https://www.liquidpoker.net/


LP international Poland    Contact            Users: 322 Active, 10 Logged in - Time: 21:26

Anyone have experience trading forex or stocks?

New to LiquidPoker? Register here for free!
Forum Index > General
 1 
  2 
  > 
  Last 
  All 
Nitewin   United States. Feb 17 2014 00:31. Posts 1316

If so, please share your experience/tips. I think it's a good idea to have multiple streams of income. Trading is perfect because it's more passive than poker.

Facebook Twitter

Bigbobm   United States. Feb 17 2014 02:49. Posts 5492

Almost all of my experience is with long term positions, so not exactly trading. But I've been following a lot of the hot topic stocks (TSLA, SCTY, PHOT), and I've had a pretty good deal of success with it thus far. Also have money invested in generating LiteCoins - all about that passive income.

Its time to stop thinking like a bitch and think smart like a poker player - ket 

auffenpuffer   Finland. Feb 17 2014 02:59. Posts 1429

I have got a great tip: because it's not like you would beat the market in any case just put all your monies to some index fund. Almost no one does beat the market in the long run, and it can even be argued that literally no one does better than the market unless by chance.

 Last edit: 17/02/2014 04:12

Bigbobm   United States. Feb 17 2014 03:42. Posts 5492


  On February 17 2014 01:59 auffenpuffer wrote:
I have got a great tip: because it's not like you would beat the market in any case so just put all your monies to some index fund. Almost no one does beat the market in the long run, and it can even be argued that literally no one does better than the market unless by chance.



Or unless they're cheating. Vanguard and Fidelity are two amazing places to go to for index funds fwiw. Just pick the index funds with the lowest rates, and you'll print money.

Its time to stop thinking like a bitch and think smart like a poker player - ket 

2primenumbers   United States. Feb 17 2014 17:04. Posts 199

Read from practitioners

Mark Spitznagel's The Dao of Capital
Nassim Taleb's Incerto Trilogy
George Cooper's The Origin of Financial Crises
Graham's Intelligent Investing

www.youtube.com/RichardGamingo - All of your commentated gaming entertainment. 

jchysk   United States. Feb 17 2014 19:04. Posts 435

Read "The Market Wizards"
You can find/replace stocks and futures with poker and it'll apply the same way.

w00t 

cariadon   Estonia. Feb 17 2014 21:49. Posts 4013


  On February 17 2014 02:42 Bigbobm wrote:
Show nested quote +



Or unless they're cheating. Vanguard and Fidelity are two amazing places to go to for index funds fwiw. Just pick the index funds with the lowest rates, and you'll print money.


May i ask what you think these Vanguard and Fidelity do that average people with half a brain and a chair can't ? Edit: besides taking their cut and some fees ofc.
Almost no one does beat poker in the long run, and it can even be argued that... wait what? What the fuck has it got to do with anything? It is possible to beat the market in the long run, all there is needed to know.

 Last edit: 17/02/2014 21:49

mnj   United States. Feb 17 2014 22:48. Posts 3848


  On February 17 2014 20:49 cariadon wrote:
Show nested quote +



May i ask what you think these Vanguard and Fidelity do that average people with half a brain and a chair can't ? Edit: besides taking their cut and some fees ofc.
Almost no one does beat poker in the long run, and it can even be argued that... wait what? What the fuck has it got to do with anything? It is possible to beat the market in the long run, all there is needed to know.



average people with half a brain can't make what the market is making. fidelity/vangaurd they probably do have a few indexes that are more actively managed, but through them you can just BUY THE MARKET which means you have bought a piece of over 500 + companies and probably closer to 5000.

the average person very often picks 1-3 stocks (LOL TALK ABOUT DIVIERSIFYING YOUR RISK DAD THANKS!), and probably 99% lie under 20 stocks.

also i like this advice

  On February 17 2014 01:59 auffenpuffer wrote:
I have got a great tip: because it's not like you would beat the market in any case just put all your monies to some index fund. Almost no one does beat the market in the long run, and it can even be argued that literally no one does better than the market unless by chance.

 Last edit: 17/02/2014 22:48

mnj   United States. Feb 17 2014 22:53. Posts 3848

and just to elaborate how impossible making money through stocks (and this i define as achieving above market returns over 10 years, so making 20% when the SP500 makes 10%)

i work with an ex-hedge fund analyst, and i was asking him about his job (because i kinda would like to go into hedge funds myself). he said as an analyst he would go to company X, let's say Hershey's and from far away with BINOCULARS he would count the number of truck deliveries.

if you know the number of trucks and the value of candies within said truck you can ascertain before the public an estimated revenue/cost for the next Quartile. Basically before the earnings report comes out this hedge fund already knows the information. this might not be TECHNICALLY insider trading, but it clearly works in the same way, the hedge fund has more information then the public.

and i mean it was crazy, he knew how much it costs for 1 delivery tuck, the tires, gas, truck driver, inventory costs. so this isn't some bullshit model/analysis he freaking attributed $ value to every singe variable i could come up with pertaining to the delivery trucks.


GoTuNk   Chile. Feb 18 2014 00:28. Posts 2860


  On February 17 2014 02:42 Bigbobm wrote:
Show nested quote +



Or unless they're cheating. Vanguard and Fidelity are two amazing places to go to for index funds fwiw. Just pick the index funds with the lowest rates, and you'll print money.


Is it possible to invest on this as a foreigner ? any other online place that sells ETFs?

Chilean market has no ETFs. Seriously.


auffenpuffer   Finland. Feb 18 2014 04:33. Posts 1429


  May i ask what you think these Vanguard and Fidelity do that average people with half a brain and a chair can't ? Edit: besides taking their cut and some fees ofc.
Almost no one does beat poker in the long run, and it can even be argued that... wait what? What the fuck has it got to do with anything? It is possible to beat the market in the long run, all there is needed to know.



No you don't see it.

First of all, let's keep in mind that in poker "beating the game" means making any money whatsoever, for example someone banking 1bb/100 in nl50 is said to "beat the game". In stocks "beating the market" means making more than 8 - 10% profits yearly, and 10% - inflation yearly is shitloads of money for doing absolutely nothing at all.

Secondly, in poker really lots of people are winning, perhaps even as massive as 1 % of all players (that's ridiculously much), and of the people who use 8 hours a day on it almost all are winning. In stocks, almost no one is winning, and almost none of the professionals is either.

So this has a lot to do with everything, because if you try to gain profits in excess of those of an index fund, you'll have poor results because actively managing your portfolio, especially when you are gambling with trivial sums of money, will drain much of your income into transaction costs (while not increasing profits). Also active trading requires much effort, and I think you were looking for passive income.

There is this thing called the efficient market hypothesis. The information available to you is available to everyone else too, and expected changes are correctly discounted into current prices. Now in poker no rational person could make the argument that "literally no one is beating the games". Obviously Tom Dwan is beating the games and not by running good. On the contrary, a rational person can maintain that say, Warren Buffet is not beating the market for reasons other than luck. Indeed this latter position is quite popular among economists.

 Last edit: 18/02/2014 07:45

cariadon   Estonia. Feb 18 2014 12:13. Posts 4013


  On February 17 2014 21:48 mnj wrote:
Show nested quote +



average people with half a brain can't make what the market is making. fidelity/vangaurd they probably do have a few indexes that are more actively managed, but through them you can just BUY THE MARKET which means you have bought a piece of over 500 + companies and probably closer to 5000.

the average person very often picks 1-3 stocks (LOL TALK ABOUT DIVIERSIFYING YOUR RISK DAD THANKS!), and probably 99% lie under 20 stocks.

also i like this advice

  On February 17 2014 01:59 auffenpuffer wrote:
I have got a great tip: because it's not like you would beat the market in any case just put all your monies to some index fund. Almost no one does beat the market in the long run, and it can even be argued that literally no one does better than the market unless by chance.




Just because your dad doesn't beat the S&P500 doesn't mean others can't.
I'm not talking about the average person, i'm arguing the point that it is indeed possible to beat the market with public information and some aquired knowledge.


cariadon   Estonia. Feb 18 2014 12:25. Posts 4013


  On February 18 2014 03:33 auffenpuffer wrote:
Show nested quote +



No you don't see it.

First of all, let's keep in mind that in poker "beating the game" means making any money whatsoever, for example someone banking 1bb/100 in nl50 is said to "beat the game". In stocks "beating the market" means making more than 8 - 10% profits yearly, and 10% - inflation yearly is shitloads of money for doing absolutely nothing at all.

Secondly, in poker really lots of people are winning, perhaps even as massive as 1 % of all players (that's ridiculously much), and of the people who use 8 hours a day on it almost all are winning. In stocks, almost no one is winning, and almost none of the professionals is either.

So this has a lot to do with everything, because if you try to gain profits in excess of those of an index fund, you'll have poor results because actively managing your portfolio, especially when you are gambling with trivial sums of money, will drain much of your income into transaction costs (while not increasing profits). Also active trading requires much effort, and I think you were looking for passive income.

There is this thing called the efficient market hypothesis. The information available to you is available to everyone else too, and expected changes are correctly discounted into current prices. Now in poker no rational person could make the argument that "literally no one is beating the games". Obviously Tom Dwan is beating the games and not by running good. On the contrary, a rational person can maintain that say, Warren Buffet is not beating the market for reasons other than luck. Indeed this latter position is quite popular among economists.


I wouldn't call 1bb/100 in NL50 beating much of anything, maybe your own free time.
You are throwing random statements out there about nobody winning but if you think about it someone has to be winning all the time. There are two parts to a transaction so minus fees for every transaction there is a losing and a winning side. You should meditate on that for a while before throwing random statements about nobody beating the market.
Warren Buffett is to investing what Tom Dwan is to poker and then some. Grahams and later Buffetts investment strategy is legit and it works. Auffenpuffer you are ignorant.

The valuable lesson learned from efficient market hypothesis is not to trade your positions back and forth too much because (depending on your bankroll) you get killed by fees. In PLO50 your edge has to be bigger to overcome the mad rake, parallels can be drawn with investing.


GoTuNk   Chile. Feb 18 2014 12:45. Posts 2860


  On February 18 2014 11:25 cariadon wrote:
Show nested quote +



I wouldn't call 1bb/100 in NL50 beating much of anything, maybe your own free time.
You are throwing random statements out there about nobody winning but if you think about it someone has to be winning all the time. There are two parts to a transaction so minus fees for every transaction there is a losing and a winning side. You should meditate on that for a while before throwing random statements about nobody beating the market.
Warren Buffett is to investing what Tom Dwan is to poker and then some. Grahams and later Buffetts investment strategy is legit and it works. Auffenpuffer you are ignorant.

The valuable lesson learned from efficient market hypothesis is not to trade your positions back and forth too much because (depending on your bankroll) you get killed by fees. In PLO50 your edge has to be bigger to overcome the mad rake, parallels can be drawn with investing.



He is more likely right though. He did forget to mention you can have higher expected returns than the market by taking more risk in your portfolio, with the obvious downside. That said, as a finance major (that would my degree's name in the US I think) I can tell you with no doubt that are not known investment strategies to beat the market, and that BY A MILE the business of banks is charging fees to investors. Moreover, some huge retirement and investment funds are changing over to pasive funds.

Graham's value investing strategy has been tested with different models (he basically advocates purchasing "value stocks" in modern terminology) and the abnormal returned is explained by market size and book/value ratio (Fama and Fench model, instead of CAPM). That means you take more risk and therefore have higher ROI.

The counter argument to all of this is that some people (other than insiders) possibly now how to beat the market, but because they have the chicken that lays gold eggs they obviously won't tell anyone.

An interesting point is that Fama believes in efficient market theory, so his investment strategy is about building a portfolio that keeps the risks factor relatively constant and trough the use of the trade premium picks the stock that give him the highest margin when selling/lowest when buying those he consider of equal risk.

Edit: The english name is bid spread I think.

 Last edit: 18/02/2014 12:47

cariadon   Estonia. Feb 18 2014 13:50. Posts 4013

I don't get the point you are making with higher risk and return. Was there supposed to be one? I'd love investment opportunities with zero risk.
There are many value creators and each company is different. You can't take one model apply it everywhere and expect a profit.
The term value stock is overused. Graham and Buffetts strategies are available in written word, explained in examples and concepts. Applying them randomly won't get you anywhere, you have to use your brain.

You can make better than market returns picking your own stocks.

It is highly improbable someone who doesn't know the rules of poker can beat 50nl. However, with keen learning, effort and discipline it is possible for some (not most). Same can be said about stocks.


cariadon   Estonia. Feb 18 2014 13:55. Posts 4013


  On February 16 2014 23:31 Nitewin wrote:
If so, please share your experience/tips. I think it's a good idea to have multiple streams of income. Trading is perfect because it's more passive than poker.



I suggest making a playmoney account and start dabbling around. Reading a few good books will get you further than asking a bunch of degenerates opinions who haven't even bought a stock. I'd recommend staying away from forex.


auffenpuffer   Finland. Feb 18 2014 14:00. Posts 1429


  I wouldn't call 1bb/100 in NL50 beating much of anything, maybe your own free time.
You are throwing random statements out there about nobody winning but if you think about it someone has to be winning all the time. There are two parts to a transaction so minus fees for every transaction there is a losing and a winning side. You should meditate on that for a while before throwing random statements about nobody beating the market.
Warren Buffett is to investing what Tom Dwan is to poker and then some. Grahams and later Buffetts investment strategy is legit and it works. Auffenpuffer you are ignorant.

The valuable lesson learned from efficient market hypothesis is not to trade your positions back and forth too much because (depending on your bankroll) you get killed by fees. In PLO50 your edge has to be bigger to overcome the mad rake, parallels can be drawn with investing.



It's interesting how all the content in this post could have been expressed by "I disagree". You make no arguments whatsoever, you simply state negations of what my post said (and of course add one personal insult).

Or yeah, you did have the original argument that "in any transaction someone loses". Now the fundamental difference between finance (or more generally economics) and gambling (for example) is that gambling is a zero sum game, whereas investing is not. http://www.investopedia.com/terms/z/zero-sumgame.asp

So whatever if you are interested in this kinda thing you can start reading with the wikipedia article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Efficient-market_hypothesis, I'm done with this discussion.

 Last edit: 18/02/2014 14:02

julep   Australia. Feb 18 2014 14:07. Posts 1274

i trade bonds as a job.

barrier to entry in s quite high unlike poker. there is alot to learn about everything really. and it is usually hard to get a start at a firm let alone be around good traders who are willing to take you under their wings.


devon06atX   Canada. Feb 18 2014 14:20. Posts 5414

I was really enjoying this conversation until cariadon started to throw out immature insults.

Anyways, thanks guys. I like reading peoples thoughts that are much more informed than mine.

As an aside, you can't use Buffett as an example. He can buy a big chunk of stock, it will hit the news that he's investing in it, then everyone will jump on the bandwagon - thus driving the value of it up. He has enough leverage to do things no single 'person with half a brain' can possibly dream of.

It sounds to me that puffer is quite knowledgeable in this topic, why don't you listen to what he's saying instead of trying to argue every point?


Highcard   Canada. Feb 18 2014 15:12. Posts 5422


  On February 18 2014 13:07 julep wrote:
i trade bonds as a job.

barrier to entry in s quite high unlike poker. there is alot to learn about everything really. and it is usually hard to get a start at a firm let alone be around good traders who are willing to take you under their wings.



So, why would someone want to trade bonds compared to say, all other forms of trading. What are the advantages?

I have learned from poker that being at the table is not a grind, the grind is living and poker is how I pass the time 

 
 1 
  2 
  > 
  Last 
  All 


Copyright © 2020. LiquidPoker.net All Rights Reserved
Contact Advertise Sitemap