tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-706772597530050449.post7291761770379732770..comments2024-02-19T12:04:56.080-05:00Comments on Reading the Markets: The passion to practiceBrenda Jubinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02587551531260863509noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-706772597530050449.post-69005536286619987462009-08-16T07:47:51.175-04:002009-08-16T07:47:51.175-04:00Jorge, thanks very much for the reference; I will ...Jorge, thanks very much for the reference; I will definitely take a look at it. I agree that static models are flawed when it comes to markets. I remember Simon from <em>Million Dollar Traders,</em> the third-rate British reality TV show available on YouTube. A retired software engineer, he was confronted with trading stocks for a hedge fund with virtually no training. In his former life, he moaned, it might take a very long time to write a piece of code, but once done properly, that was it. It would always work. In the market there was no such consistency; something that worked one day would fail the next.<br /><br />One reason I didn’t pursue the martial arts model further is that I don’t like personifying the markets, thereby making them an opponent, adversary, even enemy. Such personification might work fine for some people, but it’s not good for my psyche. I prefer to think of the markets along the lines of sporting clays where you have to shoot clay targets that are thrown, as Wikipedia says, in a great variety of trajectories, angles, speeds, elevations and distances. You either hit the moving target or you don’t, but it doesn’t hit you back. Admittedly, on my dark days I think of the market as a carnival shooting gallery where my BB gun is loaded with ammo that doesn’t have enough cross section to shoot out the star. That is, I’m being scammed and the carny guys like Goldman Sachs are laughing all the way to the bank.Brenda Jubinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02587551531260863509noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-706772597530050449.post-57152927276351687752009-08-15T20:19:56.573-04:002009-08-15T20:19:56.573-04:00[This is a comment on the previous post - I can...[This is a comment on the previous post - I can't seem to be able to post there]<br /><br />Hi Brenda,<br /><br />While I mostly agree with your post, I'd like to offer my two cents.<br /><br />If I was <i>really</i> evil, I would posit the following experiment: let's wire toddlers with electrodes and give them varying-strength random electric shocks with a distribution slightly biased towards movements conducive to upright walking. Then let's see how many end up walking and how many crawl for the rest of their lives.<br /><br />Short of that, we could also alter every night the tuning of a piano and track how many young learners end up mastering music and how many end up banging their heads against the wall.<br /><br />That is why I think that the martial arts comparison is more apt: you're trying to hit a <i>moving</i> target that <i>hits you back</i>. (An excellent book, IMO, regarding the gist of your post is The Art of Learning by Josh Waitzkin).<br /><br />Many thanks for the excellent blog,<br /><br />JorgeJorgehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16875726059248008250noreply@blogger.com