|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
> I think to be successful you would only need to see a few seconds
>into
> the future
My last post in this thread.
Subjectively the universal spheres are consciousness, with Absolute
Consciousness (Omnipotence, Omnesicence, Omnipresence) as the causal
factor.
Objectively they are time and space - 'bent' at the higher levels
(thankyou Einsten) - non existent at the causal level.
brian_z
--- In amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "Ed Hoopes" <reefbreak_sd@xxx>
wrote:
>
> Two comments:
>
> I have seen this clairvoyant effect in a day trader I observed for a
> month or so. (And sometimes traded in his shadow.)
>
> The way he would enter a trade is he had a dozen or so trading
setups
> that he would tell you about. But when it came time to enter a
trade
> he would get quiet for a few minutes then announce "I'm long".
>
> Then (it seemed to me) he would go back over his group of trading
> setups and pick the one that most closely matched the chart at the
> time he went long. He would then announce "Oh yes - this is a XYZ
> setup." It always seemed to me that he would do the trade first,
then
> pick the setup later.
>
> This guy made his living daytrading.
>
> Comment 2:
> I've also watched my kid play college lacrosse(LAX) - on the team I
> was rooting for there was a player that would always seem to be in
the
> "right place" when critical plays were made.
>
> I got to watching this guy and he would go to totally crazy places
on
> the field and quite often - the ball would just sort of magically
> appear at his feet. I had my kid ask him "How do you do that?" and
he
> answered I don't know - I just get the urge to run over to a spot
and
> wait there.
>
> I think to be successful you would only need to see a few seconds
into
> the future.
>
> ReefBreak
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --- In amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Dennis Brown <see3d@> wrote:
> >
> > Brian,
> >
> > I know what you are saying, but should you be saying it on this
forum?
> >
> > However, since you have brought up the subject of getting random
> > results from flipping a coin, and much trading is based in the
idea of
> > random noise being a big factor, I propose a test.
> >
> > Get a piece of graph paper, a pen or pencil, and a coin.
> >
> > Your goal will be to flip the coin and record the deviation from
zero
> > on the graph paper to prove that it is NOT random.
> >
> > Find a very quite place with a rug where you won't be disturbed
for a
> > half hour. You should not have eaten recently.
> >
> > Put an X in the middle left box on the graph paper as the
starting
> > mark. When you flip the coin, you will be marking the next
square to
> > the right of the last mark. If you flip a Heads, you will be
moving
> > up one square. If it a tails, you will be moving down one
square.
> > This would normally be an example of a random walk graph.
> >
> > Put your mind in the most focused level of consciousness that you
can
> > for this test. In other words concentrate!
> >
> > The next step is the most important of all:
> >
> > Summon up the greatest emotional desire you can for achieving a
> > singular result. That result is your desire for the line you
are
> > graphing to deviate from the starting point by as much as
possible.
> > Feel it in the pit of your stomach. That burning desire to
influence
> > the flip of a coin! Don't think, just desire!
> >
> > Flip the coin and let it land. Record your mark. Flip the
coin.
> > Record your mark. Feel the desire focusing your concentration
ever
> > more. Flip, Mark...
> >
> > When picking up the coin, do not return it to heads up, or tails
up,
> > just use whatever it landed on last as the starting position.
Give it
> > a good flip. Not just a few turns in the air, but spinning well.
> >
> > At some point, you will feel emotionally dry. You will not be
able to
> > keep up that emotional intensity forever (for me it is 20
minutes).
> > Notice when that point happens and put a mark on the paper so you
can
> > see that point.
> >
> > For some the results of this test will give you a new perspective
on
> > yourself to think about.
> >
> > I devised this test 35 years ago and the results changed the
direction
> > of how I perceived many things after that.
> >
> > Enjoy!
> > Dennis
> >
> > On Aug 22, 2008, at 8:58 PM, brian_z111 wrote:
> >
> > >> Another possible irrational explanation is that some humans
may have
> > >> the ability to see the future.
> > >
> > >
> > > Ed,
> > >
> > > I feel I sold you short on this one so if you are interested in
a
> > > more detailed answer read on.
> > >
> > > In my scheme of things there are no trader classifications,
except
> > > perhaps good ones and not so good ones.
> > >
> > > If it helps us to understand our trading and/or become better
> > > traders, by naming classes, by all means lets do so but if and
when
> > > we consider traders to be discretionary, we are, IMO deceiving
> > > ourselves i.e. it is probably the most useless classification
of all.
> > >
> > > For the sake of the discussion - if there are otraders who
can 'know'
> > > things using faculties that other traders don't have then I
would
> > > call them XTraders (X == unclassified OR an unknown quantity).
> > >
> > > Our culturally accepted paradigm is that we are thinking
> > > (rationalising) and feeling creatures contained in a physical
body
> > > (vessel).
> > >
> > > Culturally it is considered 'irrational' that anyone could
function
> > > with a faculty other than thinking or feeling i.e. people
> > > who 'believe' this are sub-standard thinkers (perhaps they are
> > > unbalanced by their emotions?)
> > >
> > > In other cultures alternative 'levels of consciousness' are
> > > considered the norm (consciousness that is above and beyond
rational
> > > thinking that is).
> > >
> > > Specialists in this field don't consider these X faculties as
> > > irrational - this term is reserved for a special class of sub-
> > > rational consciousness.
> > >
> > >
> > > As an analogy:
> > >
> > > Rationality can be symbolised by a clear blue cloudless sky and
the
> > > sub-conscious mind as the clear deep green ocean.
> > >
> > > The irrational elements of our 'mind' are floating on the
surface of
> > > the ocean, bobbing up and down like corks.
> > > Collectively the corks are always in motion.
> > > They are discrete and individual corks 'rotate' above and below
the
> > > water line. Their upward motion creates pressure on our
conscious
> > > mind and some leap out of the water, into consciousness, for
brief
> > > periods.
> > >
> > > We call them irrational because they never come to full and
complete
> > > expression in our rational mind - it is not possible for them to
> > > exist there autonomously because of the material that they are
> > > constructed of (speaking symbolically they are half-formed
creatures
> > > from the deep).
> > >
> > > They act somewhat autonomously from our consious mind and
controlling
> > > them is a devil of a job (the labours of Hercules).
> > >
> > > Specifically they are products of our environment
(upbringing/past
> > > etc) that are exascerbated ny 'inherited' qualities (put two
people
> > > in the same stressful environment and one can develop a mental
> > > pathology while the other person won't).
> > >
> > > They can affect our trading by popping up as irrational
behavoiur in
> > > the heat of battle or by generally influencing our approach
> > > (fear/greed etc).
> > >
> > > The 'higher' level of consciousness (knowing) that I am
personally
> > > familiar with is the Intuition which I consider to be the
4th/seven
> > > levels of consciousness attainable my Mankind.
> > >
> > > Note that in our culture the term is used in different ways in
> > > different cultures and that even amongst specialists in this
field
> > > their is disagreement over the classifications of consciousness
and
> > > the nomenclature.
> > >
> > > I don't know how Intuition works, nor have I experienced the
full
> > > scope of it.
> > >
> > > For me it works in different ways at different times and it is
> > > dependent on how I manage it (if I am tired or don't pay full
> > > attention the quality of what I 'perceive' drops).
> > >
> > > It is not mind reading.
> > >
> > > I experience it as a kind of 'super-rationality' i.e. given the
same
> > > facts that the rational mind possesses (yes I still have to
read the
> > > help manual) I can sometimes connect the dots in amazing ways
and do
> > > it instantaneously - I just consider I have done the rational
anlysis
> > > at a speed that my conscious mind couldn't keep up with.
> > >
> > > According to the pundits other levels of consciousness are
accessible
> > > in the supra-rational mind.
> > >
> > > The intuitive level of consiousness can be accessed via the
abstract
> > > mind and this is what many of the leaders of our culture do -
it is
> > > especially prevalent in those who are trained in/have a
disposition
> > > towards use of the abstract languages e.g.
> > > maths,programming,philosophy, art, music etc where it is
experienced
> > > as INSPIRATION.
> > >
> > > I haven't tried to be an Intuitive trader because I am quite
happy to
> > > use all of the resources available to me in a balanced way
(combining
> > > computer skills, rational thinking, inspiration and emotional
control
> > > in a synthesized package and I am doing fine with that).
> > >
> > > Anyway, I can't seperate my learned experiences from my
instinctive
> > > experiences so I couldn't perform an honest test (if I tried to
make
> > > purely intuitive trading choices I could be biased by other more
> > > mundane factors).
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > How does this apply to trading?
> > >
> > > We can make a truly unbiased decision if we flip a coin
(technically
> > > speaking the decision is made by the coin at the moment it
comes to
> > > rest).
> > >
> > > Coins don't have thoughts, feelings or X consciousness.
> > >
> > > We do.
> > >
> > > Whenever we make a decision it is almost impossible for us to
measure
> > > the degree that it is influenced by feelings, thoughts or
XFactors.
> > >
> > > Anything that influences our decision making places a condition
on
> > > it, so in a round aout way it is a rule.
> > >
> > > That is why I claim that we are all rule based traders (unless
we
> > > flip a coin to make our trading decisions).
> > >
> > > The differences come about because of the quality, number,
format etc
> > > of our 'rules'.
> > >
> > > As a rule of thumb:
> > >
> > > Writing down our rules is one way to quality control them.
> > > Writing them in computer language is an even more definitive way
> > > force them to logicality.
> > >
> > > However we shouldn't assume that people who like to trade in a
visual
> > > way e.g. chart trading, don't have written or programmed rules
OR
> > > that people who haven't written down their rules are 'worse'
traders
> > > than those who do.
> > >
> > > In all probability traders who haven't written down their rules
are
> > > using much simpler 'systems' and/or have automatically joined
> > > together a few simple rules to make a set of easily 'remembered'
> > > mental rules.
> > >
> > > On that basis it is a bold asumption to say that they couldn't
teach
> > > it to others.
> > >
> > > I dare say they can most likely teach it to a 15 year old a lot
more
> > > readily than they could teach them to autotrade.
> > >
> > > It is a pretty fair bet that bad rules, unclear rules, or no
rules at
> > > all, is the source of most trading trouble rather than unwritten
> > > rules or XFactor rules.
> > >
> > > As for XFactor traders (if there really are any out there):
> > >
> > > - they are still following a rules it just happens that they
get them
> > > from the fairy perched on the top of their computer screen (I
guess
> > > the proof of the pudding is in the eating).
> > >
> > > Personally, I haven't made a decision to buy/sell based on an
> > > intuitive signal AFAIK (if anyone is an intuitive trader then I
would
> > > be a good candidate).
> > >
> > > However in real life I make intuitive decisions all of the time.
> > >
> > > One way I use the intuition is that I sense it like a stop
light in
> > > the pit of my stomach - I can almost see it - red ==
stop/orange ==
> > > caution, green == go.
> > >
> > > Specfic examples:
> > >
> > > I go to a website - I take one look at it - I read the first
> > > paragraph of an article their - I get a red light - don't read
> > > anyfurther - it saves me research time - reason == the level of
> > > consciousness of the author is too low - they couldn't possibly
write
> > > anything about trading worth reading (sorry but it isn't
anything
> > > more romantic than that).
> > >
> > > In other cases I use the intuition in more advanced ways but
that is
> > > a very long story.
> > >
> > > I hope that helps a few traders sort out their thoughts.
> > >
> > > "If we are saying it, we are thinking it.
> > > If we are thinking it, we are doing it".
> > >
> > > If we are sloppy with our trading nomenclature?
> > >
> > >
> > > brian_z *:-)
> > >
> > > I am very sorry but I can't answer private emails to my public
email
> > > addresses - many of them get lost amongst the spam anyway.
> > >
> > > Also I apologise deeply but I do not 'take' students.
> > >
> > > FTR I teach the 'middle way' (not in a sectarian way) and I do
what I
> > > can publically.
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "Ed Hoopes" <reefbreak_sd@>
> > > wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Another possible irrational explanation is that some humans
may have
> > >> the ability to see the future.
> > >>
> > >> In competitive sports some players just seem to know what their
> > >> opponents will do. Maybe the same is true of some successful
> > > traders.
> > >> They can't explain it rationally, but they "just know it"
> > >>
> > >> Reef
> > >>
> > >> PS
> > >> Unfortunately, I don't have this trait.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> --- In amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "brian_z111" <brian_z111@>
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
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
------------------------------------
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/
|