Why do traders fail?

[dbphoenix]

This was my thought. Perhaps it is *very hard* to accurately appraise one's own trading ability. Just like intelligence. Most people consider themselves to be the smartest person they know - an obvious fallacy from the big picture perspective.

The guy who runs OK Cupid did a survey on users opinion of their intelligence. 60% considered themselves genius! Yes, sixty percent! Now it may be that OK Cupid pretty much only draws from the very tippy top of intelligencia, but the much more likely answer is that people generally cannot asses their own intelligence. When you are a dolt, it's very hard to tell - cuz if you could tell, well then you wouldn't actually be a dolt.

Perhaps the same thing applies to trading ability. It seems very easy to look at past trades and say "But I should have done this and next time I will."

This is why NoDoji and I (and others) stress the importance of keeping records, whether in a journal or a spreadsheet. The numbers don't lie. One can rationalize, of course, but there's only so much records can accomplish with regard to maintaining the tether between fantasy and reality.

 

[tradingjournals]

The numbers don't lie.

That is precisely why traders are more likely to fail than not, b/c the numbers in a zero-to-negative sum activity imply it.

 

[helmholtz]

Most traders fail because they don't want to win. They want to hurt themselves by losing so they lose. Simple.

 

[dbphoenix]

That is precisely why traders are more likely to fail than not, b/c the numbers in a zero-to-negative sum activity imply it.

Well, trading is not a zero-sum activity, so your hypothesis is not something that logically follows.

 

[tradingjournals]

Well, trading is not a zero-sum activity, so your hypothesis is not something that logically follows.

If a variable is nonzero, it is either a positive number or a negative number. The logic of your post assumes that the sum is non-zero, and further assumes that the sum is never negative as otherwise the conclusion would be incorrect.

On what basis did you arrive at the conclusion that trading is not a zero-sum, and that it is never a negative sum?

 

[dbphoenix]

If a sum is nonzero, it is either positive or negative. The logic of your post assume that it is non-zero, and further ther assumes that the sum is not negative otherwise your conclusion is incorrect

On what basis did you arrive at the conclusion that trading is not a zero-sum, and that it is never a negative sum?

It's not a closed system. But you've been told all this in at least some of the many posts you've made on this subject. I have nothing to add to what's already been said.

 

[smallStops]

Most traders fail because they don't want to win. They want to hurt themselves by losing so they lose. Simple.

another reason : psychology/spirituality, where the deep reasons are outside trading, but trading is used as a vehicle to achieve it.

 

[SIUYA]

Perhaps the same thing applies to trading ability. It seems very easy to look at past trades and say "But I should have done this and next time I will."

Thats one of the ways slot machines suck you in.....folks get almost the same rush from getting 'close' as winning. The idea that next time will be different and better.
It makes you wonder if 'pessimists' (otherwise known as pragmatic realists) make better traders, regardless of IQ or intelligence.
There are so many mental traps in trading

 

[cornix]

OK. Done for me as well.
Let's say that it is usually easier to trade to an easy yearly target,
than to trade to a target one perceives as hard to achieve.

Well, there's some psychological benefit in setting many small goals for sure.

 

[Tonkadad]

May be just for a change, you MIGHT want to target just one tick for one full year.

Not getting your point?