Why do 5% of Traders Win?
- Thread starter oldtime
- Start date
Actually after all important things to be successfull contstantly....
-> having edge working trading strategies...
-> having good risk managment depending on the trading strategies and the %probability of them......
IS..............to have DISCIPLINE.......
YES.........DISCIPLINE.........is the most overall magic mysticall thing to be a winner...............A WINNER.......
DISCIPLINE...................
DISCIPLINE...................
Why dont you follow your plan, if you have a plan ???
Do you follow your plan 100%, and still lose money, stop trading and find another job.
--------------------------------------
I most fucking thing in trading i know is to be DISCIPLINED all the time, all the fucking time.......
I mean do you acutally read what i write, ALL THE FUCKING TIME...
DISCIPLINE
Why even talk about it, it should be logical clear, that if when you have made a plan you should follow it to 100%, otherwhise you could throw it down the toillet........
Fucking emotions..........Dont even think you could be better than the plan........
DISCIPLINE
You are just a slave to your plan, just like you were a slave to your previous job boss........now you are a slave to yourself.....
isnt this ironic.............
DISCIPLINE
:eek: :eek: :eek:
Not always so. Yes it's basically a zero sum game, but in FX for example, corporations with their currency hedges etc. play very serious role and speculators benefit from their "losses" technically, but that's not taking profit from losers in the sense of this thread.
Those 95% of small losing traders constitute negligible amount of total volume in the most liquid markets.
Yeah, and that's what I was trying to get at earlier. Those who claim that you cannot trade 4 lots in a 30k account and expect to make a middle class living, but you CAN trade 4 lots in a 100k account and make a living..... they are obviously assuming you're going to have significant drawdowns. I mean 15-30k drawdowns that would cripple the small account, but that the larger account would be able to withstand and eventually bounce back from.
I'm a developing trader so am in no position to say what is or isn't possible, though I have talked to a few successful guys who make money every month and have not been in a drawdown equal to a 20k drawdown in a 100k account at any point other than their early days learning the ropes. So I think it's a mistake to assume everyone has huge drawdowns regularly. Still it is interesting and sometimes amusing to see the diversity of opinions out there.
I have a trader friend who trades for a living, primarily swing trading futures, and he sweeps the trading profits not needed to cover his expenses into a dividend investing account. So he ends up networking with traders as well as investors. I remember he remarked not too long ago that most investors think trading is impossible and a losers game and most traders think investing is impossible and a losers game, so there are always going to be arguments about what can/can't be done... LOL.
Lol so winners are the core of being profitable...
>No Doji said
>Trader B with a $10,000 trading account trades a single contract of >CL and generates an average profit of $400 a day over a period of >time through varying market conditions, producing an annual "salary" >of $90,000 without ever averaging down, trading without a stop loss, >or increasing size. People think, "A 900% return??? That's a bunch of >bullshit! Anyone claiming that is a liar or a snake oil salesman or >both!"
There is a good reason for this. In order to understand why I typically discount such claims from vendors who sell such crap, I need to introduce the Gap or Hurdle Concept. Basically, we need to marry the "credibility" of a claim with the "difficulty in achieving it" and the proof provided.
Let me give a few examples:
I have a trading method (I really do) that has generated 50%-120% per year (depending on variation), nearly every year, for the past several years. Oh, but to trade this method you'll have to risk a whole lot per trade and its very risky.
----
Now, I'm currently trading this method but I didn't to start with because I DIDNT HAVE THE MONEY. I currently offer this system at c2. Notice that there is a "hurdle" to trading this method... namely the significant risk which can be up to $2,000 per trade per contract for the highest returning variation. (I'm trading a version that risk around $650/contract, lower return/lower risk).
Let me give another example, Larry L, claims to have a method that generates about 100k per year on a 5k account. Notice the return claimed is much at 20x. I know many professional day traders. I know World Cup winner, I can tell you that their best returns tend to be in the 50% to 100% range. While not a WC trader, I did a 60% hypothetical with a 14% DD last year. In other words, the most credible traders, those who have track records are claiming to do around 50% to 120% and typically below 100%.
Yet, here we have a vendor claiming to do 20x. Okay, let's dig deeper, let's dig deeper. This vendor also claims to only need to risk about 2 points per trade (or $100 per contract). The vendor was successful trading futures at one point and has a business.
Now we have a few things coming "in-line". The gap/hurdle to trading the method is ridiculously low, returns are ridiculously high, and thus the PROOF required is much more. I was handed an Excel spreadsheet. I said you call this a track record? Notice, my own hypothetical record was audited by a third-party. This was just a spreadsheet anyone could make up. I asked for proof and the Larry's salesman about had a heart attack!
If someone claims to do 50%.. This is a great return but certainly possible for a great trader. 60% is also very attainable (I did it last year)... All the evidence I've found indicates that as one moves out beyond 300% return boundary in futures then one needs to really question it. But sure there are traders who did better on any given year.
What is important is the NATURE OF THE QUESTION.
The question isn't can you take 10k and make 90k? I know it is possible. If I hit a good run and was willing to risk the entire account then I could do it... (last year my return to risk ratio was about 4.6x.. so going beyond 276% would have been stretching).
The question is CAN YOU EXPECT to take 10k and make 90k? Can you do that most years? This is a much different question and no one has ever provided proof for those level of claims, EVER.
Let me get back to the gap/hurdle concept. One problem with Larry L's claims is that the gap/hurdle to trading them is so low.. do you know what a 60% compounded return will do over 5 or 6 years? It will make you extremely rich..... many millions of dollars. They are claiming a 20x return and with the ability to use tight risk controls.. Larry showed how me made a million. He needs to show how he made 50 million with his claims. Again as the "hurdle" decreases and the claims increase then the requirement for proof rises in kind.
NoDoji, I'm curious do you charge for your services? Have you ever been payed by Oliver Velez? Have you ever referred anyone to him? If you do charge, are you willing to provide a track record/brokerage statements regarding your claims?
Again, even if you did this 1 year then that is not the same as being able to do it the next.
For the record, I do charge for various mentoring products/offerings.
>Trader B with a $10,000 trading account trades a single contract of >CL and generates an average profit of $400 a day over a period of >time through varying market conditions, producing an annual "salary" >of $90,000 without ever averaging down, trading without a stop loss, >or increasing size. People think, "A 900% return??? That's a bunch of >bullshit! Anyone claiming that is a liar or a snake oil salesman or >both!"
There is a good reason for this. In order to understand why I typically discount such claims from vendors who sell such crap, I need to introduce the Gap or Hurdle Concept. Basically, we need to marry the "credibility" of a claim with the "difficulty in achieving it" and the proof provided.
Let me give a few examples:
I have a trading method (I really do) that has generated 50%-120% per year (depending on variation), nearly every year, for the past several years. Oh, but to trade this method you'll have to risk a whole lot per trade and its very risky.
----
Now, I'm currently trading this method but I didn't to start with because I DIDNT HAVE THE MONEY. I currently offer this system at c2. Notice that there is a "hurdle" to trading this method... namely the significant risk which can be up to $2,000 per trade per contract for the highest returning variation. (I'm trading a version that risk around $650/contract, lower return/lower risk).
Let me give another example, Larry L, claims to have a method that generates about 100k per year on a 5k account. Notice the return claimed is much at 20x. I know many professional day traders. I know World Cup winner, I can tell you that their best returns tend to be in the 50% to 100% range. While not a WC trader, I did a 60% hypothetical with a 14% DD last year. In other words, the most credible traders, those who have track records are claiming to do around 50% to 120% and typically below 100%.
Yet, here we have a vendor claiming to do 20x. Okay, let's dig deeper, let's dig deeper. This vendor also claims to only need to risk about 2 points per trade (or $100 per contract). The vendor was successful trading futures at one point and has a business.
Now we have a few things coming "in-line". The gap/hurdle to trading the method is ridiculously low, returns are ridiculously high, and thus the PROOF required is much more. I was handed an Excel spreadsheet. I said you call this a track record? Notice, my own hypothetical record was audited by a third-party. This was just a spreadsheet anyone could make up. I asked for proof and the Larry's salesman about had a heart attack!
If someone claims to do 50%.. This is a great return but certainly possible for a great trader. 60% is also very attainable (I did it last year)... All the evidence I've found indicates that as one moves out beyond 300% return boundary in futures then one needs to really question it. But sure there are traders who did better on any given year.
What is important is the NATURE OF THE QUESTION.
The question isn't can you take 10k and make 90k? I know it is possible. If I hit a good run and was willing to risk the entire account then I could do it... (last year my return to risk ratio was about 4.6x.. so going beyond 276% would have been stretching).
The question is CAN YOU EXPECT to take 10k and make 90k? Can you do that most years? This is a much different question and no one has ever provided proof for those level of claims, EVER.
Let me get back to the gap/hurdle concept. One problem with Larry L's claims is that the gap/hurdle to trading them is so low.. do you know what a 60% compounded return will do over 5 or 6 years? It will make you extremely rich..... many millions of dollars. They are claiming a 20x return and with the ability to use tight risk controls.. Larry showed how me made a million. He needs to show how he made 50 million with his claims. Again as the "hurdle" decreases and the claims increase then the requirement for proof rises in kind.
NoDoji, I'm curious do you charge for your services? Have you ever been payed by Oliver Velez? Have you ever referred anyone to him? If you do charge, are you willing to provide a track record/brokerage statements regarding your claims?
Again, even if you did this 1 year then that is not the same as being able to do it the next.
For the record, I do charge for various mentoring products/offerings.
Oldtime could not accept reality as part of Dr B's rebuttal team.If they knew the truth , they wouldn't buy courses and seminars from these vendors.
If you were told , you have 1 chance of winning and 99% chance of losing , would you buy a course?
It shows how deluded people are and they believe what they want to believe.Most of these postings are driven by self interests to sell junk science .
