1. I cannot get even a remote sense for the nature of his risk exposure from looking at his daily returns.
2. ok.
3. The point here is that a systematic bias in his algorithm will expose his trading strategy to the good graces of market fortune (luck) regardless of whether he trades a million, billion or once a day. The source of the bias is irrelevant.
4. did not see where he said that but that very much confirms 'timing' / which in this case I interpret as luck as being at least a contributing factor.
2. Author has stated elsewhere than he began with $10k in seed capital.
3. The "bullish" market you cite increased only about %70 in that timeframe while the author's returns were multiples of that number.
4. Author walked away from a _previously successful_ strategy that no longer produced profits. His montlhy returns went to nearly zero so he stopped.
Edited to fix numbers.