Does any one make money intrady trading
- Thread starter gifropan
- Start date
Personally, I don't think anyone is going to teach anyone anything, unless there is some sort of personal or long-term business relationship. Which is something that I would be interesting in forming.
On the otherhand, I have seen lots of gambling (poker) bulletin boards which are loaded with shills for the gambling House (in this case the House would be online brokers) whose sole purpose was to get noobies (fishes) involved so that they can provide fresh money into the game so the House can continue to rake in the money.
The House always makes out best. No risk and all rake. There are some professionals who make money (they have the Edge), and almost all novices lose everything they have. The whole game revolves around the proposition that there is a Sucker Born Every Minute - which is as true today as is was when W.C. Fields first uttered the phrase.
So, in order to be real, lets be honest and just acknowledge that the odds are very long that any novice is going to make any money day trading and is probably better off just averaging in over the long term (though I would be short at this time).
Rich
"The House always makes out best. No risk and all rake. There are some professionals who make money (they have the Edge), and almost all novices lose everything they have. The whole game revolves around the proposition that there is a Sucker Born Every Minute - which is as true today as is was when W.C. Fields first uttered the phrase."
trading is actually a lot like poker. i did very well, and was nicely profitable in sit n go's, tournaments, and cash games.
how? i studied my opponents. i compiled tons of data on THEM, using a couple of poker programs, i knew what type of player they were, how they played certain hands, etc. in no-limit, that is absolutely key. you can have a slight edge over mediocre players playing JUST the cards, and no edge over good players doing so. if you understand psychology, game theory, etc. you can be profitable.
poker is also like futures trading in that they are BOTH zero sum. online poker has a small enough rake, that if you have a decent edge over your competitors, you can do quite well.
yes, the house has a guaranteed take and ZERO risk in poker, since it's not their money at risk, but they get to siphon off other people's money (as opposed to blackjack where it IS possible to get an edg over the house - but they have gone a long way to prevent this with multiple decks, etc.)
i stopped playing poker when my state made it a "C" felony to play online, but it was a fun way to diversify my income stream.
prospective traders can learn a lot about trading by studying poker books and strategy.
the primary advantage in futures trading over poker is that you do not have to put any money at risk until YOU decide the odds are in your favor (in poker, you gotta pay the blinds every X hands depending on table size).
poker also teaches you to take small losses when you don't have an edge, and to press when you do.
otoh, in poker you can affect the outcome by what YOU do. in trading, you are not going to affect the outcome in any meaningful way - unless you are dumping or loading sevral hundred full size S&P contracts in the pit
trading is actually a lot like poker. i did very well, and was nicely profitable in sit n go's, tournaments, and cash games.
how? i studied my opponents. i compiled tons of data on THEM, using a couple of poker programs, i knew what type of player they were, how they played certain hands, etc. in no-limit, that is absolutely key. you can have a slight edge over mediocre players playing JUST the cards, and no edge over good players doing so. if you understand psychology, game theory, etc. you can be profitable.
poker is also like futures trading in that they are BOTH zero sum. online poker has a small enough rake, that if you have a decent edge over your competitors, you can do quite well.
yes, the house has a guaranteed take and ZERO risk in poker, since it's not their money at risk, but they get to siphon off other people's money (as opposed to blackjack where it IS possible to get an edg over the house - but they have gone a long way to prevent this with multiple decks, etc.)
i stopped playing poker when my state made it a "C" felony to play online, but it was a fun way to diversify my income stream.
prospective traders can learn a lot about trading by studying poker books and strategy.
the primary advantage in futures trading over poker is that you do not have to put any money at risk until YOU decide the odds are in your favor (in poker, you gotta pay the blinds every X hands depending on table size).
poker also teaches you to take small losses when you don't have an edge, and to press when you do.
otoh, in poker you can affect the outcome by what YOU do. in trading, you are not going to affect the outcome in any meaningful way - unless you are dumping or loading sevral hundred full size S&P contracts in the pit
Usually attributed to P. T. Barnum.
Hi,
I agree with everything you said. I stopped before it became a felony, for these reasons:
1) I knew that it would take me a very long time and a lot of energy before I was able to beat the experience of the Pros.
2) I quickly learned that there were all kinds of ways a group of Pros (and even novices) could game the system.
3) The House (since they controlled the computers which saw everything) could easily game the system in any way they wanted. You can't imagine what great hands I use to get when I first entered into a new site.
4) If someone wanted to out right cheat, there were all kinds of ways to do so, and there wasn't anyone watching or really cared (echos of the Republican neutered SEC).
So, while I entered the game with real excitement, I was a quick learner.
The nice thing about the stock market, is that, unlike poker, I do not have to be a daytrader, so I can at least stay away from the shenanigans that ultimately enter into any high-stakes game. Cya,
Rich
Sorry for the mistake. You are quite right. The quote is usually attributed to Barnum. I think I confused it with the Fields movie.
However, even Barnum may not be the true author.
http://www.historybuff.com/library/refbarnum.html. Wikipedia has even a longer rant on the subject.
Rich
""1) I knew that it would take me a very long time and a lot of energy before I was able to beat the experience of the Pros.""
most of the people playing $5-20 sit and go's aren't pros. also, like i said, my #1 edge component was studying my OPPONENTS. trust me. there are some weakass, and/or loose-passive players online.
very very beatable
"2) I quickly learned that there were all kinds of ways a group of Pros (and even novices) could game the system."
sites like partypoker, etc. have pretty advanced algo's that track when certain people play together and try to game the system. imo, it's not a concern.
"3) The House (since they controlled the computers which saw everything) could easily game the system in any way they wanted. You can't imagine what great hands I use to get when I first entered into a new site."
cmon. get real. these sites make bank, and they are not going to risk a riskless easy free money stream by trying to entice yuo with good hands.
also, it is relatively easy (and many have) done statistical analysis of hands dealt to them (and others).
i tracked literally scores of thousands o hands (my own and others). given that large sample size, statistical anamolies would be easy to spot. they weren't there. it's simply a baseless worry. it's like when i hear somebody trading 2 contracts on ES who is CERTAIN that they are gunning his stops. lol
it is a natural tendency of people to try to see patterns and/or conspiracies where none exist, in order to excuse away uncomfortable facts.
"4) If someone wanted to out right cheat, there were all kinds of ways to do so, and there wasn't anyone watching or really cared (echos of the Republican neutered SEC). "
don't even get me started. i live in a leftwing state that passes such ridiculous nannystate laws as making poker a C felony.
most of the people playing $5-20 sit and go's aren't pros. also, like i said, my #1 edge component was studying my OPPONENTS. trust me. there are some weakass, and/or loose-passive players online.
very very beatable
"2) I quickly learned that there were all kinds of ways a group of Pros (and even novices) could game the system."
sites like partypoker, etc. have pretty advanced algo's that track when certain people play together and try to game the system. imo, it's not a concern.
"3) The House (since they controlled the computers which saw everything) could easily game the system in any way they wanted. You can't imagine what great hands I use to get when I first entered into a new site."
cmon. get real. these sites make bank, and they are not going to risk a riskless easy free money stream by trying to entice yuo with good hands.
also, it is relatively easy (and many have) done statistical analysis of hands dealt to them (and others).
i tracked literally scores of thousands o hands (my own and others). given that large sample size, statistical anamolies would be easy to spot. they weren't there. it's simply a baseless worry. it's like when i hear somebody trading 2 contracts on ES who is CERTAIN that they are gunning his stops. lol
it is a natural tendency of people to try to see patterns and/or conspiracies where none exist, in order to excuse away uncomfortable facts.
"4) If someone wanted to out right cheat, there were all kinds of ways to do so, and there wasn't anyone watching or really cared (echos of the Republican neutered SEC). "
don't even get me started. i live in a leftwing state that passes such ridiculous nannystate laws as making poker a C felony.
Quote from whitster:
1) "most of the people playing $5-20 sit and go's aren't pros. very very beatable"
Actually these were some of the best tables to game. The Pros use to love talking about the easy money at these tables. They could easily clear thousands a day. It was funny though, when the Houses decided that they wouldn't pay up "because they were shocked, shocked, that there was cheating going on." The Pros would kick like mad and there was absolutely nothing they could do about it. It was all 3 Stooges like.
"2) I quickly learned that there were all kinds of ways a group of Pros (and even novices) could game the system."
sites like partypoker, etc. have pretty advanced algo's that track when certain people play together and try to game the system. imo, it's not a concern."
The algos as far as I was able to make out were dumb, easy to beat, and PartyPoker couldn't care less - until the money train was cut off by the U.S. gov. I didn't even know what I was doing, and I was able to ditch the PP algos. It was ridiculous. I can't even imagine with the real techies were doing.
"3) "cmon. get real. these sites make bank, and they are not going to risk a riskless easy free money stream by trying to entice yuo with good hands."
The beauty was, that there were so many games going on all the time (the House knew how to encourage this), that all of the machinations could be easily hidden from "statistical samplings". But it was so obvious, it was totally laughable. Of course, there were always those novices who were so awe stuck at their great skills, (which they learned by watchin TV Poker), that they ignored the obvious. I.E. that they were being suckered in.
"4) "don't even get me started. i live in a leftwing state that passes such ridiculous nannystate laws as making poker a C felony."
Well at least the Republicans did something right by cutting off the lifeline to that crooked game.
Cya,
Rich
1) "most of the people playing $5-20 sit and go's aren't pros. very very beatable"
Actually these were some of the best tables to game. The Pros use to love talking about the easy money at these tables. They could easily clear thousands a day. It was funny though, when the Houses decided that they wouldn't pay up "because they were shocked, shocked, that there was cheating going on." The Pros would kick like mad and there was absolutely nothing they could do about it. It was all 3 Stooges like.
"2) I quickly learned that there were all kinds of ways a group of Pros (and even novices) could game the system."
sites like partypoker, etc. have pretty advanced algo's that track when certain people play together and try to game the system. imo, it's not a concern."
The algos as far as I was able to make out were dumb, easy to beat, and PartyPoker couldn't care less - until the money train was cut off by the U.S. gov. I didn't even know what I was doing, and I was able to ditch the PP algos. It was ridiculous. I can't even imagine with the real techies were doing.
"3) "cmon. get real. these sites make bank, and they are not going to risk a riskless easy free money stream by trying to entice yuo with good hands."
The beauty was, that there were so many games going on all the time (the House knew how to encourage this), that all of the machinations could be easily hidden from "statistical samplings". But it was so obvious, it was totally laughable. Of course, there were always those novices who were so awe stuck at their great skills, (which they learned by watchin TV Poker), that they ignored the obvious. I.E. that they were being suckered in.
"4) "don't even get me started. i live in a leftwing state that passes such ridiculous nannystate laws as making poker a C felony."
Well at least the Republicans did something right by cutting off the lifeline to that crooked game.
Cya,
Rich
with all due respect, i don't buy it. many traders can't stand to admit that THEY can't trade well, so it's the market makers fault, the brokers faults, etc.
similarly, the same thing in poker - "it's rigged" bla bla bla
whatEver
i compiled many thousands of hands. i won CONSISTENTLY cause i played good poker. the 5-20 sit n go's at party poker and pokerstars were VERY beatable. there were a lot of loose passive, calling stations, and a few decent ABC guys who bet their hands and that's about it.
there's no black helicopters, and if you couldn't win at those fishy sites, its not the fault of colluding pro's and crooked systems.
similarly, the same thing in poker - "it's rigged" bla bla bla
whatEver
i compiled many thousands of hands. i won CONSISTENTLY cause i played good poker. the 5-20 sit n go's at party poker and pokerstars were VERY beatable. there were a lot of loose passive, calling stations, and a few decent ABC guys who bet their hands and that's about it.
there's no black helicopters, and if you couldn't win at those fishy sites, its not the fault of colluding pro's and crooked systems.
