You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Any thoughts on this article?
- Thread starter shneed
- Start date
Originally posted by TriPack
It seems like this whole deal about Niederhoffer and those who would call him the greatest trader of all time revolves around two issues:
1) Niederhoffer may be the greatest trader when he is winning.
2) Niederhoffer may be the worst trader when he is losing.
It reminds me of the classic basketball matchups between Wilt Chamberlain and Bill Russell. Some may argue that Chamberlain was the most dominating offensive player of all time. Others may say that Bill Russell was the most effective defender in the game. When it came down to championships, Bill Russell's team always came out on top. Maybe defence is more important than offence?
i called him a 'great trader' and a 'great human being.' It's a long way from that to being the greatest human being or trader that ever lived.
I daresay, he's on top of anyone who has posted here so far.
Originally posted by TriPack
It seems like this whole deal about Niederhoffer and those who would call him the greatest trader of all time revolves around two issues:
1) Niederhoffer may be the greatest trader when he is winning.
2) Niederhoffer may be the worst trader when he is losing.
Just like 1 * -1 = -1, a trader that blows up on a loss is just a CRAP TRADER.
Considering losses are just a natural part of the game we play, good traders are good even when they are losing.
Originally posted by chasinfla
i called him a 'great trader' and a 'great human being.' It's a long way from that to being the greatest human being or trader that ever lived.
I daresay, he's on top of anyone who has posted here so far.
WRONG.
Amount of times Niederhoffer blew up: 2
Amount of times Daniel M. blew up: 0
Originally posted by daniel_m
WRONG.
Amount of times Niederhoffer blew up: 2
Amount of times Daniel M. blew up: 0
number of years daniel m was rated top in his field?
number of millions daniel m has made for his clients?
number of trades daniel m has done for george soros?
number of books written by daniel m?
number successful traders daniel m has trained?
number of groundbreaking research papers written by daniel m?
remember, daniel, Taleb says it's only a matter of time.
Originally posted by chasinfla
number of years daniel m was rated top in his field?
number of millions daniel m has made for his clients?
remember, daniel, Taleb says it's only a matter of time.
I'm 25 right now. The odds are very favorable, almost overwhelming, that I'll make quite a few millions in my lifetime. Guess what...I'll keep most of them too.
Rated top of my field? I hope I never reach the level where I'll be "rated" at all.
EDIT.
You gave me a few more to answer there.
Trades for George Soros. That's no measure of success or competence.
Number of books written. I plan to write a few books over my lifetime. Not for another 30 or so years though. I've got other fish to fry till then.
Number of successful traders trained? Not a road I'm interested in going down.
Not interested in writing "research papers" either. If I discover something new, I'm keeping it to myself.
It's only a matter of time, says Taleb? That's what I think too. Only a matter of time until I reach my goals.
Originally posted by Mr Subliminal
Commisso, I have the book in front of me and I can't seem to find your "letter". Do you have a page reference? FWIW, Taleb is not mentioned in the Notes (p. 415), Select Bibliography (p. 423) or Index (p. 429).
"{I} respond to it with grave concern. It's obvious that it's only a matter of time before you go under. Why in the world would I ever risk my money in the futures market and if I ever gave in to such a folly, why should it be with Niederhoffer!??? I know this must come accross harshly BUT I thought it would be better than sugarcoating it"
He says a friend wrote him this agitated message shortly after reading an early draft of the book...
the last thing i have to say about this debate is this: The guy took risks. They wowed him when he was winning. Now the new generation of turks dances on the news of his failure. Dance on. He's probably still trading. Monday morning quarterbacking never paid well (except for talking heads).
Originally posted by chasinfla
the last thing i have to say about this debate is this: The guy took risks. They wowed him when he was winning. Now the new generation of turks dances on the news of his failure. Dance on. He's probably still trading. Monday morning quarterbacking never paid well (except for talking heads). --------------------------------------
Its too bad the thread went that direction. I think you may have been right about the liberal slant to the article. Niederhoffer was inticed by the evil dollar and Taleb vowed that would never happen to him, or something like that. Thats not what makes it such a great story. Its about the risk to the capital at risk, not what percent you put at risk.
Is Talebs edge the ability to determine which market is due for an event. Or does he find the correct probability distribution, better than most. If I understand the article right, Taleb believes you cant calcutate these things. He buys cheap straddles and waits for an event. That may be oversimplifing his system but its the basic idea. Atleast thats what the articles author thinks Taleb does. I found this article more insightfull to Taleb as a trader.
http://www.derivativesstrategy.com/magazine/archive/1997/1296qa.asp
Not that I'll have to worry about trading huge size anytime soon. Its still interesting. Is there more or less luck involved with either trader?