Does this explain a lot of the posts on ET?

Quote from energytraderus:

This exchange between me and Thunderdog helps me clarify my thinking.

Journalists--like Lowenstein-- usually show little understanding of commodity price moves or discretion in choosing sources. Even DJ staff writers quote floor brokers and runners for price move "reasons". Learn to distinguish between primary and secondary information sources: Lowenstein is, at best, a secondary source. Also, it's highly unlikely Merton accused Merriweather of "sinking the ship": such talk violates LTCM's partnership agreement and also is libellous. Be careful to distinguish between Lowenstein's opinions or speculations and facts or actors' statements. I wouldn't bother reading Lowenstein's narrative of LTCM's collapse; frankly, Lowenstein doesn't know much about LTCM and also isn't qualified to interpret either events or data.

You used the word "unyielding" to--in your words--describe merriweather. "Unyielding" is nearly synonymous with "stubborn" but not close to "proud".
More...
Please understand that I did not say Merton accused Meriwether of sinking the ship. Rather, that he no longer had the same confidence in the model that Meriwether continued to have in the face of considerable financial adversity. The accounts of the firm's operations pointed to Meriwether's intimate involvement.

I admit that my only knowledge of LTCM came from media sources at the time, and Lowenstein's book somewhat after the fact. It may or may not be a complete account of the goings on at LTCM, but it was the best source available to me. That it was well received by the financial press gives me...some comfort. I'll have to go with what I have. On the other hand, you seem rather quick to dismiss something you apparently have not even read. (If you have read it, then please forgive my misunderstanding of your wording.)
 
Quote from patch227:
According to Baumeister, The psychology of irrationality: Why people make foolish, self-defeating choices (2003), he concluded his survey with the following findings:

1. Under emotional distress, people shift toward favoring high-risk, high payoff options, even if these are objectively poor choices. This appears based on a failure to think things through, caused by emotional distress.

2. When self-esteem is threatened, people become upset and lose their capacity to regulate themselves. In particular, people who hold a high opinion of themselves often get quite upset in response to a blow to pride, and the rush to prove something great about themselves overrides their normal rational way of dealing with life.

3. Self-regulation is required for many forms of self-interest behavior. When self-regulation fails, people may become self-defeating in various ways, such as taking immediate pleasures instead of delayed rewards. Self-regulation appears to depend on limited resources that operate like strength or energy, and so people can only regulate themselves to a limited extent.

4. Making choices and decisions depletes this same resource. Once the resource is depleted, such as after making a series of important decisions, the self becomes tired and depleted, and its subsequent decisions may well be costly or foolish.

5. The need to belong is a central feature of human motivation, and when this need is thwarted such as by interpersonal rejection, the human being somehow ceases to function properly. Irrational and self-defeating acts become more common in the wake of rejection.
More...
Yeah, fair enough on all that.

You can summarize it, though.
Its simple.
The need to lose. Its what most independent traders are fulfilling.
You can imagine that if most traders ('wannabes' and 'has beens' which make up this board) end up with a net loss, they need only have done the reverse.
Why not? The need to lose is the answer .. to be the same amongst others .. to satisfy their real knowledge that they are losers.
Think of all the bravado and 'gonna do it stuff' here .. you can read acres of it .. thats the the cover.
They wouldn't be saying any of that if they were and are winners.
Losing is a practiced need .. for losers winning is a stressful and occasional place to enter, if reached, and if ever there a place to gratefully leave and return to their comfort zone.

Wheres the hope then?
No law against trying.
:)
 
Quote from Cheese:

Yeah, fair enough on all that.

You can summarize it, though.
Its simple.
The need to lose. Its what most independent traders are fulfilling.
You can imagine that if most traders ('wannabes' and 'has beens' which make up this board) end up with a net loss, they need only have done the reverse.
More...
Forgive me, but that is a particularly naive statement. Don't believe me? Tell your losing trader friends to "just do the reverse." Be sure to let me know how it goes.
 
The 'reverse' is generic for all the actions and habits that need to be reversed or corrected .. I leave you to tell your losing trader friends.
:)
 
Quote from Cheese:

The 'reverse' is generic for all the actions and habits that need to be reversed or corrected .. I leave you to tell your losing trader friends.
:)
More...
Generic perhaps, but not operational from a trading perspective. Trading relies on a certain amount of timing and trade management. Good timing and proper trade management is somewhat more elusive than merely the flip side, or mirror image, of poor timing and bad trade management on an a priori basis. I think your response is flippant and not very well thought out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top