PDA

View Full Version : Forum Title (The Stock Market)


Carl_William
11-27-2005, 02:08 PM
Just a suggestion:

I feel that the Forum Title "The Stock Market" could be changed to:
"Finance and the Stock Market" or better yet
"Finance and the Markets"

I feel this would be a little more appropriate for this forum.

There are many reasons why I feel this way. One reason being: One facet of 2+2 Forums is that most of the contributors are above average intelligence. For instance most of the poker players (who post on 2+2) admit to winning one big bet (or so) an hour. Bottom line: “Lots of good poker players post on 2+2.” This means that the average player who loses 2 big bets an hour (“or so” after the rake); does not generally post on 2+2. But when the topic switches to the markets, some of this above average intelligence probably goes down the drain – no insult or putting down intended. Many good poker players don’t have a profound understanding (whatever that is) of the markets. Over the years, we have all heard and I believe it to be true that poker is a higher level game than say “bridge and on a level with chess – although the poker and chess are “somewhat” animals of a different nature. But if the markets are considered a game; then they are a somewhat different than card games and bridge. On stock market Internet post site or blogs, it seems that many times the posters just plug or tout certain stocks – wise investors know that following the advice of these posts is a losing game in the long run for most people.

I feel that a market forum “an honest forum;” should help the average investor or saver to optimize his/her long range goals.

Zygote
11-27-2005, 02:32 PM
probably around 80%-90% of 2+2ers don't make money after rake or are marginal winners at best.

Sniper
11-27-2005, 05:45 PM
[ QUOTE ]
probably around 80%-90% of 2+2ers don't make money after rake or are marginal winners at best.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is wrong... a very high percentage of 2+2ers are winning players... in fact the number of long term active posters that are winners, likely approaches 100%.

There have been many threads on this topic, across the forums.

Zygote
11-27-2005, 08:06 PM
i haven't been on a poker forum in several months, but my numbers definitely agree with my observations at the time i was visiting those forums. i can't imagine the number of winning players would have hmad that significant of an increase in such a short period.

FWIW, sklansky estimated in poker gaming in life that of those poker players who diligently study, probably no more than 10% are winning more than a marginal amount.

Dazarath
11-27-2005, 10:52 PM
2+2 does not consist of a representative sample of the poker player pool.

Zygote
11-27-2005, 11:24 PM
so? how is that relevant?

Sniper
11-28-2005, 12:15 AM
Zygote,

Im not sure why you have decided to hijack this thread, but I humbly suggest that you take a look around the strategy forums here on 2+2. You might learn something!

I will conclude with Ed's words from this month's 2+2 mag... "Our members are succeeding to a far greater extent and in far greater numbers than I imagined possible when we were writing SSH. David wrote, `$50,000 a year should be no big deal.' Now it seems like maybe that number should be more like $200,000."

Zygote
11-28-2005, 12:36 AM
[ QUOTE ]
Zygote,

Im not sure why you have decided to hijack this thread, but I humbly suggest that you take a look around the strategy forums here on 2+2. You might learn something!

I will conclude with Ed's words from this month's 2+2 mag... "Our members are succeeding to a far greater extent and in far greater numbers than I imagined possible when we were writing SSH. David wrote, `$50,000 a year should be no big deal.' Now it seems like maybe that number should be more like $200,000."

[/ QUOTE ]

i'm definitely not hijacking the thread. I am debating an assumption behind one of the OP's points.

Also, unlike the material of david's that i cited, yours does nothing to further prove your point. For one, we don't know ed's orignial expectations. Secondly, the amount an individual can make has a little to do with the percent of winners.

Lastly, i appreciate the suggestion, but I doubt i will go back to the strategy forums unless they have changed since i've left. unfortunately, discussing this would be hijacking the thread, so i'll stay from this topic for now.

Degen
11-28-2005, 12:42 AM
how about INVESTING

Uglyowl
11-28-2005, 08:19 AM
If the stock market only offered deposit bonuses I would be all set /images/graemlins/smile.gif

All kidding aside, I do ok in the stock market (around 15%/year over the last 4 years). Maybe luck, who knows.

krishanleong
11-28-2005, 12:33 PM
[ QUOTE ]
2+2 does not consist of a representative sample of the poker player pool.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]

so? how is that relevant?

[/ QUOTE ]

I just wanted to say that is the funniest thing I've read in a while... /images/graemlins/smile.gif

Krishan