In 2005, the Applied Cognitive Psychology journal presented the results of a study of variables that predict skill levels of chess players. It turned out that the most powerful factor in skill is time. High-level chess players spent five times as long as intermediate-level chess players. Swedish psychologist Anders Eriksson has identified the “10,000 hour rule”. Ericsson has done research among music professionals. He divided them into three groups - stars, professionals and amateurs. He then conducted a survey among them asking the participants how much time they spent training. Almost all of them started to create music when they were kids. But over the years, the time each of them spent doing their classes grew different. By the age of twenty, the best musicians had up to 10,000 hours of hard work on their music. Professionals would have spent around 8000 hours, and the amateurs did no more than 4000. It is important that Ericsson did not find musicians who achieved a high level of skill without putting in much effort and exercising less than their peers. There were no people who put all their effort into music but did not get ahead of their less professional peers. Studies on professional competence have suggested that it is impossible to achieve mastery in complex activities without extensive practice. Researchers came up with roughly the same figure leading to a craftsmanship of 10,000 hours. Neurologist Daniel Levitin wrote: “From numerous studies, the following picture emerges: no matter what you want to become an expert in, it takes 10,000 hours of practice to achieve a high-class expert level. Whoever you take - composers, basketball players, writers, skaters, pianists, chess players, and so on - 10,000 hours is what they’ve all spent to become who they are now. " Levitan also noted, “so far no one has come across a case where the highest level of skill would be achieved in less time. It seems that it takes the brain just so long to assimilate all necessary information.” There is good and bad news here. 10,000 hours is a lot. Of course,it will take less time to become an expert in something simple. But in popular, highly competitive areas, trading included, it can take significantly more than 10,000 hours. The good news is that everyone can be successful in what they do. In fact, regardless of natural talents, when you work hard you will achieve your goal once you’ve become persistent with your effort. For a trader, 10,000 hours of professional development would take around 10 years. During this time any trader will come across various global events, including at least one world economic crisis, several black swans. They will encounter big losses on their way. And only after that will this person become one of a very few "market survivors" and earn a stable income. You might ask, "Is it possible to shorten the education curve?" The answer is yes as the most powerful factor in mastery is not simply time, but rather time spent wisely. For most, the biggest issue is underestimating the complexity of this game. The vast majority is looking for a shortcut. And even after creating a theoretically profitable trading system, one might crash into their own psychological problems. Developing the skills of managing your behavior under stress can make up the bulk of a trader's overall development. The problem is that there is no single recipe for how to "pump" these skills. But, knowing about the "10,000" hour rule, we can confidently assume that the whole point is studying a vast number of market scenarios to learn and polishing our behavioral skills through professional feedback. The process of trader’s development goes like this: To sum up, we all need to take our time to become trading professionals. Why put your capital at risk on the way? Try one of our evaluation programs instead, and get funded in less than a month!
Amateur : " I don't know anything " Actually, in this ET forum, the definition is very different. Amateur is : ' I know a lot about trading. Let me post it in the ET forum and teach others how to trade " And their job is to TEACH, not to learn. Go and check it for yourself. They tend to create thousands of new threads.
Ha ha, the classic correlation vs causation paradigm. It never gets old! You could spend 1B years on something, but if you really never get to understand what you are trying to do ... you may as well go and do something else. Hope and time alone will no change anything!
Wise words. I've known "quant traders" who've lost either their own or client money for more than 10years, and still think that back-testing is the solution.