Trading vs. Poker

[ResonanceFx]

Losing in trading on purpose might be possible. Let your ratio be cash:loan=10:90 or more.
If you repeat many times, you soon will be broke, even if you win some times.

Best way to lose fast is such as 1:99. Most likely less than ten bets shall make you empty pocket.

If you bet is 100:0 (purely cash), then losing on purpose is as much as difficult as winning, if there is no commission and tax.

************************

Furthermore, one significant difference is that someone give you loan with collateral in equity, while no one give you loan in poker chip.

Your talking about using leverage. Leverage is just a tool you can use if you have an edge.

Just imagine there is no leverage. Your trading purely the equity you have in your account.
(eg you have $100,000 USD in your account, and you only take positions of 100,000 or less, so that you dont need to borrow anything from your broker)

From there, can you lose on purpose?

As for using leverage to lose quickly, does that mean the opposite is true. Using no leverage (or negative leverage whatever that might be) would give you a positive edge.

 

[jk90029]

I guess you never saw 'Rounders'.

Of course, I have a DVD for Matt Damon Rounders.

I mean only a few have collateral debt. Real estate and equity and a car.

But loan at House such as Rounders or loan at Pawnshop are another class.

 

[jk90029]

Basically Sheldon adelson (the satanic casino mogul who meddles in U.S politics) wanted to shut down online poker.

If he is correct, then how about closing online reading and allowing only in the building at Wall St?

 

[jk90029]

online reading => online trading

 

[Jakobsberg]

So perhaps the secret to trading is some system that is based on holding on regardless of drawdown and then taking profits (Regardless how small the profits).

With a broad index like SP500, FTSE100, DAX etc that has historically been a good strategy. However, many people cannot hold on regardless of drawdown. They sell in panic or took on took much leverage and become forced sellers.

Give me lots of money and I can lose it quickly for you buying single options. Same way you can lose quickly at Roulette. Just go all in with single bet. If by chance you win do it again, you will soon go bust, quick death. If you are forced to diversify (buy all options for a security or place bets on all roulette numbers) then you will just lose the comission / fee / rake and it will be a slow death.

 

[jk90029]

However, many people cannot hold on regardless of drawdown. They sell in panic or took on took much leverage and become forced sellers.

Roughly 90% of the traders tends to play like that, based on my personal experience.

Also note that 90% or more does NOT even follow the index like SnP500.

Only 10% or less
1) diversify with numerous stocks.
2) resist (hate) leverage to save ANY interest paid.
3) outperform the index change.

For more, see https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=uYWZNJwAAAAJ

 

[VIXTrader]

Oh man, the old zero sum game argument again? Haven't you ever at any point in your life asked yourself: "why do markets go up over time?" After dividends and inflation, they still go up over time. Interesting no?

I wish that term zero sum game for trading would die a very public and horribly torturous death