|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Glen Wallace wrote:
> Not an appropriate request. This proprietary system has taken thousands of
> hours over many years for Guy's family to develop. Let's have some respect.
>
It's certainly a relevant point. Another is ... I guess I am about to say
a triviality, but anyway ... . To me the concept "there are indicators
that work, others not" doesn't make much sense unless, of course, one does
something really stupid. I believe, "everything works" is closer to the truth.
As it was said many times on this list and elsewhere, a real trick is to find
tools that fit yourself (your mindset). All basic tools one needs are here,
available. To illustrate the point I want to make, take Jim Greening's system.
It's open to anybody in all details due to Jim's generosity (thanks, Jim!), so
that everybody can make money (good, I presume) just following his rules. Yes,
everybody ... but not me. Often I couldn't pull the trigger when working his
system (even though it was on paper) essentially wrecking by this the system.
It's not that I am too shy. I just didn't feel quite comfortable when I had
to make a move. Nothing wrong with the system or me. It just doesn't click in
me, although it does wonders for Jim.
So, can you say as a general statement that Jim's set of indicators does work?
Or doesn't?
The quest for "what works, what doesn't" is a quest for Holy Grail in disguise,
IMHO. Sure, there always remains a necessity to adjust a system to changing
markets.
Cheers, Vitaly
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <BuyersG@xxxxxxx>
> To: <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: April 28, 1999 11:06
> Subject: Re: Message to Guy. not even medium level generalities ?
>
> > In a message dated 4/28/99 2:33:15 AM Central Daylight Time,
> grt@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> > writes:
> > None of us are going to be able to copy 20% of anything built over so long
> > even if we had a rather detailed description. It is just irritating to
> have
> > no idea
> > what you have found that works so well but you keep talking about it so
> > vaguely.
> > Surely you could share some more of the generalities of the theory and
> > indicators which we gather are mostly statistically based (as are
> Bollinger
> > Bands but which you say as MS indicators are not similar).
> > Come on Guy. Just give us some medium level generalities and stop
> > taunting and teasing us, please. The more people who trade with you.. the
> > more
> > your market item moves anyway so u have nothing to lose and we would
> > really appreciate it.
> > R
> >
> >
> > << Since all of the indicators are proprietary and bear no resemblance to
> > anything that MetaStock includes on their software, it would be
> impossible
> > to explain them without spending a ton of time on the underlying
> > calculations and thoughts that went into constructing them.
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > Guy >>
|