|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Steve,
Is that forum still supposed to be active? I see something called
realtraders-2 on yahoo groups, but it's empty.
BTW, if anyone has recommendations for good trading/system-
development related groups to monitor, I'd love to know about 'em.
Thanks.
Jitu
--- In amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "CedarCreekTrading" <kernish@xxxx>
wrote:
> Jitu,
>
> About four years ago, the realtraders yahoo forum had a great
thread on Larry Williams. Realtraders is still around and worth
monitoring. I don't know how they archive their messages, but it
might be worth trying to find it. Lot's of traders had their
own "Larry" stories. The thread was quite humurous. Larry Williams
sells seminars, books, systems, and tutoring? People like John
Henry, Paul Tudor Jones, Richard Dennis, and many others, have traded
billions. Does anyone believe that Williams is a better trader than
any of these CTA's? I hope not. I'm sure Larry has helped someone,
somewhere, ... at least I hope so. Calling Larry Williams one of the
most knowlegeable trader of modern times is like saying Pamela
Anderson is the greatest actress of the last fifty years.
>
> Take care,
>
> Steve
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: jtelang
> To: amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Sent: Sunday, October 19, 2003 8:13 PM
> Subject: Objective functions (was RE: [amibroker] Re:
Optimization -- again)
>
>
> Hi Pal,
>
> Couple of questions re. Larry if you don't mind...
>
> 1. Have you ever been taught by him, via books or seminars?
> 2. If yes, have you made significant profits from the things he
> taught?
>
> I've certainly read/heard about him, but at the same time, have
never
> heard affirmative answers to both of these questions on other
> discussion forums on the net. Its entirely possible that people
> who've actually made money are not bothering to spell it out, but
I'm
> curious to know what the source of your belief in him as one of
the
> greatest traders is (other than his trading competition results
and
> the million dollar challenge, etc.)
>
> BTW, I have no bias about him either way. I've never interacted
with
> him nor been significantly influenced by his teachings so far,
and so
> have no opinion either way.
>
> Jitu
>
> --- In amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "palsanand" <palsanand@xxxx>
wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Many recent contributions suggest using discipline, commitment,
> > trading skills, etc., rather than 100% mechanical systems. I
think
> > this will cause more losers than winners.
> >
> > The reason computer trading systems exist is to capture good
ideas
> > and determine the best way to apply them. Basically, any idea
one
> > uses can be automated and tested. Various filters and stops can
> often
> > improve a system's 10-yr performance even after it's released.
> > Otherwise, one may lose their skill or luck in selecting trades.
> >
> > In Jack Schwager books (The Market Wizards and the The New
Market
> > Wizards), the author writes about Ed Seykota, who multiplied
his
> > clients accounts by 2500 times (250,000%) in about 10 years.
Then
> > there's Michael Marcus, who parlayed a $30,000 initial stake
into
> $80
> > Million. Another famous trader not included in Jack Schwager's
> books
> > is Larry Williams, who won a national trading competition in
1987
> by
> > multiplying $10,000 into over $1,000,000 in 1 year. Each of
these
> > traders says they use mechanical systems, some almost
exclusively.
> >
> > Most traders are very reluctant to reveal real-time trading
income
> > particulars including myself for obvious reasons...
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Pal
> > --- In amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "Fred" <fctonetti@xxxx> wrote:
> > > LOL ... Okay, if you say so ... Let me know when any of you
guys
> > who
> > > believe this START trading mechanical systems with REAL
money,
> I'll
> > > be very interested in your real time results.
> > >
> > > --- In amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "Jayson" <jcasavant@xxxx>
wrote:
> > > > Fred,
> > > > I think market behavior does change because the market
itself
> has
> > > changed.
> > > > 10 years ago your broker told you "Buy GE, put it under the
> > > mattress, you
> > > > will make money". If you took his advice and bought it on
> Monday
> > > only to
> > > > watch it fall all week then called him up he would tell
you "We
> > are
> > > in this
> > > > for the long haul, relax" ...... and you probably did,
> especially
> > > since your
> > > > trade probably cost you over $100 round trip. 10 years ago
a
> one
> > > year or 6
> > > > month hold was considered "Short Term" today that is no
longer
> > the
> > > case.
> > > > With online brokerage accounts you can now buy and sell
that
> same
> > > chunk of
> > > > stock for $10 per side. Your broker isn't selling the stock
de
> > > jour, instead
> > > > you are picking it your self. You have access to hundreds
of
> > > websites,
> > > > dozens of data providers and have computer power on your
desk
> > that
> > > could
> > > > have launched a rocket a half a generation ago. And more
> > > importantly so do
> > > > millions of other "Small investors". Day traders didn't
even
> > exist.
> > > This
> > > > isn't your fathers market, IMO to back test data from 10
or 20
> > > years ago
> > > > and think that optimizing on that data to trade today holds
> > little
> > > value.
> > > > The markets turn on a dime and there is a whole new breed
of
> more
> > > nimble
> > > > traders taking part in the action. The dynamics and
psychology
> of
> > > the market
> > > > is completely different. It is no longer ruled by the few.
> Watch
> > the
> > > > buy/sells go through and you see trade after trade of 100-
200
> or
> > > 500 shares.
> > > > This is not Dean Whiter placing trades but Joe and Jill six
> pack.
> > 5
> > > years
> > > > ago I used to always wait until the first have hour of
trading
> > had
> > > passed
> > > > before placing a trade to avoid the built up demand already
in
> > the
> > > pipe. Now
> > > > if I wait more than 10 minutes the train is out of the
station.
> > > Perhaps it
> > > > is just a forest/trees scenario but I think there are
> fundamental
> > > > differences in the way the markets react today versus the
> recent
> > > past......
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Jayson
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Fred [mailto:fctonetti@x...]
> > > > Sent: Sunday, October 19, 2003 5:38 PM
> > > > To: amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > Subject: Objective functions (was RE: [amibroker] Re:
> > Optimization -
> > > - again)
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > There are a lot of questions and provacative statements in
your
> > > post,
> > > > only one of which from my perspective needs an
answer/response.
> > > >
> > > > Market behavior will continually change after that ...
> > > >
> > > > Change ? from what ? into what ? I guess this is the part I
> don't
> > > > follow. To me there is nothing new in market behavior now
that
> > > > didn't exist last month, last year, last decade, last
century,
> but
> > > > clearly those that take a short sighted view of history and
the
> > > > market action that made up that history will clearly never
see
> it.
> > > > It's a forest and trees thing ...
> > > >
> > > > --- In amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "Dave Merrill"
<dmerrill@xxxx>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > I'm not trying to be argumentative, honest (:-)... I'm
more
> > than a
> > > > little
> > > > > sick of saying the same thing over and over, but I j u s
t
> d
> > o
> > > > n ' t g
> > > > > e t i t .
> > > > >
> > > > > ------------------------------
> > > > >
> > > > > I fail to see the huge difference in principle between
equity
> > > > feedback and
> > > > > backtesting.
> > > > >
> > > > > let's start by assuming that backtesting performance of a
> system
> > > > and its
> > > > > parameters over some period of past data tells you
something
> > about
> > > > its
> > > > > future performance. it's not a perfect predictor, but
it's
> the
> > > best
> > > > evidence
> > > > > we have. does this seem like a reasonable starting point?
what
> > > > alternative
> > > > > is there?
> > > > >
> > > > > if that's true, why is it better to do it only once? what
> > > > justification is
> > > > > there for picking one examination period over another?
clearly
> > > > market
> > > > > behavior will change continually after that. don't we
need a
> > way
> > > of
> > > > working
> > > > > that looks at what's been happening and evolves our
response?
> > > > >
> > > > > sounds like we examine performance up to some point and
> adjust,
> > > > trade with
> > > > > the best-choice system and parameters for a while, then
> examine
> > > and
> > > > adjust
> > > > > again later. make sense? what alternative is there?
> > > > >
> > > > > so then, how often do we re-examine performance history?
to
> put
> > it
> > > > > differently, how long do we ignore any changes in market
> > dynamics
> > > > that may
> > > > > or may not have occurred? why would intermittently
refusing
> to
> > > look
> > > > and
> > > > > respond improve system performance or reliability?
> > > > >
> > > > > if that needs to be done, why not have the system itself
do
> it,
> > as
> > > > part of
> > > > > its inherent operation? why is it better for us as an
outside
> > > agent
> > > > to
> > > > > periodically run some separate tests, reach into the
> internals
> > of
> > > > the
> > > > > system, and change stuff?
> > > > >
> > > > > or should we just continue with the system and parameters
we
> > > choose
> > > > at the
> > > > > beginning? are they somehow more valid than what we'd
choose
> > > later,
> > > > using
> > > > > the same backtesting methods, but on a different date
range
> of
> > > data?
> > > > >
> > > > > ------------------------------
> > > > >
> > > > > I realize that even if it seems to make sense logically,
this
> > all
> > > a
> > > > complete
> > > > > crock if no systems put together like this even backtest
well,
> > > > never mind
> > > > > forward testing.
> > > > >
> > > > > but every time I think about abandoning this line of
> research,
> > it
> > > > seems like
> > > > > the first thing I'd want to do with a new system would be
> (let
> > me
> > > > guess),
> > > > > test and possibly adjust it using data up to some date,
then
> run
> > > > with it for
> > > > > a while after that and see if equity growth is good. if
it
> is,
> > I'd
> > > > want to
> > > > > lather, rinse and repeat with other in and out of sample
> data,
> > to
> > > > make sure
> > > > > that wasn't coincidence.
> > > > >
> > > > > sounds way too familiar to be a completely different
animal.
> > > > >
> > > > > dave
> > > > > From: Fred [mailto:fctonetti@x...]
> > > > >
> > > > > That IS what I was trying to say. I suspect because
equity
> > feed
> > > > back
> > > > > is like looking in a rear view mirror, great for
letting us
> > know
> > > > > where we were and how we could have adjusted the past
to
> make
> > it
> > > > > better, but that's about it.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> > > > ADVERTISEMENT
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Send BUG REPORTS to bugs@xxxx
> > > > Send SUGGESTIONS to suggest@xxxx
> > > > -----------------------------------------
> > > > Post AmiQuote-related messages ONLY to:
amiquote@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > (Web page: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amiquote/messages/)
> > > > --------------------------------------------
> > > > Check group FAQ at:
> > > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amibroker/files/groupfaq.html
> > > >
> > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
> > Service.
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> ADVERTISEMENT
>
>
>
>
> Send BUG REPORTS to bugs@xxxx
> Send SUGGESTIONS to suggest@xxxx
> -----------------------------------------
> Post AmiQuote-related messages ONLY to: amiquote@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> (Web page: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amiquote/messages/)
> --------------------------------------------
> Check group FAQ at:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amibroker/files/groupfaq.html
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
Service.
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Buy Ink Cartridges or Refill Kits for your HP, Epson, Canon or Lexmark
Printer at MyInks.com. Free s/h on orders $50 or more to the US & Canada.
http://www.c1tracking.com/l.asp?cid=5511
http://us.click.yahoo.com/mOAaAA/3exGAA/qnsNAA/GHeqlB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->
Send BUG REPORTS to bugs@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Send SUGGESTIONS to suggest@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
-----------------------------------------
Post AmiQuote-related messages ONLY to: amiquote@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
(Web page: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amiquote/messages/)
--------------------------------------------
Check group FAQ at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amibroker/files/groupfaq.html
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|