Quote from Cutten:
You are basically just restating the position here, without really providing evidence to support it. For example:
"In pursuit of superior profits, a good trader may take outsized risks when he is ahead that he would never take when he is behind."
You don't give any supporting evidence to justify this assumption. Why can't a trader during a bad drawdown take an outsized risk, if the trade opportunity is exceptional? If I offered you 100-1 on heads on a coin flip, would you refuse to bet big because you had lost 30% YTD? If you had the reverse proposition, would you bet just because you were ahead?
"If you take a YTD perspective, your equity curve perception is very different, allowing you to employ more aggressive money management techniques when appropriate and ehancing absolute profits in the long run."
Again you are begging the quesiton. Why should having a different "equity curve perception" make any difference to your choice of position size and risk control? A loss of 30 units is a loss of 30 units, whether you had a great or terrible run up to that point. To repeat - a trader with a great opportunity is able to bet as little or as much (subject to margin) as he likes; his equity curve, regardless of period, does not restrict or enhance that ability in any way whatsoever.
The basic position is as follows - if a trading approach would ever result in two traders with identical capital, methods, and risk preference taking on different position sizes, then that trading approach is logically inconsistent. Any method which advocates X and not X at the same time is clearly irrational.