Does AS give people an edge in "playing" the stock

Post Reply New Topic

Does AS give people an edge in "playing" the stock market?

Maybe if it's their "special interest". Otherwise, there are a high number of relatively random parameters that cannot be determined unless you perform a highly scientifical investigation into each of them.

No. The things that make playing the stock market difficult and unpredictable affect us as much as everyone else.

I've no business knowledge at all, but I invested 50 in a company and the next week it was worth 250. I invested 10 in a bank, who's shares were down from $20.00 to $0.20. They are government owned, so they can't go bankrupt, unless the country itself goes bankrupt, and hopefully in a few years that 100 will be worth a lot more Maybe it's the AS

My reasoning that it can is based on the ability of people with AS being better at turning off emotions. When one does not get emotionally attached to any securities one owns, one can make better decisions with the emotions "turned off" or "flying in formation." Therefore, I think that with sufficient knowledge and interest, AS can be an advantage.



Sometimes it is nice to have others tell you if your reasoning is clear.

I would like to invest in the stock market.

I can see my portfolio now:

Best Buy
GM (now that Uncle Sam owns it, they're practically bonds, not stocks)
Pepsi
Apple
Darden (owners of Red Lobster, Olive Garden, etc.)
Brinker (owners of Chili's, On the Border, etc.)

yeah, used to be a big special interest. the illusion of finding a pattern was so strong that I ended up loosing quite a bit though :/

I think I can speak to this. Playing poker for a living has many comparisons to playing the stock market. There are patterns to recognize, and different levels to the meta-game.

I've seen many players come and go. While they may have the skill set to play a profitable game, they are unable to manage what goes beyond the actual play of a hand. For instance, they may play over their heads, either applying to much risk (not conceding to proper bankroll management) or using poor game selection (playing with better players). Also, many people burn out because they don't have the focus or determination to keep with it.

While my mental condition can be a hindrance in many aspects of life, it makes me better suited to have long-term success in poker. While I am still prone to tilt (being negatively affected mentally by some unfortunate event), my tilt factor doesn't affect my game as much. I still get angry, but I find myself unable to make bad plays that another person in my mental state would likely make. I'm much like a robot in my play, and even if I want to be done for the day, I can't force myself not to play as well as I can. I may lose interest, but I keep on with it, regardless of how I feel.

As was previously mentioned, if strategy games are a super-hobby, Aspies have a huge edge. For many, it is simply the play that interests them, the competition. For myself, it is the game construct that truly interests me. Trying to analyze the game within the game seems profoundly more interesting to me.

While this definitely helps me overall, I can also sympathize with Anna in that it sometimes hurts me. My understanding of the game is so deep, that I often fall victim to something we call "assigning my own range". Poker is not like you see in the movies where a great player always knows the exact hand of his opponent, in the actual game, good players "assign a range". The range is the list of possible hands that fit with previous action, the more information you get, the more you can narrow that range and act accordingly. I sometimes assume that my opponents understand what they are doing (when few actually do). As a result, I will mistakenly give my opponents a range that is comparable to the range of hands I would hold in a similar situation. Because they don't understand the game, but I assume that "x means x" merely because it would if I was in their shoes, I have a hard time realizing that often "x means y".

/rambling

I think it can be both a good and bad thing, sometimes a purely rational approach isn't the best.

I've been thinking about getting into stocks, but the time and effort required for a near guaranteed gain means I'll have to wait for now (analysing a few years of stock info with software, research into past, then current corporate goings-on).

I'd say experience and information is the edge, other than giving a little motivation out of interest, it would give no advantage whatsoever.