Turtle Traders Winners and Losers: Why Some Turtles Failed and Others Became Legends

There are a few turtles out there, ones trained by Richard Dennis, who failed miserably and who have now tried to become “gurus” (with little success). These gurus can make trying to understand the real turtle story difficult. Where is the truth? There is only one objective accounting of the turtle story start to finish including the good the bad and the ugly. That story is found in the book “The Complete TurtleTrader”.

1. You can find more information on a comparison of turtle “books” here. This comparison paints a picture regarding the level of detail that can be missing from some turtle accounts.
2. You can also find a detailed research package about the turtles including original turtle notes and proprietary audio here. The turtles were taught timeless lessons. Their rules work. However, if you want to trade like a successful turtle you must first find out why some turtles failed.

What Separates the Winning Turtles from the Failing Ones

The Turtle experiment proved Dennis’s thesis: that systematic trading rules can be taught to people without prior trading experience, and that those people can then produce exceptional returns using those rules. The experiment’s overall results confirmed this. But not all Turtles succeeded, and the pattern of which ones succeeded and which ones failed tells the more important story.

The rules were identical for all Turtles. The capital was Dennis’s, not their own. The markets they traded, the position sizing methodology, the entry and exit criteria, and the risk management parameters were all taught in the same two-week training session. There was no informational advantage that separated the winners from the losers. The rules were available to all of them equally.

What separated the winners from the losers was the discipline to follow the rules through the periods when following them was psychologically most difficult: the extended drawdowns, the losing streaks, the flat periods when nothing seemed to be working, and the moments when a position was showing a significant loss and every instinct said to exit rather than wait for the stop to fire. The Turtles who succeeded found a way to follow the rules consistently through these periods. The Turtles who failed found reasons to deviate from the rules at exactly the moments when deviating was most destructive.

Erle Keefer’s research finding that the combined S1/S2 system produced worst-case 80% drawdowns rather than the 50% Dennis had described is the quantitative context for why discipline through drawdowns is so difficult. An 80% drawdown requires a 400% gain to recover. The Turtle who exited the system during a 60% drawdown because they could not sustain the psychological pressure was not being irrational about the pain. They were responding rationally to genuine distress. But exiting the system at the worst point of the drawdown converted a recoverable position into a permanent loss.

The Turtles who became failed gurus followed a predictable pattern after their departure from the program. They had access to the rules but not to the track record that would validate them for outside investors. Their trading results during and after the program did not support the guru narrative. So they sold the story of the Turtle experiment rather than the trading results, often omitting the specifics of which Turtle they were and what their actual performance looked like. The books and courses that emerged from this pattern are less accurate than the original source material in every measurable dimension.

What Separated the Winning Turtles from the Failing Ones

The Turtle experiment set out to answer a single question: can trading be taught? Richard Dennis believed it could. His partner William Eckhardt believed it could not. The results of the experiment confirmed Dennis’s thesis. The Turtles who followed the rules produced exceptional returns. But the experiment also produced a second, less celebrated finding: not all Turtles followed the rules.

Every Turtle in the program received the same training, the same rules, the same capital, and the same markets. There was no informational edge available to some and not others. The rules covered entry signals, position sizing, exit criteria, and risk management. Two weeks of instruction was all it took to transfer the complete system.

What the two weeks could not transfer was the psychological capacity to follow the rules through their most difficult periods. Extended drawdowns, losing streaks, and flat periods when nothing seemed to work — these are the conditions that separate traders who succeed from those who do not. The Turtles who failed deviated from the rules at the moments when the rules were most important to follow. They exited positions before their stops fired, reduced size at the wrong times, or abandoned the system during drawdowns that the system was built to withstand.

The Turtles who went on to become failed gurus followed a recognizable pattern. They had the rules but not the track record. Their performance during and after the program did not support the credentials they marketed. So they sold the story of the Turtle experiment — often omitting their own results — and produced books and courses that are less complete and less accurate than the primary source material in every measurable respect.