Quote from ronblack:
Because he wants you to understand that losers speak about losers and winners speak about winners. It's simple.
Even if you are trading randomly in the markets you have high probability to profit. The reason so many fail is because they trade worse than random , they choose difficult timeframes, the wrong markets and they are undercapitalized for what they do. The statistics in this blog say an interesting story: 95% of random long trades in SPY this year initiated after tossing a coin have made a net profit with $0.01 commission per share included. Over 40% of long/short positions made a profit. Trading, when done right, is very profitable, unless you trade worse than random.
Quote from tangentShot:
As I mentioned earlier, if an alien civilization ever need to quantify the ego of the human species, this thread would probably be a rich data source.![]()
Quote from cmb:
to be the top 5% in the world at anything requires a strong sense of self confidence bordering on arrogance. Do you think Roger Federer has a little bit of an ego? Pete Sampras?
so we have already agreed that the people here on ET are mostly profitable, or else they would not be posting here. So we are probably in the 85% to 100% of the top traders in the world give or take.
so yeah there is a bit of ego/arrogance here.
Quote from R. Raskolnikov:
If you ask a question about whether someone is a net winner or a net loser and a person answers net winner, does that make them egotistical?


Quote from kut2k2:
I swear I get deja vu reading this post. My journey almost exactly.
Only difference is, I could never trade my system manually and I've burned out my old computer developing it. Past time to get a new one anyway. 2014 is going to be a very interesting year.![]()