010 3.60 4.09 3.60 4.06 3,120,700 4.06
Aug 19, 2010 3.56 3.63 3.51 3.59 297,600 3.59
Aug 18, 2010 3.55 3.60 3.45 3.55 373,100 3.55
Aug 17, 2010 3.35 3.57 3.21 3.54 570,600 3.54
Aug 16, 2010 2.94 3.32 2.84 3.20 322,500 3.20
Aug 13, 2010 2.96 3.10 2.94 2.95 157,300 2.95

now take a look at the DOW, which was getting smashed during that time frame... that kind of unusual strength is very telling.

Aug 24, 2010 10,170.86 10,170.86 9,975.86 10,040.45 4,436,330,000 10,040.45
Aug 23, 2010 10,215.51 10,328.88 10,146.18 10,174.41 3,210,950,000 10,174.41
Aug 20, 2010 10,270.98 10,276.13 10,131.88 10,213.62 3,761,570,000 10,213.62
Aug 19, 2010 10,411.15 10,412.29 10,202.34 10,271.21 4,290,540,000 10,271.21
Aug 18, 2010 10,398.59 10,486.38 10,308.83 10,415.54 3,724,260,000 10,415.54
Aug 17, 2010 10,297.55 10,501.67 10,297.55 10,405.85 3,968,210,000 10,405.85
Aug 16, 2010 10,303.07 10,354.39 10,193.26 10,302.01 3,142,450,000 10,302.01
Aug 13, 2010 10,320.33 10,381.86 10,254.18 10,303.15 3,328,890,000 10,303.15

g

[gambler2075]

gambler, how easy/hard is it to get into the swing trading? What is the minimum you need to have to get started (where broker fees don't eat up all of the trading profits)?

Just FYI, I've detailed my trading today below: (btw, there is a blank box in the pic below because I didn't want to pump one of my thinly traded stocks... I have included one screenful of the rest of the trades for today)

Started off watching a few tech stocks that I thought were oversold over the past few days, OVTI was definitely on my watch list. I thought getting smashed from 22$ was too much...

Started off at 11:06am, buying 10,000 shares of OVTI at 18.67, half size position, as it had bounced off what I thought were the lows (18.40-ish)... put in a limit order at 18.97, which filled at 11:32am, profit of 3,000$ in 26 minutes. Then I was watching it pull back and thought it bounced off the lows again, and put in another order at 18.6 (12:14pm), with 10,000 more shares... watched it pull back down to 18.52, was down about 800$ but held tough. I then saw it bouncing and wussed out at 12:40, at 18.87, +2700$, in 26 minutes.

Between those two trades I was watching RIG which I knew was way overbought, and so I was planning on shorting near 60.00$... I should have just put in a limit short order, but I shorted 5000 shares at 59.67, and then covered at 59.57, which in retrospect was a silly idea. Made 500$ in 7 minutes (from 11:35 am to 11:42am) but should have held for much more.

Also I was watching CREE which I still feel was overly smashed down, and too many people are negative on it. I do think it is close to bouncing... bought 7000 shares at 48.75 as I thought it was breaking out, but ended up capitulating at 48.55 or so, -1500$

Ended up +4500 on the day, and watched my OVTI go to 19.75 (sold WAAY too early, missed out on 8K) as well as RIG going back to 58.5 (missed out on 5K there)

hope this helps.

g

p.s. I know this is a saving board, not a trading board so I will not post anymore detailed trading logs. I just wanted to answer the question about the actual mechanics of trading by giving an example.