Firstly, didn't you say your previous post was going to be your last ever on T2W? Now you've gone and made a liar out of yourself.
I've been thinking why 95% - 99% of traders fail,
Why waste your time thinking about something that isn't even true? The number of people who fail at trading is not that high, that is a myth. It is high I grant you, but just simply not that high. Makes for nice ego pumping to those that do succeed to believe they have achieved something 99% of others can't but that's all that number is good for.
temptrader said:
and it seems to be that the subject is vast and complex. But no matter. It is my view - and quite a lot of people as well - that some innate talent is required to be successful.
Absolutely some talent is required to succeed. I have never suggested otherwise.
Innate talent though? Nope, sorry to dissapoint you but the real world examples of the huge number of vastly different people from different backgrounds with different strengths and weaknesses indicates that some
innate talent is not required. Learned and practiced talent is most definitely required though.
Where you and I differ is that you seem to believe that the only definition of "success" is to be categorised as being in the top upper echelon of traders. To be a "genius"(if you will) of the trading world. To me being a successful trader means you make money trading. To you that isn't good enough. Any monkey with discipline and average intelligence could possibly learn a profitable method and make money. So that just wont do will it? How can a successful trader feel all egotistically superior if any monkey could do what he does. Therefore there has to be some other definition and so you bring in this idea of being somehow better than anyone else doing it.
I have never denied that being in the upper echelons of successful traders would take some sort of innate talent. Being a successful trader does not though. Just because you think it must be so doesn't make it so.
temptrader said:
All because you "think it" so, doesn't make it so, no more than calling a tail on a dog a leg makes it a leg.
Exactly, just because you think successful trading must take some innate talent doesn't mean it does.
temptrader said:
I wasn't referring to listening to the right people to be successful, but listening to them to see what it is that the game involves, and from seeing what the game involves PROPERLY you decide for yourself how far you can go with it, what your limits are. To take an analogy I would say trading is like golf: everyone can play if given the right equipment, time, practice and appropriate surroundings.
Exactly, evreyone can play with enough time, practice and environment. You obviously do understand the concept.
temptrader said:
But only a very few can be exceptional. But you don't have to be exceptional to make a living playing golf professionally though - you just have to reach a certain standard.
Now you are really on the right track. You don't have to be exceptional. Many a professional golfer never wins a tournament. They just land in the money, get some sponsorship deals, keep playing the tournament circuit and grind out a living doing something they most likely enjoy. Would that not be considered a success? Or is only Tiger Woods successful?
temptrader said:
But even at that level the majority fail.
Absolutely the majority fail. unfortunately you are seeing this as proof of something that it just isn't proof of.
Lets look at this another way.........
Literacy and numeracy skills in most developed countries have fallen significantly over the last few decades. Would you see this as proof that the majority of people can't learn to read and write? Would you even consider this as proof that the majority of those people who have thus far failed to learn to read and write,
can't learn to read and write? By your logic the fact someone has failed to learn to read and write is proof they
can't learn to read and write. Do you see how flawed that logic is?
I would suggest that the falling literacy and numeracy skills has more to do with other factors such as increased class sizes, disruptive and disrespectful students, poor funding and resourcing of schools etc etc etc. I would suggest the majority of those that can't read and write as yet are not
incapable of learning. Rather, they have not, for whatever reason, put in the time and effort to properly learn as yet.
My point being that the fact that the majority of people fail as something simply is not proof that they
can't possibly achieve success at it. No amount of you wishing otherwise will change that fact. I'm am truly amazed that someone who claims to have such an understanding of science and logic can't(or probably simply doesn't want to) understand that.
temptrader said:
The tragedy here is that most of the posters and the discussions at hand are not about "golf", they about baseball, or tennis, or rounders etc . . . and some are secretly trying to offer "coaching" services (read vendors and scam artists). Is it any wonder most newbies are confused? They don't even get to learn the basics and just chase their tails all the time with the crap that you and other posters spout.
But how is that a tragedy? According to you there is only 1-5% of people who are born with the special traders gene needed to achieve success anyway? So how is it a tragedy if the newbies chase their tails? The ones with the gene will make it and the ones who don't have it wont right? What use is learning the basics if they aren't born with the gene?
You have to make up your mind about which way it is I think.
temptrader said:
No, it's not. That's crappy Tony Robbins talk. America laps it up and so do most people here - maybe that's what forums do to people. People who say this have something to sell. History is much more brutally honest. Reality is much more brutally honest.
You talk about reality and then ignore it when it doesn't support your view.
The reality is there are huge numbers of successful traders in the world. They come from many different countries, many different backgrounds, have many different strengths and weaknesses. I would even go out on a limb and say no two successful traders are exactly alike. Yet you persist in claiming that they must all have some sort of special successful traders gene in order to be successful!!
temptrader said:
I am still wondering why most vendors and authors don't trade themselves, and it took me a while to realise that they CAN'T, or that they don't know how, or just that they are not good enough, and they write dumbed down rubbish for the public to read.
You take every opportunity to imply you are so intelligent and such a success and yet it took you "a while" to realise this? hhmmmm
temptrader said:
In short, PKFFW, I personally think a lot of real traders are laughing with the comfortable thought that there will always be people like you and firewalker99 who want to believe what you want to believe, and create liquidity and cannon fodder for them.:cheesy:
So now you seem to be suggesting that my thought process is mutually exclusive with being a successful trader, is that it? That it is impossible to be a successful trader and still hold the belief that with the right training and work anyone can be successful?
Now I know you are just stroking your own ego. Maybe you should do less stroking and actually trade a bit and you might get better at it.
Cheers,
PKFFW