"edge"

[Mr Subliminal]

Quote from Thunderdog:

With due respect, I'm not sure I agree with that characterization. Ignoring my views on market "probabilities" for the moment (as explained in my prior post to this thread) for the sake of argument, consider this example. A trader has historically had a win/loss ratio of only 40%. However, his average win is 4 times his average loss. Therefore, he hypothetically has a higher probability of losing money than making money on any given trade. Nevertheless, I would think that he has quite an edge if he can actually sustain his batting average over time (a big proviso). However, by the definition you quoted, he does not have an edge.

Douglas does not say anything about his definition referring to one trade, but rather to the intentionally vague "thing". His edge could refer to superior equipment (probability of my getting filled is higher than your getting filled) or to 5 trades of your trader (probability of winning after 5 trades is higher than losing after 5 trades).

 

[Thunderdog]

Quote from Mr Subliminal:

Douglas does not say anything about his definition referring to one trade, but rather to the intentionally vague "thing". His edge could refer to superior equipment (probability of me getting filled is higher than your getting filled) or to 5 trades of your trader (probability of winning after 5 trades is higher than losing after 5 trades).

If he was referring to the "thing" then I agree that it was exceptionally vague. ("It depends on how you define 'thing'." Hmm, reminiscent of a certain presidential testimony.) How useful.

Perhaps everytick said it best and most succinctly with a legitimate degree of vagueness (and no more) in his post on the first page of this thread. Perhaps we should have just left it at that.

 

[Mr Subliminal]

Quote from Thunderdog:

Perhaps we should have just left it at that.

We must do something about Baruch's thread necrophilia.

 

[neutrino]

Quote from abogdan:

Confidence

Experience

 

[dbphoenix]

Quote from Mr Subliminal:

Douglas does not say anything about his definition referring to one trade, but rather to the intentionally vague "thing". His edge could refer to superior equipment (probability of my getting filled is higher than your getting filled) or to 5 trades of your trader (probability of winning after 5 trades is higher than losing after 5 trades).

Actually, this is not the case. Douglas goes to great lengths explaining how to develop a high-probability/low-risk system. The "thing" is whatever is the outcome one is looking for as a result of his study, testing, trading.