|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Leo, you hit it on the head. I spent many years drawing the charts in the
pre-computer days, getting data where you could. Looking for patterns, where
a triangle or H&S could be found on any street corner. If you could handle
more than 30-50 stocks, you were superman. People still buy Edwards and
macgee, and stumble through a subjective pattern recognition game.
Thank goodness, the computer and reliable data has come into our homes. We
are no longer hampered in trading by handwork. We have a staff of 100s in
that CPU. Real time or end-of-day, we can have it, to manipulate anyway we
want to. We can develop indicators that give precise entry and exits that
the masters of the past could never do. We owe Gann, Wyckoff, Coppock,
Elliot and others a great deal of thanks for leading the way through the age
of darkness. Now Chande is an example of objective TA.
The major work for a trader that might take years is finding the system that
fits your mindset and trading it. Don't use anyone's system but your own. Oh
it might have borrowed elements, nothing is new under the sun. But, It has
to be a system, you trust and understand. That takes time - testing, even
paper trading. It could be called "work". The time spent depends on your
goals and how long it takes to make a match.
Richard Estes
-----Original Message-----
From: Leo Karl <leokarl@xxxxxxxxx>
To: metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tuesday, July 07, 1998 10:31 PM
Subject: Re: Wyckoff Method
>
>If "indicators and moving averages are not used", while "chart reading is
>stressed", does that mean the method is amenable to computerized analysis
>(e.g. Metastock)? Since Wyckoff himself (1873 - 1934) developed his
methods
>prior to computers, was it a "lot of work" because computers were
unavailable
>to him, or is it a judgmental system more akin to pattern analysis than
>numerical analysis? I guess I don't understand how a system based on price
>and volume doesn't use indicators, and why I haven't seen any "Wyckoff
>Indicators" that have been developed over the years.
>
>Secondly, as far as trading is concerned, what does "a lot of work" mean.
My
>problem with the concept of "work" in trading is that I have not been able
to
>discover for myself a direct relationship between the amount of work and
the
>rewards.
>
>
>Leo
>
>
>Al Taglavore wrote:
>
>> I have not taken the course, but I have had two seminar sessions with Mr.
>> Hank Pruden, professor at the Golden Gate University. The Wyckoff Method
>> is based on price action and reaction. I have become very interested in
>> the methodolgy. It is sound analysis of price and volume. Indicators
and
>> moving averages are not used. Detailed chart reading is stressed. Lot's
>> of work? You bet! As I perceive the metodology, it is for "sound"
>> investment practices. Mr. Pruden will teach another phase of the Wyckoff
>> Method at the Dow Jones TAG Seminar to be held in Las Vegas in Nov.
>>
>> Al Taglvore
>>
>> ----------
>> > From: Leo Karl <leokarl@xxxxxxxxx>
>> > To: metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> > Subject: Wyckoff Method
>> > Date: Tuesday, July 07, 1998 12:40 PM
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Any opinions or experience with the Wyckoff Method of trading,
>> > especially with the $850 course offered by the Stock Market Institute
of
>> > Phoenix, AZ?
>> >
>> > I sent for their literature describing the course which I have heard
>> > described as very good, but "a lot of work". The literature is a bit
>> > vague, and generalized.
>> >
>> > I would be interested in any comments, both pro and con.
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> >
>> > Leo
>> >
>
>
>
|