|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
--- In amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "quanttrader714"
<quanttrader714@xxxx> wrote:
> Actually, confusing randomness with zero expectancy is exactly what
I
> thought Herman was doing, thus my comment. BTW, the distribution is
> *not* subjective and it *does* exist. It's just constantly
changing.
It exists in the eyes of the beholder.
The distribution of probabilities is always subjective.
It depends of the degree of knowledge (of confidence) you have.
If you have some insider information you may form a completely
different opinion (distribution of probabilities) about what the
price of a stock may/will be.
If you know that something will happen for sure then your probability
for that event may be 1 and 0 for all the other possibilities while
for me the distribution may be uniform or other else. What is then the
*objective* distribution of probabilities for that event?
When you say that 'Van Tharp specifically says that a system must
have a positive expectancy to make money. In other words, an edge.
Nothing random about that.', it should be told that the expectancy is
calculated upon a distribution of probabilities of a random variable.
So it's not correct to conclude that there is 'Nothing random about
that.'
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
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amibroker/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
amibroker-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|