See this is a math problem most ETers struggle with. Stats 101. It's a conditional problem. "Of" the group of traders in the population who are struggling to get funding (just that subset), they are looking for the top 1% of "that" group. They are NOT looking for the top 1% of the entire population set. This is why you get drilled in math on prop firm interviews btw.
Jack Schwager discusses FundSeeder, a free platform to find undiscovered worldwide trading talent
- Thread starter dealmaker
- Start date
See this is a math problem most ETers struggle with. Stats 101. It's a conditional problem. "Of" the group of traders in the population who are struggling to get funding (just that subset), they are looking for the top 1% of "that" group. They are NOT looking for the top 1% of the entire population set. This is why you get drilled in math on prop firm interviews btw.
I am looking forward to their next book, "Undiscovered Market Wizards".
Be curious to see how it turns out. Listened to him on chatwithtraders and sounded interesting. Only issue I saw was the lack of investors looking at it.
If I remember correctly their was currently only one guy or group( can't remember) that we're looking to invest and Jack mentioned he might aswell.
But this was a few months ago and sounded like they we're still working on the legal side of things.
And I agree Maverick, that would be an interesting book.
If I remember correctly their was currently only one guy or group( can't remember) that we're looking to invest and Jack mentioned he might aswell.
But this was a few months ago and sounded like they we're still working on the legal side of things.
And I agree Maverick, that would be an interesting book.
I'm talking about edge, not about luck.
You're talking nonsense.
You don't think he got lucky during that 18 months?
Oh maybe. Certainly.
But not all lucky men make it.
You can be lucky and totally screw up.
Luck is having access to an opportunity,
Like a great bear or a bull market.
But one has to exploit it.
Consistently.
And NOT GIVE IT BACK.
Mathematically, here is how I view luck. Luck is a one off event. Meeting the right girl, bumping into somebody and getting an interview, selling your house at the market top. I define luck as something that is not repeatable. In the case of Zanger, he took 15k to 12 million or whatever it was. He then lost a lot of it back down to 2 or 3 million. But then the guy did it again and ran that 3 million to 45 million. I can't remember the exact numbers, but the 2nd run was more impressive then the first being the dude had really money at stake from the lows. Again, luck is not repeatable in most statistical applications. In fact, with empirical science we generally validate authenticity by the ability to duplicate results. Is it conceivable he got that lucky twice? Sure, after all there are people who win the lottery more then once. However, Zanger unlike a lottery winner is not randomly picking stocks. He earned his second run doing exactly what he did the first time. In my world, his results are validated.