Lawrie Inman interviews
- Thread starter Directional
- Start date
- Watchers 14
I'm not so sure.....he was last quoted in Sep this year, apparently from his desk at Marex...? So if he has blown up it was recently....
Uncomfortable brush with reality for market's 'geezers' | News
Uncomfortable brush with reality for market's 'geezers' | News
chilltrader
Experienced member
- Messages
- 1,296
- Likes
- 115
I prefer slow consistent profits!
+700K in one day can also mean -1.4M in another!!
+700K in one day can also mean -1.4M in another!!
The secret is cashing out along the way.
Some hedge fund guys make loads of dough one year then blowup next year with same strategy- but not bad if u cashed out £50m the previous yr (i.e. that long nat gas trader in 07 -was it for amaranth or something? All they did was go long in 06, got absolutely caked then did the same in 07 and did their a***s- goodbye investors, thx 4 last yrs dough!)
Some hedge fund guys make loads of dough one year then blowup next year with same strategy- but not bad if u cashed out £50m the previous yr (i.e. that long nat gas trader in 07 -was it for amaranth or something? All they did was go long in 06, got absolutely caked then did the same in 07 and did their a***s- goodbye investors, thx 4 last yrs dough!)
When I first started out in trading all the buzz was about "Braveheart". He made so-and-so on 9/11, he did this on the fed meeting etc. People used to say he only got well-known because he got lucky by buying x thousand contracts over big events while better traders were having a ****. I took the view of this as unbelievable jelousy on the gossipers part. The only reason he bought so many thousand over such an event is because he was a good enough trader before this to build up an account to allow these limits.
In my opinion, the way for up and coming traders to take the Lawrie interview is with trepedation. Yes, he is a fantastic trader (and a nice guy by all accounts) and he can make a substantial amount of money in a day but like every trader, those losses can equally add up. The only thing is nobody self-publicises their losses. There are dozens of traders who make more than him over the course of a year around the city but they prefer to have a lower profile.
For those who are starting out in this crazy business, he can be used as an example of what is possible but not someone to try and emulate. Once you change your style of trading you will suffer. It is a hard enough battle against the markets, but attempting to battle someone in newspaper who you've never met will only add to any potential downfall. Trade how you feel comfortable and if over time you appear to be a natural at this job, the profits will follow naturally.
In my opinion, the way for up and coming traders to take the Lawrie interview is with trepedation. Yes, he is a fantastic trader (and a nice guy by all accounts) and he can make a substantial amount of money in a day but like every trader, those losses can equally add up. The only thing is nobody self-publicises their losses. There are dozens of traders who make more than him over the course of a year around the city but they prefer to have a lower profile.
For those who are starting out in this crazy business, he can be used as an example of what is possible but not someone to try and emulate. Once you change your style of trading you will suffer. It is a hard enough battle against the markets, but attempting to battle someone in newspaper who you've never met will only add to any potential downfall. Trade how you feel comfortable and if over time you appear to be a natural at this job, the profits will follow naturally.
The fact that he made £700k in a day, actually it was a bit more, means in itself that he isn't going to lose 1.4m on another. He was given those huge limits for a reason, because he has the ability to make that kind of money and control his down days. His biggest down day is still half of his biggest up day. You don't just get given that kind of money to trade with as soon as you walk through the doors.
it is irrelevent as that size can't be put on in the bund/bobl market in those situations any more. and the same size would equate to a higher sterling amount now anyway.
And traders were given that size, yes they may have traded well previously but there were some traders who had plenty of ammo who werent exactly setting the world alight.
A consistent approach is required for longevity. One can argue that you only max out on good opportunities, but it requires the trader to be on the ball (great if you can do it). By putting so much risk on one trade (compared to your usual size) can make it difficult to see the trade for what it is. P/L, being proven right, bravado in the office, competition with others, poor recent run, need to make money can all lead to poor execution of a great setup. This frustration can then snowball making it harder.
There are no shortcuts in the end. For someone starting out by trading that way either A you hit jackpot B you out the door straight away. If you hit A first time (could be luck) does not mean you gonna stick around as next time will be probably on larger size and your ego will want the same result. Obviously there are always exceptions but ideally you don't want to have to hit the home runs to stay in the business. Those are your bonus.
And traders were given that size, yes they may have traded well previously but there were some traders who had plenty of ammo who werent exactly setting the world alight.
A consistent approach is required for longevity. One can argue that you only max out on good opportunities, but it requires the trader to be on the ball (great if you can do it). By putting so much risk on one trade (compared to your usual size) can make it difficult to see the trade for what it is. P/L, being proven right, bravado in the office, competition with others, poor recent run, need to make money can all lead to poor execution of a great setup. This frustration can then snowball making it harder.
There are no shortcuts in the end. For someone starting out by trading that way either A you hit jackpot B you out the door straight away. If you hit A first time (could be luck) does not mean you gonna stick around as next time will be probably on larger size and your ego will want the same result. Obviously there are always exceptions but ideally you don't want to have to hit the home runs to stay in the business. Those are your bonus.
I'm talking about Lawrie Inman specifically. He isn't your average prop shop gilt trader looking for the next big spike in the bund to cover their rent.
You can't walk in to prop shops and hit the jackpot as you say. Limits have to be earned through consistency on the sim and then live with small size, building up as you go. We all know there's no quick way to succeeding in this game, but what i'm saying is that he is not going to lose all his money because the very fact he can trade such a large size in the first place means he's ironed out all the problems with his trading and mind-set on small size first.
You can't walk in to prop shops and hit the jackpot as you say. Limits have to be earned through consistency on the sim and then live with small size, building up as you go. We all know there's no quick way to succeeding in this game, but what i'm saying is that he is not going to lose all his money because the very fact he can trade such a large size in the first place means he's ironed out all the problems with his trading and mind-set on small size first.
Sorry I wasnt talking about Paul Lawrie, the previous post was mentioning how going for a big trade isnt always the best thing and that he knew traders whose largest up day was less but who earnt a lot possibly more on the year. And I would agree with his opinion. 20k a week average to get a mill does not require much size if you consistently trade well. Rather than the other method where you "need" a big day, which puts pressure on you to take advantage of those far less frequent times. Many only went for figures, what do they do now?
You can't walk in your right and get huge limits but at the time we are talking about size was been given out freely. You didnt have to be a superstar. There was an element of keeping up with the jones. It was in Mac's interest to say they had all the largest ie "best traders". Lets not forget it was in their interests as they made on the commisions. There was a post recently where someone believed Marex had only 40 traders all earning 1mill +. That is simply not true
I know plenty of cases where the size given to traders was extreme, and arguably not earnt (some even with negative balances had big limits) Again some deserve the size some didnt. Some very average traders where given size and arent around any more. This Paul Lawrie if he is still swinging it around must be very good (and I have no doubt there are some like that), but many of the others who traded "size" have fallen by the way side. For every one like that there are ten who could not maintain that form. Just because some got to that size did not mean they had ironed out all their weaknesses. and a great trader is not solely defined by the size he trades. Would you say all these star fund managers of the last couple of years had ironed out their weaknesses? Now we see who the good ones are. For some it is good enough to just relive the past glory days.
I don not know Paul Lawrie/braveheart or how they are doing I am speaking from my experience with other "big traders".
You can't walk in your right and get huge limits but at the time we are talking about size was been given out freely. You didnt have to be a superstar. There was an element of keeping up with the jones. It was in Mac's interest to say they had all the largest ie "best traders". Lets not forget it was in their interests as they made on the commisions. There was a post recently where someone believed Marex had only 40 traders all earning 1mill +. That is simply not true
I know plenty of cases where the size given to traders was extreme, and arguably not earnt (some even with negative balances had big limits) Again some deserve the size some didnt. Some very average traders where given size and arent around any more. This Paul Lawrie if he is still swinging it around must be very good (and I have no doubt there are some like that), but many of the others who traded "size" have fallen by the way side. For every one like that there are ten who could not maintain that form. Just because some got to that size did not mean they had ironed out all their weaknesses. and a great trader is not solely defined by the size he trades. Would you say all these star fund managers of the last couple of years had ironed out their weaknesses? Now we see who the good ones are. For some it is good enough to just relive the past glory days.
I don not know Paul Lawrie/braveheart or how they are doing I am speaking from my experience with other "big traders".
joselopezde
Junior member
- Messages
- 31
- Likes
- 0
any news about him?
rwillia789
Newbie
- Messages
- 1
- Likes
- 2
moved on to trade for a fund recently
BSD
Veteren member
- Messages
- 3,819
- Likes
- 988
Paul Tudor Jones, no less:
http://news.efinancialcareers.com/u...hires-super-star-trader-with-taste-for-poker/
http://news.efinancialcareers.com/u...hires-super-star-trader-with-taste-for-poker/
