|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Hi all,
What a great idea TJ..:))
I would love to hear how some of the more
experience T/A traders back test there theories.
What time spans do the use eg bull cycles
verse bear cycles
What results would they deem acceptable
eg.
What % win/lose.
How should it compare to say longer term
holdings.
How do they decide that time has expired
that particular indicator
or method .
I could write a whole list of items but you get the
picture ?
As most of you would know in relatively new to tech
analysis
switching from broker fundamental
recommendations ( he told me what to buy and I said yes or no ).
After becoming dissatisfied with the results I
discovered T/A,
I can remember at the time think wow this looks
easy buy a expensive program (s) and it will tell me when to trade
:).
Well stop LOL you lot,
as I soon found out that wasn't the case after
playing with ms for a while I found it very user unfriendly ...
It wasn't my desire to learn T/A I just wanted a
better more independent way to trade.
Then I stumbled across AB whilst it didn't
teach me T/A, it addressed the short falls that annoyed me in MS and
A developer who listened to users concernsand
idea's fuelled my desire to learn more about T/A
In that learning process I bounce idea's and
thoughts off the group hoping some of the more experienced users will set me
straight or put me on the right path, it is unreasonable to expect TJ to answer
every single email/ post and continue to develop AB at the current pace
.
As AB doesn't have 10,000 users and a staff of
100's it requires users to help develop it and its member base ..
This is also why I post lots of questions and
requests re sharing code etc
it not only helps me learn but others as well
..
Hmm rambling again
so lets cut to the chase ..
I see AB as an excellent program and worthy of user
support
The list has grown considerably as of late I
suspect there are many experienced users sitting in the
wings.
wave , server and other please take TJ request
for help re newsletters as a complement to your skills and
add to the group (not saying that you haven't already) .
TJ I hope I'm not out of line here if i amplease
let me know ?
Regards David
<FONT face=Arial
size=2>
<BLOCKQUOTE
>
----- Original Message -----
<DIV
>From:
Tomasz Janeczko
To: <A title=amibroker@xxxxxxxxxx
href="">amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Saturday, May 26, 2001 3:14
AM
Subject: Re: [amibroker] Vertical
Lines
Hi Peter (a.k.a server not recognized) and Bill
(a.k.a wavemechanic)
I just watch your discussion and wonderif you
could (and willing to) write something
for the newsletter. I mean to put your time and
energy into writing
something that all AmiBroker users can benefit
from.
Maybe an AFL formula that shows how to
apply your trading experience
in AmiBroker environment?
What do you think?
Best regards,Tomasz Janeczko===============AmiBroker - the
comprehensive share manager.<A
href="">http://www.amibroker.com
<BLOCKQUOTE
>
----- Original Message -----
<DIV
>From:
wavemechanic
To: <A
title=amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
href="">amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2001 3:49
PM
Subject: Re: [amibroker] Vertical
Lines
Ok Server, you sucked me, but not to respond to
your unsubstantiated claims about Gann that you continue to try to wiggle
out of.
<BLOCKQUOTE
>
----- Original Message -----
<DIV
>From:
<A title=winchp@xxxx
href="">server not recognized
To: <A
title=amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
href="">amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2001 9:06
AM
Subject: Re: [amibroker] Vertical
Lines
If its all the same to you I'll have the last word.
You've obviously decided and your mind is made up
and Gann is for you. Fine. So don't pretend all I have to do isshow
a table of result comparisons. We both know that even if I were
inclined I'd have to run every indicator known to man in every
conceiveable scenario with Gann finishing last to convince you. Its
disengenious of you to suggest all I'd have to do in one apparently
innoccous sentence. If I showed only one occassion where anything
was better than Gann it wouldn't mean anything. To develop the
statitiscs to demonstrate that Gann's inferiority was statistically
significant we both know is a mountain of work.
OTOH as you mention candlesticks, Japanese candlesticks
HAVE been assessed and the markets HAVE changed and the classical reponses
HAVE changed. It doesn't invalidate candlesticks, just changes how
you have to work with them. This is a lot easier to prove. Amibroker
can show it now if any care to look. In fact fading the classic indicators
is more likely just as the MACD(26,12) artifact is used by professional
traders to screw the little guys who never change the defaults in
Metastock.
The square property you try and ascribe to normal
distribution of prices is incorrect, prices are probably log normal.
They also have long memory (hurst et al). So its at best an
approximation - which is OK so long as its borne in mind while using
it.
The Black-Scholes model of
option pricing is based on a normal (random walk) distribution of
price movements. Random walk (Brownian motion) models result
in an expected price excursion that varies with the square root
of time. Over time, stock price movement have been shown to randomly
distributed, so the fact that the square root factor pops up in both
theory and practice is not surprising. So to directly address your
comment, prices are probably not log normal distributed. I havenot
read the MIT studies for sometime, but I believe that was their conclusion
also.
To completely ignore that since 1950 a HUGE amount of
time (read $) has been spent on time series analysis, and just about
anything else that walks, to make trading systems that work. Normal
folk manage by rotating through indicators/oscillators and time constants
slowly with time as tried and true lose their effectiveness. Most
have a select group for primary work and maintain a stable of those in
waiting that could work or show promise, rather than seek a Holy Grail
indicator. Since Gann died what developments have there been?
Connie notwithstanding. Mocking my comments about age is not
arguement. You are suggesting that in 2050 Gann as-is will be used,
2150 etc. The fact Connie spent a whole chapter trying to condense
the ramblings of Gann, and she's spent a career on it, from which youpick
two simple ideas, should be warning enough that traders shouldn't waste
time with Gann looking for the hidden secret. A secret powerful
enough to need to be coded and hidden away. The secret isn't
there. You've probably extracted about as much as is worth using - a
technique and MM.
Enough for now. I hope this discussion has
provoked some thought from others at least. While not about
Amibroker, it is about trading, and some of the power of Amibroker can be
used to check some of the flakier ideas out fast without wasting
time.
In the meantime I'm sure if something you deign is earth
moving happens, worth discussing and of great importance you'll
tell us.
P
<BLOCKQUOTE
>
----- Original Message -----
<DIV
>From:
<A title=wd78@xxxx
href="">wavemechanic
To: <A
title=amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
href="">amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2001 11:44
AM
Subject: Re: [amibroker] Vertical
Lines
<BLOCKQUOTE
>
From: <A
title=winchp@xxxx
href="">server not recognized
<BLOCKQUOTE
>
<BLOCKQUOTE
>
To: <A
title=amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
href="">amibroker@xxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2001
7:49 AM
Subject: Re: [amibroker]
Vertical Lines
This is not the place to go into these
things. As a generality any horse can make it around the
track. Some are better than others. The fact that
almost any method scrutinised to an inch of its life coupled with
money management speaks volumes for money management.
By money management I mean simply GET OUT when it
doesn't go you way from the start. I'm my own worst adherent
of this one. Why is it so important to be able to get
a time and price from a single high or low? Would anybody
seriously invest 5% of their wealth on a single data point?
So what's the point?
As you note below, mutiple
inputs are important, although you incorrectly assume that I use
only Gann. Gann stuff is one approach that I use.
Fibonacci is another, Momentum is another. Etc.
So for me Gann is just one of many tools, and like Fibonacci is
used as a heads up indicator. I do not invest on the basis
of any single indicator. And yes, money management is
important, but I like to start with the best indicator base that I
can find.
<FONT color=#0000ff
size=2>
WE
AGREE.
I've had a go at Gann and the problem
is for me that its not IMNSHO even as useful as my favourite
P&F. Not only does it not have timing but it doesn't
give any sense of "storing of energy". I've thought that a
3D square where time spent at a price accumulated vertically might
be useful. But my biggest problem is that it doesn't seem
grounded in anything substantial. Even Fibbonacci
seems to be reflected or grounded in some natural mathematical
order. At best if Gann provides a set of definite rulesthat
are adhered to maybe that's its strength or best point.
You clearly do not fully
understand Gann when you say it does not have timing. Please
refer back to the Gold chart. But your biggest problem
is mixing up correlation with cause. There is nothing you or
I use that has a known cause. Correlation? Yes, but
not cause. As one learns in Logic 101, establishing a cause
requires a theory that accounts for observations better than
alternative theories. As a result, everything we do is in
the "voodoo" category since there are no valid theories (not
correlations) for MACD, RSI, Gann, Fibonacci,
etc.
<FONT color=#800000
size=2>
WHO MENTIONED CAUSE?
I presume that "grounded
in anything substantial" is a cause, certainly not a
correlation.
I've read almost "Truth of the Stock Tape" &
"Wall Street Stock Selector" by Gann. My conclusion wasthat
the markets in his day were different and he applied a great deal
of unknown but appreciable sub-conscious pattern recognition and
judgement to his work - at least I think so. Interpretation
still has plenty of scope. Gold may well have fit within
$0.50 but I'm also sure that someone's RSI, or MACD or whatever
had settings that hit it too.
I have read
very few of the original works of any indicator/system developer,
including Gann, and just sponge off of the digested output ofthe
TA writers, as most do. But you are exactly right aboutthe
value of other methodologies. That is why no tool should be
used alone, including RSI, MACD, Gann, Fibonacci, etc. Very
few use only one thing, but look for verification from many.
In my experience, Gann is one that is useful in this regard, and
so far all you have said that is that you do not
believe. I have shown you evidence that it does work.
Always? No, but nothing does. I have not seen
anything presented by you that indicates that Gann has a
poorer win/lose ratio than any other indicator. Do you have
such evidence?
<FONT color=#800000
size=2>
I CAN SENSE THAT NOTHING
SHORT OF A TREATISE WILL WORK FOR YOU. THEN I FACE THE
CHALLENGE PROCESS. AND THEN OF COURSE ITS STILL ONLY A THEORY
SINCE THERE IS NO PROOF.
<FONT color=#0000ff
size=2>
Since you have knocked
Gann so hard, I have no doubt that you have statistically valid
data to justify such a position. Please share that so that
we can all benefit. I certainly do not expect a
treatise. How about graphical or tabular results
demonstrating the futility of using the Square of 9 or Gannsect
versus other methodologies? If this cannot be done,
then there is no objective basis for rejecting these
approaches.
I spent a bit of time in misc.invest.technical
and misc.invest.futures newsgroups and of those whose opinions and
experience I came to believe was based on solid years of
experience, they didn't have much kind to say about Gann
compared to other approaches. I suggest a vist to <A
href="">www.deja.com and and see Hershey
for example.
<FONT color=#800000
size=2>
Most, like yourself, do
not really understand how to properly use Gann. As a result,
their opinions are not particularly important. Like you
I used to spend time on the "misc" boards, but did not
find them worth the effort of shifting through the
"junk." There are much better
places.
<FONT color=#800000
size=2>
THIS TRUE ESPECIALLY
LATELY OVER THE LAST 6-8 NTHS ESPECIALLY. HOWEVER SEVERAL
YEARS AGO THE GROUPS I MENTIONED WERE ESPECIALLY ACTIVE AND ABOUT
10-15 POSTERS WERE EXTREMELY EXPERIENCED IN TIME, MARKETS AND
TECHNIQUES. THESE ARE PEOPLE WHO KNOW ABOUT ARCH AND GARCH
AND EVEN MORE ADVANCED TIME SERIES ANALYSIS TECHNIQUES. SOME
DEVELOPED TRADING SYSTEMS FOR MEGA MILLION FUNDS. AS A RETORICAL
SUGGESTION - WOULD YOU BE HAPPY WITH YOUR SUPERANNUATION FUND
USING GANN TECHNIQUES?
<FONT color=#0000ff
size=2>
<FONT
color=#008080>What do you mean by Gann techniques? I use
only two - Gann Square of 9 and Gannsect. Yes I would be
happy using them with my IRA, as well as with any of my
trading. In fact, I do. I do not use different
methodologies for different types of accounts. Why would
I? The trading vehicles differ, but not the
methodologies. I suppose that one
could envision using different techniques for short- and long-term
trading, but that would reflect use of systems that are
specifically aimed at certain time frames, which mine are
not.
I suggest that multiple tools operating in
different time frames, an awareness of the inherent lags or
anticipatory nature of the tool/indicator/oscillator/chicken
entrails coupled with MM will do the trick more than
GANN.
Well as noted above, we
agree about multiple tools and time frames. But MM?
You obviously are not aware that MM is based on Gann's Squareof
9. Time for a little homework. Once again, please
provide evidence for your statements about the value of one
methodology over another. You speak with such certaintythat
I am sure you must have a valid statistical basis for your
statements. Please share them with us, or by direct
e-mail, if you do not want to post. Absent this enuf
ced.
<FONT color=#800000
size=2>
OK. READ P.KAUFMANN
PP366 -371 FOR A DESCRIPTION. NOTHING STARTLING OR DEROGATORY
ABOUT WHAT HE SAYS. THE LAST FEW SENTENCES ARE 'ON MANYOF
GANNS CHARTS THERE IS NOTATION SHOWING PLANETARY
MOVEMENT...'. KAUFMANNS NEXT TOPIC IS FINANCIAL
ASTROLOGY. I'M NOT USING GUILT BY ASSOCIATION, BUT REFERING
ABOVE WOULD YOU BE HAPPY IF YOUR SUPERANNUATION FUNDS INVESTMENT
DECISIONS WERE RULED BY ELEMENTS OF ASTROLOGY. IF THEY MADE
MONEY NO-ONE WOULD COMPLAIN BUT CAN YOU IMAGINE THE OUTCRY IFTHEY
LOST MONEY AND FINANCIAL ASTROLOGY WAS INCLUDED. AGAIN NOT
PROOF OF ANYTHING. IF THE FEATURE OF GANN IS DESCRIBED AS AN
ATTEMPT TO GET CYCLICAL BEHAVIOUR AND AS KAUFMANN DESCRIBES GANN'S
APPROACH AS"CONSERVE YOUR CAPITAL AND WAIT FOR THE RIGHT TIME' I
STAND BY MY ASSERTION THAN 'GANN' IS MORE ABOUT MM THAN HIS
TECHNIQUE. IF YOU WATCH A RACEHORSE AND NO OTHER RACEHORSE
THEN EVENTUALLY YOU'LL SEE IT IN A RACE THAT IT CAN RUN A PLACE
AND YOU'LL PUT A BET ON AT THAT TIME.
<FONT color=#0000ff
size=2>
Gann,
as you note, believed in astrology. But the point you
miss is that his Square of 9 has nothing to do with
astrology. The fact that he made such astrological notations
on his charts has nothing to do with the mathematical
validity of squaring price and time, or whether or not
he believed that there was an astrological basis for the
charts. One does not have to know the slightest bit about
astrology, and I don't, in order to use the techniques. The
Square of 9 chart is nothing but a square root table, which
by the way, if you are concerned about cause, one can argue
is assocated with prices that are normally distributed and that
should be related by a square relationship. To understand
that astrology is not involved you will have to understand the
construction of the Square of 9. As far as your
rejectioin of the Square of 9 (and Gannsect) is concerned you
are offbase when you reject them on astrological grounds.
And to be sure, Gann undoubtedly used money management, as any
trader does with any system. However, going back to
correlation and cause, I personally have no problem using
astrological stuff if a valid correlation can be
demonstrated. Actually, I have seen one on another board
posted by a respected trader that does give me pause whenever
there is a new and full moon.
<FONT color=#0000ff
size=2>
MURPHY SAYS'GANN LINES
(REFERRING TO FAN LINES)ARE SOMEWHAT CONTROVERSIAL. EVEN IF ONE OF
THEM WORKS YOU CAN'T BE SURE IN ADVANCE WHICH ONE IT WILL BE.SOME
CHARTISTS QUESTION THE VALIDITY OF DRAWING GEOMETRIC TRENDLINES AT
ALL.' AND THAT IS ALL HE HAS TO SAY ABOUT GANN IN 500 PAGES.
DRAW YOUR OWN CONCLUSIONS.
<FONT color=#0000ff
size=2>
No conclusion to be
drawn. As with Fibonacci fan lines, etc. they sometimeswork
and sometimes they don't. I personally do not use them,but
as you know many traders use them all the time, presumably
successfully. My conclusion about the trendline statement is
that based on the experience of the vast majority of traders it is
nonsense.
<FONT color=#0000ff
size=2>
SCHWAGER DOESN'T EVEN
MENTION GANN IN 700 PAGES. READ ELDER 'TRADING FOR A LIVING"
P23. REGARDING GANNS ALLEDGED $50M...WHY ALL THE SECRET
CODES, O/SEAS BANK ACCOUNTS, KEEPING MONEY FROM FAMILY ETC...YOU'D
BELIEVE A LAWYER? THAT SORT OF BEHAVIOUR SMACKS OF PARANOIA
OR AND GURUISM. IT SEEMS TO ME TO REFLECT ON THOSE
SELLING SYSTEMS AFTER HIS DEATH TO MAINTAIN GANN AS A SEMI MYSTIC
SO THEY CAN SELL A SYSTEM THAT THEY HAVE TO EXPLAIN BECAUSE IT WAS
ALL WRITTEN IN CODE.
'THE COMPLETE CRAP'
COMMENT RELATES TO USING AN APPROACH THAT IS 60 YEARS OLD, THAT
CONTAINS SOME ELEMENTS RECOGNISED AS IMPORTANT SUCH AS MM &
BEHAVIOUR AND WERE AHEAD OF HIS TIME. BUT SO WAS HENRY FORD
AND LOOK WHAT OTHERS HAVE DONE TO THE CONCEPTS
SINCE.
<FONT color=#0000ff
size=2>
Please try to move beyond
amateur psychology to providing solid evidence that Gann's Square
of 9 (or Gannsect) does not work. Absent your willingness or
ability to do so, you appear to be "beating the air" in
an attempt to muddy the waters and hide the fact that your
opinions are unsubstantiated. Basic Gann (Square of 9 and
Gannsect) is very simple and available in "decoded" form for any
who want to learn the techniques. These techniques, I should
mention, are "decoded," as I understand because some took thetime
to figure out what Gann was doing. I agree that the weakness
in using Gann is that it is 60 years old and has not changed since
then. That is a valid point, and as a result I will
throw out my Japanese candlestick books based on an essentially
unchanged approach that is 350 years old. If I live long
enough, I guess MACD, RSI, etc., etc., will be old enough to be
dumped. Probably should also throw out all the stuff about
Newton, calculus, chemistry, etc. Gads, even I have to
go! You are right, old is "crap." LOL.
<FONT color=#008080
size=2>
But the beauty is....its your money...anyone can
play ....nobody is right absolutely...
I STAND BY THIS AND WISH
YOU THE BEST. I'M NOT TRYING TO DISSUADE YOU BUT PUT A POINT
OF VIEW. I SUSPECT THAT USUALLY WHEN PEOPLE FOLLOW
PERSONALISED SYSTEMS (MEANING BASED ON PERSONALITIES) THEIR
ADOPTION BEGINS TO BORDER ON A RELIGIOUS BELIEF AND A REBEL
ATTITUDE THAT SEEKS TO BE CONTRARIAN FOR THE SAKE OF IT.
THIS COMMENT IS NOT DIRECTED AT YOU SINCE I DON'T KNOW YOU.
GOOD LUCK WITH GANN BUT I WISH TOMASZ DIDN'T PUT IT IN AMIBROKER
BECAUSE IT PERPETUATES A MYTH AND CONTINUES TO LEND CREDIBILITY
TO SOMETHING THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN INSTALLED IN THE HALL OF
FAME YEARS AGO, AND THE REST OF US HAVE MOVED ON. JUST MY OPINION
OF COURSE. YOU COULD ALSO SEE GARY SMITHS COMMENTS "HOWI
TRADE FOR A LIVING" ON P31 & 61. YOU MIGHT BE MORE
ALIGNED WITH HIS SUGGESTION OF PERCEPTUAL FILTERS. THISIS A
VIEW A LONG WAY FROM USING GANN TO TRADE
WITH.
<FONT color=#0000ff
size=2>
You might try knocking
Gann with successful traders that keep Gann in their
toolbox. For starters, I suggest you contact Connie
Brown and/or Bryce Gilmore and bounce your view of Gann off
them. I think you would agree that they qualify
as successful traders, and I am sure that they would confirm
(as they do in their books and on their websites) use ofGann
in conjunction with other stuff. Whether you contact these
traders or others, be prepared for your
unsubstantiated viewpoint to be rejected without
much fanfare. I know that my rejecting your viewpoint
is of little consequence, but I would hope that rejection by
acknowledged traders would give you pause. As for AmiBroker,
it is stronger because it incorporates some of these tools, and I
have suggested to Tomasz that more be done along these
lines. Hopefully that will come to
pass.
<FONT color=#008080
size=2>
<FONT
color=#800080>Finally, I do not intend to comment further on this
issue unless there is something of great importance to be
said. At this point, we are going in
circles, using up a lot of space, and devoting too much
valuable time to this issue. You or anyone else are
free to contact me offline at <A
href="">wd78@xxxx, if there is
something short of earthmoving importance to
discuss.
<FONT color=#800080
size=2><FONT color=#800080
size=2>
<FONT color=#800080
size=2>Cheers.
<FONT color=#0000ff
size=2> Your
use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the <A
href="">Yahoo! Terms of
Service. Your use of Yahoo! Groups
is subject to the Yahoo! Terms
of Service. Your use of Yahoo! Groups
is subject to the Yahoo! Terms
of Service. Your
use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the <A
href="">Yahoo! Terms of Service.
|