- Joined
- 25 September 2007
- Posts
- 1,712
- Reactions
- 13
That's rubbish. If you don't know the average outcome before you take the next 10 or 100 trades then you shouldn't be taking them. True the next 10 or 100 trades could individually do anything but if you don't KNOW what your average expectations are over that period, or how you will handle the ones that don't fit your expectations then you are throwing darts blind at a moving dartboard hanging upside down while receiving the cucumber rumba!!
Maybe an edge but still not a reason to jump in without first developing and training that edge.
Like people that are good at playing computer games? Which is what a Prop shop looks like.
So are you saying out & out, dont even TRY trading until one has a FULLY developed and tested system??
I know you said in another thread words to the effect it cost you about $80k before you became fully profitable.
Now I have your attention the thread should be named "Your not smart enough for short Cuts because its not what counts"
From a discussion in the Beginners - Introduce yourselves! thread I thought I would start a discussion about something that I have always found a little strange. Why reasonable smart and logical people apply thinking that in my experience is illogical and must be unique to the trading field. It seems that the thinking and process of "I'm a sharp cookie at XYZ therefore I can jump in live with hard earned money and go up against pros and succeed" is unique to trading only.
If that logic is fine then it should work in reverse. That is a Pro trader should be able to jump in "live" at another profession. I have made some good money the last couple of years trading so does anyone want me to build them a house, run a school or perform open heart surgery????????
How much sense would it be for the surgeon to jump to Pro musician in 3 months of dubious training. Or the Builder to turn to electrician with 3 months of reading how-to become a sparkie journal's. It would be madness. YET thats is exactly how I would say 99% of people come to trading. They spend a couple of months "learning" the trade. And then get in all sorts of bother because they find it hard. I say WTF did you expect. Where or what else can you succeed at without a long and structured curriculum to acquire skills and correct processes?
No wonder a whole sub-industry has sprung up about trading psychology. When what is really needed is more SKILLS through correct development and feedback.
You obviously need some level of intelligence and motivation which success in one field may be an indication of possible success in another field but its the learning process that makes the diff in the end to those that have a chance (ability). In no other field outside of trading/investing does one try their hand at the task "live" without a LONG training period. Think surgery, nope years learning. Musician nope 10 years before they stand next to pro and perform. Sports, nope start in the back yard then junior sports then elite amateur then pro. Again about 10 years. Apprentice trade, you would never give an apprentice the hammer and saw to build a house without 3 years or probably more of supervision. Chess, same a period of learning against better and better opposition not grandmasters after 3 months.
The same should be for trading. What has the Musician, Surgeon, Pro sports person, Apprentice and Chess players all had before they went "live". Progressively harder results in simulation. The same should be for trading. No money down until you have results without risking real cash. No playing with the Pros until you have a positive expectancy system on sim or back-test. A "trading plan" is rubbish without the skills to go with it. And you only get the skills with progressive practice.
In order to become a consistently 'good' trader, how much depends on the personality of the person and how much depends on the training / study they do?
The really tricky thing is that in the "real world" people often become successful by denying their limitations and letting their egos run riot. I guess this is one reason that the translation from business success to trading success often ends in failure.
I prefer the cricket analogy myself.
"I've always really liked cricket. I've always felt that it is something I would really like to start doing properly one day. So I went on this website where all these smart guys which knew about cricket were and learned what kind of bat I should have, and about all the protective gear too. I went to one of the websites they recommended and ordered all this gear, and got it delivered, and it arrived within a week...pretty cool, eh? That was in May last year. I've been practising with a ball in a sock hung from the roof of my patio every day now for over a year. And with my mate Robbo every other day down in the nets at the local park. And by next summer I expect to have an appointment with a Mr B Lee in the centre of the MCG...wish me luck everyone":
Personally I think people with a Business/Accounting/Budgeting type background have an edge.
People who know how to quantify risk and importantly know how to make a decisive decision while running flat out---also have an edge.
A decent base capital doesn't go astray either.
Procrastinators will be eaten alive.
Hi tech/a,
I agree on the procrastination part.
I don't agree on the first part. I would more like to put it "survivalists".
snake- i would like your view on the part u don't agree-whats wrong with a soild background in any workforce thats has had its ups and downs
not having a go-just want to understand where u are coming from-
Thanks
Nick--
Nick,
I don't use the word "any".
A solid background in something is good for anything in life but does not mean it can be applied to something else. More a natural instinct to take something up easily with a lot of work. Survival of the fittest.
Success in one field does not equate success in another.
With regard to tech/a's comments the risk aware mindset I do agree with.
But I may be wrong and if someone has the answers I would love to know, though suspect they may be contextual.
Its said that professional people like Doctors,Scientists etc make terrible traders because they need definative results,results that can be quantified,being right takes more precident than the art of trading.
They tend to be wrong longer than those who understand being wrong in analysis (any type of analysis) is all part of the trading process.
What you do when your right and what you do when your wrong plays a most important role.
how mindset can affect learning – explaining how brilliant minds or those with natural talent can be stunted by the wrong mindset and how those struggling can use the right mindset to achieve results that otherwise may not happen.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?