You believe your line of thinking and questioning to be reasoned, but it stems from ignorance towards the intent of the exercise referenced.Quote from Socrates:
...To get past ad hominem...
SCT (as does PVT) has limits and they are based on the markets capacity and this has been stressed on many occasions. Sector Rotation has no limits (theoretically). The exercise you refer to was a demonstration of money velocity and its correlation to trader skill and experience. The ramping of contracts are not the most relevant measure or purpose of the exercise. The slope of the curve per unit time is the differentiator.
One can choose to scalp for 14 bucks/day to cover some overhead costs, or one may wish to increase his/her money velocity to a level which appears "unbelievable" or "astonishing" to many. This may even appear to be hubris as you mention. But either way, both methods extract from the "pool".
Certainly, the markets are no video game. I believe that these techniques allow a trader to very much "recognize and flow with them to your profit", even is one does not ever visit a bank in Monte Carlo.
Results are all that matter. So here are a few simple rhetorical questions ...
If one achieves results by studying and applying any technique then that is good?
And if so, then is it also good if said person(s) demonstrate great spirit of charity and sharing?
And if these can be concluded then why criticise such efforts?
These are not questions I am looking for an answer to seeing as I am acquanted with the fact that "knowledge is already known, but it is not remembered".