He has addressed this numerous times. His statement was that he was Citi Bank's best trader in 2011, which is true. The dispute is an attempt to discredit him by suggesting that him not being the best trader in other years debunks his 2011 figure.

> His statement was that he was Citi Bank's best trader in 2011, which is true

Is it? Nothing in the FT articles indicates that, and they clearly state that 2 years prior a trader got a $100 million personal bonus (so on profits much higher than that). There can be good and bad years, but I seriously doubt $35 million would be the best worldwide, and all of his colleagues who agreed to speak seem to agree with that.

> I was the best f*king trader in the f*king world and I am the bloke that called it right every f*king year

He possibly had the highest p&l on his desk ($35mil) in 2011 - was not top in 2011 in the bank, and certainly not in the world. $35mil - rookie numbers in this game, and in a seat at Citibank, middling at best.

I don't really think that matters at all, it's just an old tenuous bragging point, he's just a guy with a tough looking face and maybe has an elementary understanding of economics that relies less on being accurate and more on the viewer agreeing with him about why everything feels broken. (not that everything isn't broken, or that those reasons aren't ever accurate, but it's just a classic grifter move to pull on the thread of truth till it unravels, like asmongold)

Crashcourse economics likely provides much more value to anyone really looking to learn.