Prudent Risk Management Is The Only True Edge In TRADING

Of course they are not. Nobody said they were. They are ANALOGOUS.

 

Because the analogy was perfect. Just like when you keep holding a wining position when it keeps going in your favour, as the blackjack player keeps advancing in the tournament (the game is going in his way if you wish), he keeps winning more and more.

What is so hard to see? But I am talking to a guy who gets the basic premise of this thread wrong and too stubborn to acknowledge when he is wrong.

This thread seems to be a vanity thread.

 

The only analogy between the two is you could lose money or make money with either. There is nothing else. ---Premise of thread is extremely strong and informative--

 

Just because I am bored...

https://www.thestreet.com/story/11164406/1/parallels-between-poker-and-trading.html

If you acknowledge that poker and trading are very similar in nature AND you also acknowledge that poker and blackjack are also very similar.... You know where I am going right?

"NEW YORK ( TheStreet) -- When I speak to audiences about my approach to trading, I like to use a blackjack analogy to describe my approach."

Oh snap, somebody else also noted the similarities!!!

"My approach consists of routine, discipline, money management, and confidence. Charts and price movement represent the emotions of the herd and it is a trader's job to analyze those emotions and position themselves on the correct side. "

 

There is no correlation between BlackJack and Poker. --There is however correlation between Trading and No Limit Poker.

 

Furthermore:

https://www.casinosmash.com/features/how-blackjack-can-help-you-succeed-in-trading-2821.htm

" Blackjack and trading require a similar set of skills to succeed. "

https://www.trendfollowing.com/poker_odds/

"Blackjack and poker are the only gambling games not determined by chance alone....

What else do winning players and great trend followers have in common? More than you think:"

etc.etc.etc.

 

The word again was similarity not correlation, and here is where we stop the discussion... Sanoyara...

 

This is just being obtuse surely?

 

No. This is the only similarity as Pekelo is now putting it. Not sure why the semantics changed.

 

I had been led to believe that the way to win at blackjack was to increase the stake size on hands that have an enhanced probability of being winners. A good way to win in trading is to progressively increase the position size (through pyramiding) on winning trades that have an increased probability of further gains.

Are these statements not correct?