Once they had the trend following rules in hand there was not much sexiness, true enough. They traded for 3-4 years then went out on their own. I think any other notable trend follower at the time (Dunn, Campbell, Henry, Millburn) most likely could have given their systematic rules to trainees and found comparable results.
Hey trendfollowing, I don't read books on trading ever, and the ones I have were just for fun. The only ones i've read are a van kampen book on psycology, Ugly Americans, and your book The Complete Turtle Trader. I'm not trying to plug anything, but I really was interested in the story when I heard about it, and it truely was a great book. The whole "nature vs. nurture" really intrigues me when it comes to trading. Do you have to be born a great trader, or can great trading be taught? Even though it might not have been written out, I do believe Richard Dennis truely did want to test the "nature vs. nurture" theory, maybe for his own satisfaction at the time. I personally liked your story as it really hit home with me. I believe it is a little bit of both. Some people are born ambitious and have a general affinity for accepting risk, so that will leave some in the experiment to suceed and others to fail. For the ones who suceed, I think nurture plays a role in limiting drawdown, or basically "knowing when and when not to pick your battles". What I didn't get out of your book was an answer. What is your opinion on "nature vs. nurture"? And again, Do you have to be born a great trader, or can great trading be taught?
The evidence to me, and this goes way beyond Dennis, says one can be taught. Maybe others see something else in the evidence.
And on a second note. I personally do not think trend following is a viable strategy. Trend followers are always late to the party. I prefer predicting the trend, then following it. It seems to me that the drawdown can be avoided. I look to get in on the first early retracement of a trend, if it doesn't happen, so what, you miss a trade, big deal. I think why trend following fails in general is the same reason why trading fails for people in general. Because everyone has a different affinity for accepting loss. Some too soon, some too late, and some are just right. Kinda like the three little bears. LOL.
There sure is a whole bunch of performance data across many traders across many decades saying something else!
Nah I don't think that is the case. You are the exception to taught. I think it is a personality trait that gives one the performance that you acheived. I've seen too many Ivy league fools fail. I love that I can put my highschool degree against any Ivy league degree, and that in trading, IT DOESNT MEAN SQUAT.
For me, trend following, more than an application, was a lesson on letting winners ride and cutting losses short, and one can apply this to day trading, swing trading, or any type of trading. And if you have any info on when the turtles are meeting up again in chicago area, please post on the forum, I would love the opurtunnity to meet Richard Dennis or yourself in person. I got some good stories to share too, even though I wasn't alive when the turtles were active.
Marketsurfer, Lets say this was a conspiracy and they did not work for Dennis, then how did most of the turtles become money managers? Where did they get their experience and training? Where did they get the reputation to manage money?
I think Mr Surf is kidding, but he is saying that the Turtles may have worked for Dennis. However, they never got hired as neophytes with no background to be taught by Dennis.