Either by Michael Covel or Paul Tudor Jones it is not clear from which of the two. The question is what is the truth of the statement? Or your opinion?
It can be taught and I think both would probably say it. I think the reason it's so hard to teach is that most people don't have enough passion for it to make it through those early losses and out to the other side.
It can be "taught" in the sense that if someone else hands you a working system and starting capital, most people with enough motivation to carry out the program could do it. It can't be "taught" in the sense that any random person has the potential to evaluate markets, discover strategies and edges, and then apply them effectively and consistently. To be in this second group requires talent and aptitude. Passion is not enough.
Didn't most of the turtles fail miserably? For those late to the program, the turtles were a group of non-traders hired by some rich guys to settle a bet about whether or not tradign could be taught. Regardless, the facts are, the market has the highest attraction to those least suited for it. This is how it feeds itself. In my option prop firm the best trader was a 22 year old ex teacher who knew nothing about the market and could care less-- she just wanted the money. She was trained to use the software and made a killing-- but that really wasn't trading but rather just doing a task. the manager told me those who knew the "most" about the markets did the worst with the program as they would second guess the proven edge. So, i agree with Mr.N-- if trading is a task thanks to an edge, it can be taught, if you dont have an edge to teach, trading can not be taught. and obviously I am not talking about dubious edges and hindsight bias crap like chart reading, i mean real structural edges surf
Trading should be like counting cards in black jack. In both cases, you can observe and know when the odds are in your favor and when you should get your money out. Trading = innate ability? Ridiculous notion.
Certainly not PTJ. If you read Market Wizards 1, you know that PTJ and Kovner tried to train traders with mixed success.
Egalitarianism is popular fiction, not reality. Only those with above average aptitude can consistently win over others in any highly competitive and remunerative domain. Did you think the average person can become a grand master? That a 90 IQ classroom can be taught differential equations? "Anyone" can become a professional athlete? Now that is a funny, and truly naive notion. But if it makes you feel warm and fuzzy to think "everyone" has a chance, I'm not going to argue with you.