Quote from Swan Noir:
The biggest difference -- and it is a huge difference -- between poker and trading is that for most of us, in the size we trade, our trades are are virtually always faded if we choose liquid markets.
If I sit down in a 10 seat ring game and only play extremely high quality hands the two or three best players at the table will trip to that very quickly, the next level of traders will only be a bit behind them and before too long it will become a topic of conversation -- and derision -- so that even the dunces will understand.
I am forced to mix it up or the only time I will get called is when I am facing very strong hands. As I mix it up I, to some degree, I am forced to move away from the choicest hands.
As a trader I can wait for the very best setups and have my plays faded in exactly the same manner -- again, in liquid markets -- as I would if I played randomly.
More than any other factor it is the ability to "bet" high quality situations and be faded time and time again that makes the risk reward of trading so much better than poker.
A few summers ago I checked into an inexpensive hotel -- The Irish Pub -- in Atlantic City and played poker Tuesday night through Sunday night (about 45 to 50 hours a week) for the summer. During the 10 weeks I was there I covered my modest expenses (about $700 weekly all in), spent two days each week back at home in NYC and sharpened my game considerably.
I played only no limit hold 'em at a variety of stakes with two/five being the most common and occasionally five/ten but no higher. I have great respect for those that can make it in poker but my considered judgment is that the ability to cherry pick and still get faded in size make trading a far superior speculation.