Welcome to NexusFi: the best trading community on the planet, with over 150,000 members Sign Up Now for Free
Genuine reviews from real traders, not fake reviews from stealth vendors
Quality education from leading professional traders
We are a friendly, helpful, and positive community
We do not tolerate rude behavior, trolling, or vendors advertising in posts
We are here to help, just let us know what you need
You'll need to register in order to view the content of the threads and start contributing to our community. It's free for basic access, or support us by becoming an Elite Member -- see if you qualify for a discount below.
-- Big Mike, Site Administrator
(If you already have an account, login at the top of the page)
I'm only quoting this post because I think its the only thing @josh has ever posted I don't agree with.
I just think the math doesn't add up - I said this in a previous post but if all it took was hiring a talented kid with no experience that you could train up in 6-9 months to be profitable, where would the losers be? That is just not enough of a barrier to entry to prevent everyone from being winners. And we all know that in order to be winners there must be losers - and not just several thousand single-lot traders from trading forums - to provide the capital necessary to allow all those prop shop guys who started trading last summer to win, win, win its going to take a LOT of losers.
I do agree with the criticism of the 10000 hr "rule" - its arbitrary, it depends on what you do to learn, it depends on the training/mentoring you get early on, and the bad habits you either do or do not form. Prop shops have an advantage in training traders and I think most will learn quicker in that environment than on their own. Bellafiore makes it pretty clear that he doesn't just make everyone profitable in 3 months in his book (which is a great book, btw). I have a buddy doing the training w MB so we'll see how he does over the next several months...
Trading successfully is a skill and an art - its not a math problem. And its essentially a zero-sum game - a quote from Bill Eckhardt nicely illustrates why I think it is impossible that traders can reliably become profitable in less than a year:
“If a betting game among a certain number of participants is played long enough, eventually one player will have all the money. If there is any skill involved, it will accelerate the process of concentrating all the stakes in a few hands. Something like this happens in the market. There is a persistent overall tendency for equity to flow from the many to the few. In the long run, the majority loses.” – William Eckhardt
To win at trading you have to be better than "the majority" of the players, you can't just learn a specific set of instructions - you have to acquire the skill to be better than the majority. And in this game "the majority" are all trying to get better all the time so the bar continually rises.
Seek freedom and become captive of your desires. Seek discipline and find your liberty. - Frank Herbert
I did not say all would be winners, by any stretch. Just that some could be. Any that they could do so in much less than a 10,000 hour time frame. And hey if that's all we've ever disagreed on then that's ok!
Trading: Equities, index options and futures/futures options
Posts: 190 since Apr 2010
Thanks Given: 66
Thanks Received: 198
Several post have hinted at this point but it is quite clear that it's not just the quantity of the practice but more importantly the quality. Deliberate practice for the acquisition of expert performance in, for example trading, is not just sitting in front of a screen for a magic number of hours. How one uses that time is critical. I have yet to come across an example of deliberate practice specific to trading but the literature has many examples for other fields that can be used as a starting point. Perhaps Mike could ask Al Brooks to do a webinar on how he learned to trade. That is something I'd love to hear.
Outliers the story of success.
Very interesting, and in my opinion it can be true from certain point of view. No doubt, to become a master you need some time to do it, and if is something you like, then to put 10-12 hours a day is normal
>>Mike could ask Al Brooks to do a webinar on how he learned to trade. That is something I'd love to hear.<<
Al has talked about this many times in his trading room. He, like 98% of others, spent many years going through endless indicators, multiple screens, and other usual crap to 'learn' how to trade. Was only when he simplified his trading to a single screen and focused on price action that he made progress.
Al still tells us we need 10 years or so to trade profitably, but based on what? Doing the same as Al? Just take what Al selflessly gives us in his books, trading course, and webinars, and cut to the chase. One year or less, IF your head allows you. You do not need to use ALL his price action principles to make money.
This 10,000 hours thing is BS really, and feeds into your psyche and its belief system. Dangerous. If you keep telling yourself this BS, and believing it like many of you here, you will likely take longer than 10k hours. Just like all the snake oil stuff out there, if you tell yourself you need it, you do. If you tell yourself that 98% of the stuff is pure crap, it will be. Whatever you tell yourself is likely to prove itself right, as your brain is programmed to work that way. We are not as smart as we think.
The right psychology is the number 1 need. Not easy. So quit telling ourselves that trading is difficult, it isn't. Work on your head. That IS difficult as 98% or more are naturally lazy to stick at it. Not 'our' fault really, as brain is 'designed' to keep distracting us. Nuff said.
Great topic. But must get on, as need to make a living trading! Nearly there - 12 months chasing crap. 3 months focused on right approach. Another 4-9 years before making money?? No way. Already on top of it and working very hard on my head to allow position size to increase.
PS. Malcolm Gladwell is like most modern day Top NYT Authors and simply regurgitates others' experimental work.
Many such books relate endless experiments that are not always proved right down the road. All part of the book business feeding hungry consumers' heads with endless distractions.
