|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Bill,
> -----Original Message-----
> From: wavemechanic [mailto:wd78@x...]
> Sent: Thursday, June 17, 2004 12:00 PM
> To: AmiBroker, User
> Subject: Re: [amibroker] Re: Identifying Elliott Waves using AFL
>
>
>
> DT:
>
>
>
> I love your simple view of life.
Of course life is simple ! the explanation of life may be
complicated, but it is another[interesting] story
>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 "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.
I did not see ANY problem.
My H&S code includes a definition of H&S, or better, my definition
and the rest is the path to the final IB or AA result.
I never said I will write A "Universal H&S code" [if this creature
exists...]
This is the reason you often read "...by D. Tsokakis, dd/mm/yyyy"
I do not add this to write [again and again] my name !!
This is my H&S proposal for the specific period of time.
I never had any problem to expose myself and sign under my opinion.
Users who may agree will have a nice code to copy/paste/apply.
Users who disagree may built their own H&S code [AFL is a powerful
tool] or ask for some changes.
The honest side of the moon is that I post the same code I
use/predict/trade/make money.
My CL XXX predictions based on both StochD/MACD divergence were
correct the last 3 years. One could make some money or enjoy/use an
interesting perspective for his market, since oil peaks are important
for the whole market. If my div code is good or not, expressive or
not, universal or not is another, less important subject.
I am not a dreamer, the day all users will agree with my H&S point of
view will never come. Besides that, I hate this day, it would be
boring [and useless]
>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.
Thank you, but I will not step in, the EW is not attractive for me, I
prefer to think about GCP [the Global Conciousness Project].
If nothing else, GCP has an experimental basis to begin with.
>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
>
One more word : If you ever find the time, write an EW definition [or
your EW definition] and, perhaps, we shall AFL it.
I hope you understand the word definition, english is your language,
not mine.
Without your definition all the rest is dead-end criticism.
If there is no EW definition, then what are we talking about, AFL is
a language to implement definitions, not nebulous subjective opinions.
Dimitris Tsokakis
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
Yahoo! Domains - Claim yours for only $14.70
http://us.click.yahoo.com/Z1wmxD/DREIAA/yQLSAA/GHeqlB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
Check AmiBroker web page at:
http://www.amibroker.com/
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/
|