Mar

30

 Here is a very interesting article on a 21 year old online poker player, Daniel Cates. Some facts about him:

1. Highest online poker earnings in the world in 2010
2. Treats dollars as points, not real money
3. Doesn't understand the utility of the value of $n,000,000; believes this is an edge; less fear/emotion
4. End goal is to create a balance of life and connect the poker player with the person
5. Hypothesis that video games create good real-time decision makers, able to process lots of data, control emotions while taking risks, be aggressive and create seemingly random decisions when they are anything but
6. Extremely conservative spender, yet eats fancy meals at cheaper restaurants (good money management)

Jeff Watson writes: 

Ahem.  Some people may well have formed the impression that that kid might be cheating.

Jay Pasch comments: 

Or reading the cards as they lay, a good bluffer with bad cards, much like a futures trader…

Anatoly Veltman asks:

Could you expand: how is trading = bluffing?

Jay Pasch responds: 

Please go read Wall Street books that were printed over 75 years ago. There are countless tactics that are out there and I will restrain from this lesson in taking away from the ability for you to learn on your own. I will however suggest that The Chair has just published about three posts in the last two months that give insight of this tactic of bluffing, just not directly coming out and saying that those who implemented were bluffing.

A couple of points worth mentioning, are that 1) You have heard the sayin' "Paintin' the Tape" 2) Remember it is commonly quoted that Institutions due to vig being lower have taken the individual stock tradin' biz away from small fries 3) Bluffing is form of trading that is categorically multi dimensional not just "buy" or "sell". 4) common trait not learned in law school but one that is picked up in practice is the art of "re-direction" while in trial.

The power or leverage to bluff these days lies in the hands of those that have positions in the respected markets that they choose to bluff with such deep pockets that for you and I to do so is laughable.

Better to learn countin' than bluffin'. Though bluffin' still exists.

J. Humbert adds: 

Did this story make it to the US?

Two traders exploited a weakness in Timber Hill's robot. They made some small orders in illiquid stocks (to push up the price). Then the robot would place a large bid above the average purchase price and they could sell with a profit. They repeated this many times and made something in the $100k ballpark, I believe. Then they got convicted. It's apparently illegal to be smarter than a robot.


Comments

Name

Email

Website

Speak your mind

Archives

Resources & Links

Search