Some excellent discussion in this thread.
If I may attempt to cut to the chase, I see two distinct schools of thought here:
School #1 is saying something along the lines of "if you were as knowledgeable and/or experienced as I am, you would have found your edge by now. Continued profitability is evidence enough that trading involves a measure of skill/expertise".
School #2 is saying "if you were as knowledgeable and/or experienced as I am, you'd have reached the point where you realize that your edge is illusory, because there's no such thing as an edge that will last indefinitely. Hence your profits thus far are the result of luck".
If a trader's track record demonstrates consistent profitability thus far, then IMO he is justified in assuming that his method/approach (whatever it might be) will continue to deliver profit. His only alternative is to quit using it altogether, which – if his goal is to be a profitable trader – is self-defeating.
I think Clockwork71 makes a valid point. IMO, the "if I can't do it, nobody can" speak tells us more about a person's ego than their level of intelligence. I don't believe that School #2 are qualified to make their point, until they have (1) examined every possible approach/method (the possibilities are infinite), and (2) demonstrated that they have an omniscient view of how markets will behave in the future.
If I may attempt to cut to the chase, I see two distinct schools of thought here:
School #1 is saying something along the lines of "if you were as knowledgeable and/or experienced as I am, you would have found your edge by now. Continued profitability is evidence enough that trading involves a measure of skill/expertise".
School #2 is saying "if you were as knowledgeable and/or experienced as I am, you'd have reached the point where you realize that your edge is illusory, because there's no such thing as an edge that will last indefinitely. Hence your profits thus far are the result of luck".
If a trader's track record demonstrates consistent profitability thus far, then IMO he is justified in assuming that his method/approach (whatever it might be) will continue to deliver profit. His only alternative is to quit using it altogether, which – if his goal is to be a profitable trader – is self-defeating.
I think Clockwork71 makes a valid point. IMO, the "if I can't do it, nobody can" speak tells us more about a person's ego than their level of intelligence. I don't believe that School #2 are qualified to make their point, until they have (1) examined every possible approach/method (the possibilities are infinite), and (2) demonstrated that they have an omniscient view of how markets will behave in the future.