I've also just come across this thread. Funnily enough, this is the one that got to me the most. Do dismiss the prize awarded to some of the finest brains that ever existed as a "silly little trinket" beggars belief.weemac wrote:It was 2 nobel prize winners in Economics who helped to lose about 5 billion dollars in Long Term Capital (Mis)Management.
So that tells you a lot about that silly little trinket of a prize.
HOW exactly are you doing money?
This. I know I called this guy a troll at the start of the thread and I started spamming memes but it was because of the hilarious manner in which he posted those questions. It's hard to believe that those who actually tried to explain something to him didn't even answer his original question, which is written in bold in the first post. Everyone just got sidetracked with topics such as Fama and coin flipping whilst avoiding the real issue at hand.Euler wrote:I think the unfortunate thing about his rant is that he didn't realise you don't actually need to know the direction to make money. Price direction is just one of a number of strategies. That may have helped him come to terms with how people have made it work for them.
We all know that this question is flawed but nobody actually pointed out the flawed logic behind it, until Euler mentioned it at the very end. If he is still reading this thread, that was the answer that he was looking for. He was operating under the assumption that you need to "predict the future/direction of the price" to make money, which is simply not true because you don't need to predict anything to make money, you can be completely clueless about the direction of the price and still make regular profit without a single losing day. In fact, I believe some of the best trading styles do not involve any predicting of price direction whatsoever, but it does not mean that money can't be made with predicting either. He simply failed to understand that there are MANY ways to trade and predicting is just one of them.Thisisgambling wrote:How do you guys making a steady profit, how exactly do you know if the graph will go down or if it will go up? How can you predict the future (the prices)?
If you ignore the rest of his hilarious rant, this question was actually perfectly legitimate. I was asked the very same question by my family members and I explained to them the concept behind my trading style to put their mind at ease, so that they don't think that I'm just a random gambler, as I'm sure most of us have already answered this exact question many times before.
This guy was a perfect example of what the public opinion is regarding sports trading, for those that know sports trading even exists, it speaks volumes about the level of their ignorance.
-
Lost The Rider
- Posts: 50
- Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 2:44 pm
I hope he doesn't have a defined contribution pension, considering his lack of faith in traders to produce a ROI 
For the mathematically minded.
Let us conduct a thought experiment.
Let us propose we have a participant on betfair, Mr Gazuty.
To keep things simple this version of betfair only allows a yes/no outcome bet with a 50/50 probability. For the naysayers it's all down to luck.
Mr Gazuty pays 5% commission on winnings. He starts with a bank of $1000 and pursues a modest staking plan and risks $5 on each outcome.
After 1000 events Mr Gazuty needs to have won at least 513 times to break even. ((513 X 4.75) - (487 X 5)).
What is the probability of 513 or more successful outcomes out of 1000 attempts with a 50% probability? (Calculate it here http://stattrek.com/m/online-calculator/binomial.aspx).
It's 21.4%. High enough for the naysayers to believe Mr Gazuty could easily be successful from random dumb luck.
Mr Gazuty continues.
He reaches 10,000 events.
Now to break even he needs to have won at least 5128 times.
What is the probability of 5,128 or more successful outcomes out of 10000 attempts with a 50% probability?
Its 0.5%. So after 10,000 events the chances of Mr Gazuty achieving success through pure luck is 0.5%.
And once we get to 20,000 events The probability of achieving more than 10,256 winning results through pure dumb luck is 0.015%.
Now ask yourself this question. Let's change from Mr Gazuty to the real gazuty.
The real gazuty has participated in over 70,000 markets. On the same methodology as above he'd need to be successful in at least 35,897 to be in front (and he has been).
The probability of that through random luck? You do the math.
It's possible I don't have an edge. But that possibility is infinitesimal after participating in so markets.
Still don't believe me. Interested in a challenge? Let's each start with a new account of $500. Winner takes all after one year with a participation in at least 200 markets (just to reduce the random walk). (Trouble is my non believer noob competitors will be wiped out and I'll be collecting zero from them - apart from what I collect from them through the market along the way).
At the end of the day, traders and their variants with an edge are liquidity providers to the market and their profit is the price paid for providing that liquidity.
Let us conduct a thought experiment.
Let us propose we have a participant on betfair, Mr Gazuty.
To keep things simple this version of betfair only allows a yes/no outcome bet with a 50/50 probability. For the naysayers it's all down to luck.
Mr Gazuty pays 5% commission on winnings. He starts with a bank of $1000 and pursues a modest staking plan and risks $5 on each outcome.
After 1000 events Mr Gazuty needs to have won at least 513 times to break even. ((513 X 4.75) - (487 X 5)).
What is the probability of 513 or more successful outcomes out of 1000 attempts with a 50% probability? (Calculate it here http://stattrek.com/m/online-calculator/binomial.aspx).
It's 21.4%. High enough for the naysayers to believe Mr Gazuty could easily be successful from random dumb luck.
Mr Gazuty continues.
He reaches 10,000 events.
Now to break even he needs to have won at least 5128 times.
What is the probability of 5,128 or more successful outcomes out of 10000 attempts with a 50% probability?
Its 0.5%. So after 10,000 events the chances of Mr Gazuty achieving success through pure luck is 0.5%.
And once we get to 20,000 events The probability of achieving more than 10,256 winning results through pure dumb luck is 0.015%.
Now ask yourself this question. Let's change from Mr Gazuty to the real gazuty.
The real gazuty has participated in over 70,000 markets. On the same methodology as above he'd need to be successful in at least 35,897 to be in front (and he has been).
The probability of that through random luck? You do the math.
It's possible I don't have an edge. But that possibility is infinitesimal after participating in so markets.
Still don't believe me. Interested in a challenge? Let's each start with a new account of $500. Winner takes all after one year with a participation in at least 200 markets (just to reduce the random walk). (Trouble is my non believer noob competitors will be wiped out and I'll be collecting zero from them - apart from what I collect from them through the market along the way).
At the end of the day, traders and their variants with an edge are liquidity providers to the market and their profit is the price paid for providing that liquidity.
-
marksmeets302
- Posts: 527
- Joined: Thu Dec 10, 2009 4:37 pm
Excellent post Mr. Gazuty.
Within a couple of months I'll celebrate my 250.000th race. Didn't do the math, but the odds of that being luck and still doing the victory dance for 72% of the time must be incredibly small.
Within a couple of months I'll celebrate my 250.000th race. Didn't do the math, but the odds of that being luck and still doing the victory dance for 72% of the time must be incredibly small.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Great post Gazuty 
Hopefully any sceptics or doubters reading this thread who for some bizarre reason where beginging to belive "Thisisgambleing" view have gotten to your post and can now see the simple maths behind what 10 pages and countless users on this thread have tried to say.
It was clear from the first few pages that "Thisisgambleing" was never going to change his view or even open his mind.
Hopefully any sceptics or doubters reading this thread who for some bizarre reason where beginging to belive "Thisisgambleing" view have gotten to your post and can now see the simple maths behind what 10 pages and countless users on this thread have tried to say.
It was clear from the first few pages that "Thisisgambleing" was never going to change his view or even open his mind.
Thanks. Congrats in advance on your upcoming milestone and on your very impressive win rate.marksmeets302 wrote:Excellent post Mr. Gazuty.
Within a couple of months I'll celebrate my 250.000th race. Didn't do the math, but the odds of that being luck and still doing the victory dance for 72% of the time must be incredibly small.
Let's drop back to my win rate of 70% and take only 1000 events at a 50/50 probability. Probability of achieving wins of 70% or more is 0.000001.
At 250,000 markets and 72% win rate the probability you have an edge over the market is 99.99999 recurring. No rational sane person would call you a gambler with dumb luck.
Of course, but then again no rational sane person would call a random troll a rational sane person. Some people still don't get itgazuty wrote:No rational sane person would call you a gambler with dumb luck.
You cannot reason with trolls, they do not care about reason or logic or common sense, you are wasting your time trying to offer them your best possible argument because you will never change their mind. This guy probably wouldn't shut up even if you showed him a video of your 3 month P/L, if he didn't get banned he would STILL be posting in this thread trolling everybody.
He had some fair points. Index funds really outperform regular traders profits. So financial traders might look like dumb coin flippers. Its just that it doesn't apply here as sport markets doesn't have economic growth, inflation etc.. But this thread was sidetrack so much, that nobody really knows what it was aboutmarko236 wrote:10 pages and no one has backed thisisgambleing, there will be people losing money doing trading but it appears that they belive through hard work they will reach there goals.
Also it seems not very fare to continue this thread anymore without OP now...
There are some key fundamental differences between financial markets and sports markets, not only in the way they function but what you can do on them and the underlying instruments. Just chucking Eugene Fama at the problem wasn't particulary intelligent.
- not so surprising to see the first response he got echo all of ours Well at least he didn't ask "how exactly are you doing money" again but he sounds completely pissed off, if it wasn't sad it would be hilarious. He won't get many replies over there because that forum is completely dead. Good riddance and thanks for the meme.