Quote from LeonPhelps:
Not meant as bragging, but I'm smarter than 99.9% of you jokers. From IQ measurement, SAT scores and every standardized test I've taken, I'm in the 0.1% percentile. No BS, just the fact.
So does this mean that I should be a successful trader? Ought a "genius" with at least some common sense dominate the markets?
Amost anyone can be successful in trading.
Excellent test results (The equipment testing IQ stuff) can be useful in shortening the path to great performance.
Were you following a route dictated by a dichotomous key, you would quickly see where the departure is that is required to attain great success.
Several of the reference documents in this thread and a couple of others that are posting substantive content back my view directly and completely.
There are none that describe the opportunity of the markets and just what is possible.
The path you are looking for is not being shown to you, for obvious reasons, as you have determined.
Why do you think the list of the guys who got paid the most doen't have the capital that they were working with listed in the the report? lol....
Formulate what it takes to make your annual salary in a day.
Obviously it takes a day.
It takes two screens.
Lets turn to the personal aspect for moment.
You need to give instructions to the person who is going to get the job done during the day. He gets paid a commission to do what you say to do.
The notes on that take about 5 minutes to jot down for the particular day's work he will do. About 5 things for him to keep in mind and keep track of.
Lets go back in time to find out what led you to be able to write the notes for your broker to do the trading.
We found that everyone who has posted here went down the wrong paths the dichotomous key offered them.
You and I didn't go the wrong way.
It is the same as the tests. The proctors always debrief us to find out what it is like.
The dichotomous Q on how markets give you profits is one you haven't asked yourself nor figured out as yet.
Why didn't the other posters get it either?
Each time a person uses his intellect (or if it is absent, something else) to miss the Q's one afteranother, he steps farther away from a critical short, enriching pathway that broadens more and more into a fabulous highway.
The first Q has the correct answer which is: through value change.
Now you know that and you can look at it and stand on it and turn full circle to see what is round and about you.
I take all value change.
So I made up all the questions and all the choices of answers.
I threaded the path.
No one, roughly speaking makes up the questions, lists the answers in a priority of their value and uses the results to find the rest of the questions and their, relatively, valued answers.
That path crossed your annual salary like a small bridge crossing a stream in 4 1/2 hours one day long ago. 31 trades in one equity involving only 100,000 shares in one stream of money that day.
To trade what is available daily with 50 grand margin as a beginning trader (advanced beginner) in commodities is just a few questions down the dichotomous key and the daily net has reached 100,000 several times this year (it's posted in ET).
So you have determined that the key leads to a counter intuitive place very soon.
Yes it does take some intelligence to see that the markets are couter intuitive and that constantly refining and applying more smarts to opportunities can go astray to places like arbitrage and anomolies.
I take all value change all the time
You can see that this is not quant. What was the dichotomous question that separated me from the quants?
Look at the next six questions.
At first the key looks like it is going straight down a path. then you see how the questions fan it out so broadly. As you step way back and look you may be able to see that a spiral pattern may come into view and that you then see that regions are re-examined over and over much farther out from the beginning point.
When do you leave one paradigm to enter another that is more appropriate?
It is where the question appears that asks about the two matters of probabilistic or either non-probabilistic.
Draw an x through every post in this thread to indicate that the person did not raise the Q and he is actually sitting on the wrong side of the line in the sand which you just crossed with me as you chose the right answer.
Look back and see all the cities, all the buildings and all the offices and all the people who did not cross this line.
Look in the universities and see that there are no courses being taught on this side of the line.
This stuff comes up on about page 2000 in any book on the markets. Notice there is no page 2000 in any book. They poop out long before this.
I use velobinder to bind the pages together on the topics and the illustrations. They go in folders in boxes on shelves.
What does it look like in non probabilitic land after you have made the choice later to choose between axioms in models.
Chose contraction and not nesting to leave the horizon of uncertainty behind.
There you chose between robustness and opportuneness.
That brings you to pernicious and propitions facets of opportunenss.
You have to decide to deal with max and min. Max is minimal requirements always satified and min means sweeping sucess is always possible.
By now you see you are just an obseerver of how the mind and intellect can be used to get to the place to be.
BE DO HAVE.
It is a binary trip. And it has nothing to do with probability. It is non probabilistic and that is VERY counterintuitve.
A person is sitting at the end of the dichotomous key where he "knows that he knows" in one time setting of choice.
That is NOW and he takes a minimum set of data (AND THIS IS NOT A SINGLE ELEMENT OF FREAKOUT DATA) and uses the opportuneness to assure sweeping success is possible in all NOWS one after another.
NB: You will note that there is such a small sample of persons in the world who make money in non probabilisitic ways that the sample size is trivial and statisitically insignificant. The conclusion is that they never pay premiums to play)
So what question is always on the table in a dichotomous form to be answered correctly?
What is the MODE of the market NOW?
The two answers are: continuation and change.
For contiuation you repeatedly inquire:
Am I on the right side of the market now?
For change you take an action that includes two efforts:
Taking profits, and rentering the market on the right side.
How intellectually demanding is all of this?
No one who posted so far has made the intellectual trip. So it may be deemed very difficult. Apparently, what makes it so difficult in formal institutions is that critical thinking has gone by the boards. It is not taught and there are no parts of the cirriculum that have a connection to critical thinking.
The the informal learning sector (the financial industry) the chips are handed out for "biggering" instead of performing (making money with money) and thinking. Gaining employement is done in the traditional way: through credentialling by following the sheep and sheepskin path in addition to the social heritage and marriage path.
My conclusion is that anyone I spend time with is either very rich or going to be very rich. If I or they are trading in the presence of "others", the those others are getting an "experience".
Generally, my read time with a powerful and established big money trader is about 2 hours. I find that I can set up (as a list which I can dictate the coding strategy for) the automated backup he needs in less time than that. I make it a policy to not have any coding produced that could be reverse engineer able under any circumstances.
So far no one in the industry has approached, intellectually, formally or informally, anything that comes out of the answers to the dichotomous key. This is because no one has used their intellectual capacity to do anything to speak of as yet.
Review this post and give consideration to beginning to start to think. Just give yourself small doses for the next six months until you get warmed up a little mentally.