Professional trader?

[spreadbetting]

I could never refer to myself as a "professional trader",apart from implying I knew what I was doing for the last 10 years or so it just sounds far too pompous.

[Trader Pat]

I don't think 'professional trader' is that easy to define. My initial feeling was a professional trader is somebody who makes their living from trading but there are lots of people who work full time and make a decent second income from trading, some even who earn more through their trading than their full time job.

I suppose a professional trader for me would be someone who makes steady profits over time thats more than the average working income.

[Derek27]

I once told an old colleague that I hadn't seen for years that I'm now a semi-professional gambler. She looked at me with pity and said: "it's good that you at least recognise you have a gambling problem".

[ShaunWhite]

Our professional domestic hygene consultant is here today to do some hoovering. It's a baragin, only twice the price of our old 'cleaner'.

So Peter....you've heard what we all think....what's your view?

[Euler]

Well, it all started around the question of being a gambler or professional gambler.

Nobody I was with really felt tagging professional onto gambler would be legit, as most professionals where just "gamblers who got lucky".

Then we moved onto trading and I accepted that trading was a sophisticated form of gambling, but argued that there was probably a level at which people would be considered 'serious' or professional. The consensus seemed to mainly based on 'doing it for a living' which translated to earnings over time.

But of course, there is no Corgi certificate for trading! There is no way of telling if somebody really does actually do it.

[ShaunWhite]

But of course, there is no Corgi certificate for trading! There is no way of telling if somebody really does actually do it.

Self certifying with 'pro' should be taken with the same pinch of salt as my old 'self-certified' mortage used to be

Let's not be too scathing about the 'gifted amateur' though. Not everyone wants to do what they've good at as a full-time job. For instance there's a lot of fantastic artists & musicians who don't want the lifestyle that goes with doing that fulltime. Ditto trading weekend warriors I suspect. When it comes to assessing traders as a source of learning (rather than giving them a mortage), then for me a talented amateur with great teaching methods would win hands down over an average pro who couldn't teach for toffee.

The best example I can think of would be a guitar teacher, do you want to learn from a professional guiarist or from a professional guitar teacher? Because they don't earn millions, are they inferior?

[CallumPerry]

I think BetFair should release a leaderboard of every trader and gambler's username so when somebody says they're a pro you can see where they rank. Would make fights on this forum more fun too. "Rank 378: Fuck off 412, you'll understand when you get into the top 400 " I jest of course, some ego's 100% don't need any more fuel Although it's such a stupid idea I can see BetFair actually doing it in the New Year. My idea, mine!! Inbox me for details for where to send my royalties

[Euler]

The best example I can think of would be a guitar teacher, do you want to learn from a professional guitarist or from a professional guitar teacher? Because they don't earn millions, are they inferior?

I'd probably be more than happy than learn guitar from a pro teacher. I don't really have any issue with professional teachers. My youngest are learning to drive so I've selected (at first) a professional teacher. Lewis Hamilton would probably be a terrible teacher but fantastic entertainment as he donuts in the driveway.

[Derek27]

The best example I can think of would be a guitar teacher, do you want to learn from a professional guiarist or from a professional guitar teacher? Because they don't earn millions, are they inferior?

Good point, but not many people would turn down lessons from their guitar idle, and the bragging rights that go with it.

[vankancisco]

I see a professional trader as someone who is involved with recognised financial markets. They will have at some point received proper training. I always prefer to call people involved in betting markets as gamblers. They can certainly be professional in a sense, but I don't regard it as a proper occupation. An occupation nearly always involves responsibility and accountability which in turn can lead to recognition and increased power. Someone involved in betting markets at the end of the day is hustling for money. There's many different ways of hustling but it leads to the same goal. That's not to do down gamblers, I just think it does differ from an occupation.

[Derek27]

I see a professional trader as someone who is involved with recognised financial markets. They will have at some point received proper training. I always prefer to call people involved in betting markets as gamblers. They can certainly be professional in a sense, but I don't regard it as a proper occupation. An occupation nearly always involves responsibility and accountability which in turn can lead to recognition and increased power. Someone involved in betting markets at the end of the day is hustling for money. There's many different ways of hustling but it leads to the same goal. That's not to do down gamblers, I just think it does differ from an occupation.

That's generally the view of non-gamblers or recreational gamblers. My brother's other half laughed at me when I suggested what I'm doing can be hard work!

There is no such thing as a 'proper' occupation - it's either an occupation or it's not. Trading sports markets is very similar to trading financial markets and whereas you often hear of a gambler blowing tens of thousands, you hear of financial traders blowing millions and billions, yet they retain a higher status than us mere gamblers.

[ShaunWhite]

I see a professional trader as someone who is involved with recognised financial markets. They will have at some point received proper training. I always prefer to call people involved in betting markets as gamblers. They can certainly be professional in a sense, but I don't regard it as a proper occupation.

When you're involved in an emerging sector, formal training doesn't exit. It's actually much more difficult to turn pro because you have to plough your own furrow.

From my personal experience in The City, virtually any clown can pass a few exams and get a desk via daddy's Eton contacts. I respect anyone making a living by using their own wits either on betfair or stood trackside at Hove far more.

[Kafkaesque]

I see a professional trader as someone who is involved with recognised financial markets. They will have at some point received proper training. I always prefer to call people involved in betting markets as gamblers. They can certainly be professional in a sense, but I don't regard it as a proper occupation. An occupation nearly always involves responsibility and accountability which in turn can lead to recognition and increased power. Someone involved in betting markets at the end of the day is hustling for money. There's many different ways of hustling but it leads to the same goal. That's not to do down gamblers, I just think it does differ from an occupation.

This would be a common approach, I would think, and if so I'll be fine not being a professional anything. Having to show responsibilty and accountability to an employer/company who'll in the vast majority of cases show you no loyalty in return and cut you off at the knees at the first sign of trouble is more respectable than being accountable to yourself? Because you've received "proper" training rather than taking resposibility of training yourself a skill set? Count me out as long as I can stay alive without it.

It sounds very similar to the assumptions made regarding poker in the pre- and early boom days (and still to some extent). "Yeah but it's still just gambling, right?" No, it isn't in fact, if it's done right.

[Derek27]

It's generally accepted on this forum that trading is gambling, but I would question if you've had about 60 consecutive profitable months on the trot, is it still gambling?

[ShaunWhite]

It's generally accepted on this forum that trading is gambling, but I would question if you've had about 60 consecutive profitable months on the trot, is it still gambling?

I'd say so. Otherwise there wouldn't be such people as professional gamblers, what would you call a person who made a living backing dogs for 30yrs? What would they call themselves?

'Gamble' just means to take risk in the hope of a desired result. There's no shame in the word, it doesn't have to equate to loser. But there's no wonder the wider world struggles to understand when even 'industry insiders' shy away from it. We should take ownership of it like the 'n' word Sucessful business people don't seem to shy from saying 'i took a gamble', and when they do everyone swoons with admiration for their judgement, but because we deal with dogs and horse racing we see it as a dirty word. They did it once, big deal, we do it 100s of times a day!

But yes, trading is just a method/strategy/style of gambling, a back and a lay. But a method where you get the chance to find value at both ends so of course it's much more skillful than most gambling

btw would you say Coral or Ladbrokes are gamblers. What about your insurance company or fresh fish guy ? Everyone's a gambler Derek.
(there's a million page thread about this somewhere on the forum)