|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
DT:
I love your simple view of life. Yes, I am sure
that the basics of EW (5 up, 3 down, etc.) can be defined (Dan's Fibonacci
pattern code is a good start). But reality sets in very quickly and
one has to consider non-ideal situations where subjective and complimentary
analyses are used. The simple part is the coding, the tough part is
dealing with the "infinite" number of situations in which non-EW factors are
taken into account in making judgments about the final EW count. And then,
of course, there is the small complication that there are at least three schools
of EW analysis and they all produce different counts except for the simplest
situations. Why do you think that some of the programs give the user the
option to insert their own count? Oh, and by the way, why do you think
that the commercial programs often produce different counts in less than ideal
situations?
You say "<FONT
size=2>code may reproduce exactly what you do manually" and that
"subjective EW counting may be coded."
You obviously have not looked
into EW and believe that it comes down to some easily definable rules
and that even subjective evaluation can be defined and thereby rendered
objective or "manual." Except for simple patterns, EW is often not a
manual, mechanical exercise in which subjectivity morphs into objectivity,
although that is the thrust of Neely's work but I doubt that he thinks he
has reached that goal. Consider the problem that you encountered of coding
a simple H&S pattern and the fact that some users agreed with the output and
others did not. Multiply that situation by 10 ^ 20 and you will be
in the EW world. We are not yet dealing with artificial
intelligence.
As for the commercial programs, if
they produce different counts, or
counts that change as new data is obtained, which one is right? IMO,
the one that produces the same count as the user which in turn requires that the
user be expert in the subject. EW programs should, I believe, used as
an aid and not a replacement, although to be sure many take a
leap of faith and assume that they can use them in "cruise
control."
However, far be it from me to discourage
you. You are a good AFL programming technician, but if you are interested
in attempting to program this type of analysis I suggest that you first become
expert in the subject, including the various routes taken by the commercial
programs, before embarking on this lifelong quest. This is the reason, I
suspect, that many use EW only as background (e.g., is the market in an
impulsive or corrective mode) in conjunction with other analyses.
This is a relatively trivial use of EW that
is quite different from those that investigate every nuance and/or use it for
trading signals.
Keep us updated on your progress and good
luck.
Bill
-- Original Message -----
<BLOCKQUOTE
>
<DIV
>From:
DIMITRIS
TSOKAKIS
To: <A title=amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
href="">amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Thursday, June 17, 2004 3:22
AM
Subject: [amibroker] Re: Identifying
Elliott Waves using AFL
Bill, come on !!If you describe what you do manually, then
it may be coded in AFL. Useful or not is another topic, but it is not a
reason not to code it.A code may reproduce exactly what you do manually
and you may equally trust it.Any subjective EW counting may be coded
in AFL, especially if there are other softwares in the market doing the
job. What do these softwares have behind the curtain ? Nothing but a
"language" by far worse compared to AFL. And, in last analysis, these
"specific" softwares could not even dream the rest AFL
applications.Dimitris Tsokakis--- In <A
href="">amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,
"wavemechanic" <wd78@x...> wrote:>
> ----- Original Message ----- > From:
buzzmr > To: <A
href="">amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Sent: Wednesday, June 16, 2004 10:35
PM> Subject: [amibroker] Identifying Elliott Waves using
AFL> > > Has anyone here attempted to use
AmiBroker's AFL code to identify and > mark Elliott
Wave 'legs' on a chart? I would think this is rather
> involved, but any feedback and/or suggested coding would
be > appreciated. Thanks!!>
> Not only very involved, but since EW counts are often
quite subjective I doubt that you would trust the code to duplicate what
you do manually. There are several programs that do provide
counts. You might try them on a trial basis to see if any of them
provide a count under a variety of conditions and markets that you are
happy with. I never reached a satisfactory comfort level with those
programs and doubt that anyone starting from scratch will exceed their
performance.> > Buzz> > >
> > Check AmiBroker web page at:>
http://www.amibroker.com/>
> Check group FAQ at: <A
href="">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amibroker/files/groupfaq.html
> Yahoo! Groups
Links------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
--------------------~--> Make a clean sweep of pop-up ads. Yahoo!
Companion Toolbar.Now with Pop-Up Blocker. Get it for free!<A
href="">http://us.click.yahoo.com/L5YrjA/eSIIAA/yQLSAA/GHeqlB/TM--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
Check AmiBroker web page at:<A
href="">http://www.amibroker.com/Check
group FAQ at: <A
href="">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amibroker/files/groupfaq.html
Yahoo! Groups Links<*> To visit your group on the web, go
to: <A
href="">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amibroker/<*>
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
<A
href="">amibroker-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<*>
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: <A
href="">http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Check AmiBroker web page at:
http://www.amibroker.com/
Check group FAQ at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amibroker/files/groupfaq.html
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
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 the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
|