As traders I'm willing to bet you balk at strategies with low probability of success. Yeah I know, what matters is expected value, win = probability * amount so if amount is big enough you're still profitable as long as your repeated investments are low enough so you don't go bankrupt before realizing that profit. Still, I by far prefer 80% probability of success over 1% and am sure that also do almost all of you. And when probability = negligible and amount = ridiculous(ly low), no sane trader would take it. Yet, applying to jobs = 1 in 10,000 applicants probability of success, where success = a measly salary. All while investing a fuckton of money (time) on each "trade" (job application). Automated code tests which take hours of your time while costing the employer practically nothing. Worse, "homework" tests which cost you days. From now on I've got a rule, I'm no longer placing trades with lower than 80% probability of success. And by "trades" I mean a broader interpretation. More details later.
actually the complete opposite is the case: 80% “success rate” => almost certainly curve fitted, will fail in real live trading.
You should probably work on your CV if you're only getting one job for every 10,000 you apply. ...in all seriousness - once you get to the point where you're given some kind of test by the employer, your odds of getting an offer should be like 1 in 4 at the very worst. Either you failed the test in which case you should study harder or apply for a lower-level position, or there's something else identifiably wrong with you (awkward in person/poor presentation, gave bad answers to interview questions, etc.) in which case you should work on that.
I've never seen 80% in trading, not even in backtests (which probably counts as a good thing, the system was correct / honest). But that's a different thing, 80% real life bets DO exist.
Well don't take it THAT literal although I'm not sure it's not actually the case. There are jobs at each end of the spectrum, where the qualified candidate count per job position is in the 100-1000. Either easy shit like "web" or, perhaps counter-intuitively, very hard stuff like "quant finance". With the easy stuff it's intuitive to figure out there are a lot of people able to qualify to the level required to do the job. With harcore stuff, the problem's in the number of jobs available which is very low actually. Much lower than the number of very capable individuals who have no alternative in this shitty crappy sucky world we live on, but to compete for those few positions which offer something more intellectually stimulating and financially rewarding than shoveling shit, which is where the "optimum" is: job position exceeds "qualified" (and willing to take the crap) individuals.
So you have 100 Einsteins, Wisensteins, Abakumovs etc and ONE fucking job which allows them to unfold their talent. What, you never heard of Wisenstein and Abakumov? Well it's THEIR fault for not getting the job which rescues them from immediate extermination or at best, a life in the Gulag. Where after 14+ hours of meaningless shoveling crap work excluding chores, they should have proven themselves if they were any good anyways.
Allright, you caught me. I've never SEEN them in real life either But fuck, there's some imaginary universe where I do believe they exist Don't shoot the pianist (me), not long ago that imaginary square root of -1 didn't even exist in imagination. And if you were to live some 2000 years ago and would commit the heresy not to say that one third of a number (1/3) but inoffensive negative numbers exist, you had all chances to be harshly criticized (like piece of shits on this forum were doing to me before I discovered the "ignore" button), ostracized or worse.
In the non-fucked up universe I live in, 90% is a real thing. Go east than Eastern Europe and you'll reach 99.99% territory, you piece of shits. Well, piece of shits who doubt they exist. [benevolent smile]