That's one of the most pathetic analogies ever presented on this website. You're comparing a trader's consistent day-to-day, week-to-week, month-to-month performance to a one-off event like getting the golden lotto ticket. Yeah, surf, real convincing. Hard to see how your fund blew up with awesome logic like that.
No, i stand by the analogy. How many dan zangers are there? 1? How many lottery winners-- on a relative basis.
Exactly. This is one of the three things ringing alarm-bells for me about the OP. This is what education's about. It isn't about "becoming qualified to get a job". It's about learning how to learn. Education is what remains with you long after all the details of the precise stuff you learn have been forgotten. Another "alarm" for me is that you specified that you didn't do well enough at high school because you have no interest in science. That's not a bad indicator for trading, in itself, but the realities are that (a) some people who do badly at science are also no good at math, and (b) you need to have (or quickly to acquire) a really good understanding of statistics and probability, to have any realistic prospects of successful, long-term trading. And thirdly, I agree with the comment already made above that your use of expressions like "getting rich" and "becoming a millionaire" is probably a huge red flag regarding your underlying attitudes and beliefs. I'm slightly older than you, and wouldn't realistically have been able to trade for a living without first "learning how to learn". I would advise you, one way or another, to do that first. It would be downright irresponsible not to mention that from what you've said about yourself, so far, the deck is strongly stacked against you for the career you're asking about.
OMG! The lotteries are regularly scheduled events that have been around for decades. Of course there are many winners. All based on dumb luck. Not as many Dan Zangers but definitely more than one. Not every successful trader likes the spotlight. Looks like your anti-TA spiel is as empty as your former clients' fund accounts.
How do you know that Zanger just wasn't an extended lucky winning streak that was simply presented to the media and packaged to sell subscriptions as a system? They do happen-- he has not been able to recreate the big win-- and i am giving the benefit of the doubt that it is real and as presented to the media. surf
Dan Zanger is f'n Rambo, as far as i'm concerned. i'm not that good at math, but a 23,000% return in two years...just boggles my mind. (what does that translate to in terms of monthly compounded rate?...anyone...10K to 40 million) it would be my dream to beat that. it's easy if you have a small account, but his account got kind of high...when you get that high, you kind of move the market, and encounter other issues.
Clearly, if real, that is an admirable accomplishment-- however, it was 17 year ago-- markets have radically changed and Zanger has not been able to recreate-in fact, his results are not impressive at all since that time---