|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Thanks for clearing that up...
--- In amibroker@xxxx, "Steve Karnish" <kernish@xxxx> wrote:
> On 5/14/02, the StoRSI closed at 87.34 (triggering a possible short
sale).
> The 21 day SMA closed at 31.89 (on 5/14/02) and was below the
previous day's
> 21 day SMA which was 31.95. Since the "trend identifier" (the 21
day SMA)
> was still negative, a short sell signal was confirmed and the trade
was
> initiated. The position was covered ten trading days later and
since the 21
> period SMA was not positive...the system moved to
the "sidelines"...waiting
> for the next signal.
>
> I hope that clears it up. Never trust your eyeballs to distinguish
> fractional numbers on charts... they can be a little deceiving.
>
> Take care,
>
> Steve Karnish, CTA
> Cedar Creek Trading
> www.cedarcreektrading.com
> 1-877-668-1125
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: nurudinkaba <n.kaba@xxxx>
> To: <amibroker@xxxx>
> Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2002 8:29 AM
> Subject: [amibroker] Re: Optimal solutions of the past and future
profits
>
>
> > First let me say thank you for your contribution StochRSI and for
> > that matter the CMO5...
> >
> > On your attached QQQ chart, the signal in May 2002 doesn't look
like
> > its confirmed by the 21 sma filter...is this correct or is it just
> > the graphics...
> >
> > Thanks again.
> >
> > --- In amibroker@xxxx, "Steve Karnish" <kernish@xxxx> wrote:
> > > "I will not speak again for Stochastic RSI"
> > >
> > > Thank God. For those that are interested:
> > >
> > > Me and the boyz (and grrls) covered our short positions (QQQ) on
> > the opening yesterday. In the worst market in recent memory, the
> > system has now profited on ten out of the last eleven trades. The
> > single loser was -.75, with the winners summing 27.16. Profits
since
> > 11/1/01 have exceeded the underlying price of the issue. The
> > approach is traded by many, with real money. Nothing has been
> > changed or tweaked for years. Over the years, many forum members
> > have received this formula by "politlely" asking for it (see
formula
> > section of website). It continues to produce "out-of-sample" (and
> > more importantly, in real accounts).
> > >
> > > Again, the StoRSI is a tool to unlock profits in the QQQ. Used
> > with a simple 21 period SMA, it continues "ring the register".
It's
> > hard to believe that anyone would "lobby" against an approach that
> > continues to produce profits. If anyone decides to risk capital
on
> > this issue (or others), one must decide on an approach and then
> > actually implement it. I do not have a new approach every week
for
> > this market. This is the one and only approach I have ever posted
> > for this trading vehicle.
> > >
> > > I am convinced that there are hundreds and maybe thousands of
> > systems that will trade the Q's better. This is just one, simple
> > approach that has been "public" and that has not changed for
years.
> > I have nothing to hide and nothing to sell. Please take the
> > information and improve on it.
> > >
> > > Take care,
> > >
> > > Steve Karnish, CTA
> > > Cedar Creek Trading
> > > www.cedarcreektrading.com
> > > 1-877-668-1125
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: Dimitris Tsokakis
> > > To: amibroker@xxxx
> > > Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2002 5:34 AM
> > > Subject: [amibroker] Optimal solutions of the past and future
> > profits
> > >
> > >
> > > Last June 5, 2001, I posted to this list the Tushar Chande
> > Stochastic RSI and my Stochastic CCI.
> > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amibroker/message/2394
> > > I will not speak again for Stochastic RSI, we have seen a lot
of
> > details for this popular indicator, which
> > > presents now an optimal solution [8-13-87] for QQQ, running
at a
> > +250% for the last 30 months.
> > > Besides the difficult question of the selection of this [8-13-
87]
> > combination [although I read ...carefully
> > > the messages, I have not seen any kind of explanation,
serious or
> > humorous, by the user of this combination]
> > > I wrote that this +250% is not one of the best QQQ
performances.
> > > We have seen a lot of QQQ systems running between +500% and
+600%
> > or better.
> > > I understand that it is not fair to compare different design
> > approaches. It is very difficult for Stochastic RSI to
> > > be competitive to D-ratio or RSIt or MeanRSI TTM.
> > > So, let us compare the quite similar Stochastic RSI and
> > Stochastic CCI.
> > > Beginning from March 2000 till June 2001, there were two
almost
> > equal solutions for the respective
> > > StochCCI system, [I follow symmetric triggering just for the
> > comparison under equal terms, my personal opinion
> > > for symmetric triggering is analytically expressed in other
> > postings]running at +303% and +302%, with
> > > equal # of 10 trades/9 winners/1 loser, as you may see in the
> > StochCCI 1 gif .
> > > You could select one of them or both of them.
> > > Now, one year later, we may see the [7,13] at +405% and the
> > [6,15] at +1199%.[StoCCI2 gif]
> > > I do not believe that there were serious criteria on June
2001 to
> > select the [7,13] or the [6,15].
> > > CCI differentiation is almost invisible, if you change the
period
> > from 6 to 7.
> > > You surely need a magnifier to separate BuyLevel=13 from
> > BuyLevel=15 .
> > > If we forget these details, a +1199% may sounds great.
> > > It is up to you to decide if you prefer attractive
calculations
> > or positive trading techniques.
> > > Anyway, if you are interested in this invividualistic trading
> > style and if you prefer Stochastic oscillators, try
> > > Stochastic CCI among the others. It is not popular but it is a
> > bit smarter.
> > > Dimitris Tsokakis
> > >
> > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> > > ADVERTISEMENT
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
> > Service.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> >
> >
|