Quote from Whisky:
The third conclusion is that all these losers, that lose more than a random strategy would suggest, are doing something to their accounts that is much worse than random betting, and/or the winners of the game are doing something to their accounts and/or the price that traps all the losers in the wrong side time after time, and therein somewhere lies the two biggest edges of them all, as this is a zero sum game minus commissions: Giving liquidity to losers and/or taking liquidity from winners. Liquidity is a volume function that happens in all timeframes.
The first 2 conclusions are easy to prove mathematically. Maybe someone can do it and offer the proof here.
The third...well...it's not so easy to prove.
Well, I won't attempt a serious proof, but, the Effiecient Market Hypothesis does come to mind. Investors/Traders do not act rationally, hence EMH is flawed. That "something" losers are doing to their account is called emotional and irrational behaviour.