[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[amibroker] Re: 'Rule Based' versus 'Discretionary' trading...



PureBytes Links

Trading Reference Links

Correction.

g) some combination of B - f


--- In amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "brian_z111" <brian_z111@xxx> wrote:
>
> From the 2nd article:
> 
> "Paul Taglia sees high-probability Window set-ups that the rest of 
us 
> don't. I've seen him do this for nearly two years. He can't explain 
> it...he simply says that he's looked at thousands and thousands of 
> charts over his career and some charts simply look better to him 
than 
> others. We once asked him to keep a journal to see if we could 
> systematize what he saw. It was a useless exercise. He sees it but 
he 
> can't explain it."
> 
> 
> According to Occams Law the simplest explanation is usually the 
best.
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simplicity
> 
> Possible explanations, of Paul Taglia's discretionary style are:
> 
> a) He can 'see', or sense, the future in the charts,
> b) he has a set of rules that he learnt in the past (based on 
> experience) and they have become second nature - possibly he has 
> forgotten what they are or when he learnt them (or at least some of 
> them)
> c) he has a set of rules, and he knows that, but this is an 
excellent 
> posture to take if his game plan is never to reveal them to anyone
> d) he has a set of rules but has a playful nature OR likes to take 
> the mickey out of his associates OR has a superiority complex and 
> disdains the idiots who surround him
> e) he has an inferiority complex and needs the boost that comes 
from 
> the adulation of others - this is an excellent strategy to 
establish 
> mystique as a trader and achieve legendary status
> f) it is a great way to market ones employment value in a transient 
> workplace (its a resume that can't be questioned to any extent 
either)
> g) some combination of a-f
> h) he has a set of rules (some conscious, some sub-conscious) but 
he 
> can't be bothered explaining them (it is a form of energy 
> conservation - an alternavtive version of this is that he could be 
a 
> very focused trader and has eliminated the non-essentials, like 
> defining his style OR chatting about his style.
> 
> BTW irrationality is the common name for the shadow (I used the 
> symbolic name).
> 
> There is no irrationality in maths, programming etc which is 
probably 
> why I quite like programmers etc.
> 
> Trading myths are born out of, and perpetuated by irrationality.
> 
> brian_z
> 
> 
> 
> --- In amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "wavemechanic" <timesarrow@> 
> wrote:
> >
> > 
> 
http://www.tradingmarkets.com/.site/stocks/commentary/lcbattlep/082720
> 04-39801.cfm
> > 
> > 
> 
http://www.tradingmarkets.com/.site/swingtrading/commentary/lcbattlep/
> 09022004-39899.cfm
> >   ----- Original Message ----- 
> >   From: sidhartha70 
> >   To: amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> >   Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2008 10:52 AM
> >   Subject: [amibroker] Re: 'Rule Based' versus 'Discretionary' 
> trading...
> > 
> > 
> >   I think you're right Brian. We do all use rules of some sort.
> > 
> >   But I guess discretionary traders don't use 'hard and fast' 
rules 
> and
> >   can't always define the same set of rules by which they choose 
to
> >   define an entry or exit.
> > 
> >   For example, as we all know, something as simple as defining a 
> trend
> >   programatically can be more problematic as you might at first 
> think.
> >   However, a good trader can see very quickly what state the 
market 
> is
> >   in by looking at various time frame of chart.
> > 
> >   Likewise, divergences of various sorts can be easy to see with 
the
> >   naked eye but difficult to code in their entirety.
> > 
> >   Like driving a car, or a golf swing, you learn the 'rules' but 
> when
> >   you get really good you are no longer thinking rules... you've
> >   effectively let go of the rules and are just 'doing'...
> > 
> >   --- In amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "brian_z111" <brian_z111@> 
> wrote:
> >   >
> >   > Here is my definition:
> >   > 
> >   > We are all rule based traders.
> >   > 
> >   > Mechanical Traders are a specialist group who have programmed 
> >   > computers to autotrade their rules OR automatically announce 
> their 
> >   > rules via computer communications (audio, email, chart 
prompts, 
> >   > spoken text etc).
> >   > 
> >   > I am prepared to continue the discussion with any seers, 
> inituitives 
> >   > etc, who come forward, and adjust my definition to meet 
> anything new 
> >   > that comes out of that.
> >   > 
> >   > In advance I admit to the possibility of exceptions to the 
rule.
> >   > 
> >   > brian_z
> >   > 
> >   > 
> >   > --- In amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "brian_z111" <brian_z111@> 
> wrote:
> >   > >
> >   > > >Descretionary traders make decisions that are based on 
> personal 
> >   > > >knowledge and circumstances, perhaps using many factors 
> unknown to 
> >   > > >themselves. Like which journal they read the night before. 
> >   > > 
> >   > > This is the nub of the question for sure, and the point 
that 
> I am 
> >   > > investigating.
> >   > > 
> >   > > I suspect that when they (self-nominated DT's) think they 
are 
> >   > making 
> >   > > discretionary decisions they are in fact making rule based 
> >   > decisions.
> >   > > 
> >   > > That is why I asked for specific examples 
of 'discretionary' 
> >   > decision 
> >   > > making e.g. I haven't seen Bilbo's chart yet but I consider 
> it 
> >   > highly 
> >   > > unlikely that the decision about whether a trend is in 
place 
> is a 
> >   > > discretionary decision - I can define a trend in several 
> different 
> >   > > ways - all of them can readily be written as a rule (in 
words 
> or 
> >   > with 
> >   > > code) - I don't care if the definitions are 'correct' or 
not 
> as 
> >   > long as 
> >   > > the system that they are part of works i.e. my rules for a 
> trend 
> >   > depend 
> >   > > on the context.
> >   > > 
> >   > > As Dennis said, our rules might be difficult to program, 
> causing us 
> >   > not 
> >   > > to automate the trade, but mentally we are still running 
the 
> rules 
> >   > and 
> >   > > if we are honest with ourselves we do know what the rules 
are.
> >   > > 
> >   > > 
> >   > > >For a novice traders to try and mimic the techniques (of 
> >   > Discretionary 
> >   > > >Traders) without 
> >   > > >having similar backgrounds merits caution.
> >   > > 
> >   > > What I am suggesting is that, over time, the sub-conscious 
> mind 
> >   > will 
> >   > > automate what was intially habitual conscious behaviour, 
and 
> even 
> >   > make 
> >   > > some improvements on it, so that 'we' can skip the 
conscious 
> part 
> >   > for 
> >   > > some 'tasks' e.g. driving the car becomes second nature.
> >   > > 
> >   > > That won't happen for new traders, in a short time, so they 
> do need 
> >   > to 
> >   > > persevere, be patient and not try to mimic people who have 
> been 
> >   > around 
> >   > > for years.
> >   > > 
> >   > > IMO formal (written) rules based 
> trading/backtesting/optimization 
> >   > is 
> >   > > the best place to start - it grinds the basic lessons in 
very 
> well.
> >   > > 
> >   > > If anyone can look at a chart, and without recourse to any 
> rules, 
> >   > know 
> >   > > which way the price is going to move and trade 
successfully  
> (long 
> >   > > term) on that basis then that is something else altogether.
> >   > > 
> >   > > If it is at all possible to do that then it definitely 
can't 
> be 
> >   > taught.
> >   > > 
> >   > > That is why I asked, "Anyone doing it?".
> >   > > 
> >   > > It is just like >100%PA returns - anything is possible but 
> once 
> >   > someone 
> >   > > confirms that they have done it then it moves from the 
realm 
> of 
> >   > > possibility into reality.
> >   > > 
> >   > > In the meantime I will stick to my guns by saying 
> that "except for 
> >   > > people who KNOW what the price is going to do everyone else 
> is a 
> >   > rule 
> >   > > based trader and categorizing traders, as DT's or MT's, is 
> >   > arbitrary".
> >   > > 
> >   > > brian_z
> >   > >
> >   >
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >   ------------------------------------
> > 
> >   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
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >   No virus found in this incoming message.
> >   Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com 
> >   Version: 8.0.138 / Virus Database: 270.6.6/1623 - Release Date: 
> 8/20/2008 8:12 AM
> >
>



------------------------------------

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/