|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Steve,
I have observed many day traders. What you say is true. However,
there is an art to it that the traders themselves don't even
recognize. It has become second nature to them like riding a
unicycle when they are in the Zone.
It is a good idea to realize that a new person must develop that art
first or he will just as surely blow up his account.
Working with indicators does not mean that they have to be lagging
indicators. Leading indicators are also possible to create. After
all that is what you are doing in your mind. ;-)
Best regards,
Dennis
On Jan 3, 2008, at 5:37 PM, scourt2000 wrote:
>
> I offer up this kind of information to help give someone what they
> want. But, in this instance, I'd like mention what's far better than
> any of this CCI/RSI/MACD/Stochastic/blah-blah "stuff", adaptive or
> otherwise.
>
> This is what works since the dawn of trading (I'm speaking mainly to
> you e-mini futures traders out there who are getting too caught up in
> indicators and trying to massage them to infinity in an effort to
> reduce your loss percentage):
>
> Go to a price chart, NOT an indicator. Find support and resistance.
> Buy the stronger supports. Sell the stronger resistances. Scalp the
> weaker ones. Trade heavier with the trend. Manage the trades.
>
> Your research is your confirmation. The better your research, the
> better your real-time performance will be. If you need "momentum
> confirmation" to get into a trade, then please never tell me that
> you're getting in 1-2 bars "ahead of the world" because I'm 1-2 bars
> ahead of YOUR world and what I'm doing is leading price, not
> following it from an indicator derived from price.
>
> There's no follow-up to this on my part. I'm not engaging anyone in
> an argument over this. I have seen literally 100's fall by the
> wayside in the daytrading e-mini world, playing around with
> indicators. The ones I consistently see still in the game and
> trading well are the ones who pay attention primarily to support and
> resistance from a price chart, not from some indicator.
>
> There are exceptions to any general rule. But your likelihood of
> winding up in the blown-out account list is much higher by playing
> with indicators instead of simple, common support and resistance
> through multiple timeframes.
>
> --- In amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "scourt2000" <stevehite@xxx> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Bill,
>>
>> Sounds like you're interested in John Ehlers' work on adaptive
>> indicators that he explained in Chapter 22 of his book, "Rocket
>> Science for Traders". He took some common momentum indicators
>> (including the CCI) and coded them up to be adaptive in
> Tradestation
>> Easy Language.
>>
>> Also, you can find a couple of articles about this at
> tuckerreport.com
>>
>>
>> --- In amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "bilbo0211" <bilbod@> wrote:
>>>
>>> --- In amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "Howard B" <howardbandy@> wrote:
>>>> For this statement:
>>>> somevar = CCI(parm);
>>>> "somevar" will be an array with one element for every bar of the
>>> data array,
>>>> the value of that element the result of applying the CCI
> function
>> to the
>>>> "average" of that bar ((H+L+C)/3), for the lookback length
>> of "parm".
>>>>
>>>> What problem are you trying to solve?
>>>>
>>>
>>> I want parm to be an array.
>>>
>>> What I am doing is trying to 'tune' the CCI to the dominant cycle
> in
>>> the market.
>>>
>>> Let me give you a simplistic example using moving averages.
>>>
>>> If you are trading a trending market (longer period dominant
> cycle),
>>> you want a longer period moving average to filter out the small
>> (high
>>> frequency) corrections that occur.
>>>
>>> In a trading range market (shorter period dominant cycle), you
> want
>> a
>>> shorter period moving average that can react more quickly to the
>>> shorter term changes in direction.
>>>
>>> I started by using the fft to estimate the dominant cycle but I
> had
>> a
>>> lot of trouble coding something useful so I switched to Ehler's
>>> estimate (using Laguerre filter, it's in the afl library).
>>>
>>> As crude as that estimate is, it improves the performance of the
>>> indicators I tried it on. If I could get a more accurate measure
> of
>>> the dominant cycle, I am confident it would improve performance
>> even more.
>>>
>>> That's why I want the period of the CCI to vary.
>>>
>>> I also don't see any point to include the C of a bar for intraday
>>> charts. I use CCIa((H+L)/2,period).
>>>
>>> Bill
>>>
>>
>
>
>
>
> Please note that this group is for discussion between users only.
>
> To get support from AmiBroker please send an e-mail directly to
> SUPPORT {at} amibroker.com
>
> For NEW RELEASE ANNOUNCEMENTS and other news always check DEVLOG:
> http://www.amibroker.com/devlog/
>
> For other support material please check also:
> http://www.amibroker.com/support.html
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
Please note that this group is for discussion between users only.
To get support from AmiBroker please send an e-mail directly to
SUPPORT {at} amibroker.com
For NEW RELEASE ANNOUNCEMENTS and other news always check DEVLOG:
http://www.amibroker.com/devlog/
For other support material please check also:
http://www.amibroker.com/support.html
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amibroker/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amibroker/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:amibroker-digest@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
mailto:amibroker-fullfeatured@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<*> 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/
|