|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
<x-html><!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META content="MSHTML 5.00.2614.3401" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY background="" bgColor=#c8dfe1>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial>Chuck,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial>Open Black happens when today's opening and closing
are BELOW the previous day's close BUT the security closed UP from today's open.
Solid Green happens when today's opening and closing are ABOVE the previous
day's close BUT the security closed DOWN from today's open. It's a quirk of
candlestick charts. Perhaps it has some pattern meaning that Steve K can
explain?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial>Hope this clears it up,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial>Rick</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV></BODY></HTML>
</x-html>From ???@??? Fri Apr 30 06:03:16 1999
Received: from listserv.equis.com (204.246.137.2)
by mail05.rapidsite.net (RS ver 1.0.2) with SMTP id 11157
for <neal@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Fri, 30 Apr 1999 04:26:09 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from majordom@xxxxxxxxx)
by listserv.equis.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) id BAA08484
for metastock-outgoing; Fri, 30 Apr 1999 01:42:56 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: listserv.equis.com: majordom set sender to owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx using -f
Received: from freeze.metastock.com (freeze.metastock.com [204.246.137.5])
by listserv.equis.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id BAA08481
for <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Fri, 30 Apr 1999 01:42:53 -0600
From: g.harms@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Received: from mcan1.acu.edu.au (mcan1.acu.EDU.AU [192.148.225.21])
by freeze.metastock.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id BAA21469
for <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Fri, 30 Apr 1999 01:52:56 -0600 (MDT)
Received: by mcan1.acu.edu.au(Lotus SMTP MTA v4.6.4 (830.2 3-23-1999)) id 4A256763.002A33B1 ; Fri, 30 Apr 1999 17:40:57 +1000
X-Lotus-FromDomain: MCAULEY
To: metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Message-ID: <4A256763.002A334B.00@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 1999 17:40:55 +1000
Subject: RE: Message to Guy. not even medium level generalities ?
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Sender: owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
X-Loop-Detect: 1
X-UIDL: 3f6defdb1bb402647a008ceff8e03cb9.07
Bob
Actually we named it "adjusted range" or abbreviated it adj rng to fit into
our column headings back before there were even pocket calculators. <G> I
still have crates of those old systems stored everywhere. If the markets
ever return to the volatility of the 50s, we've got the systems for that as
well. Back then, one system worked with just about anything (but there were
no financial futures then, or even currency futures). And we traded frozen
eggs and hides <G>.
In the early 70s, we traded a block of 15 different commodities, trading
them long or short as of the open. We were always in the market and would
reverse on the open. System worked quite well for a few years, but then the
mix changed. I'm trying to remember, but I think the 15 commodities we
traded were:
5 grains (W, C, SB, SBO, SBM)
3 metals (Ag, Au, Cu)
3 meats (Cat, Hogs, PB)
4 others (cocoa, cotton, eggs [I'm not sure about the eggs] & world sugar)
We found that by trading this mini mutual fund of varied commodities, we
were able to spread out our risk and yet generate a substantial return. The
biggest trade I remember making was around 15 units or 225 contracts around
Labor Day, 1974. Actually 450 contracts since we were reversing. Remember
margins were a lot lower than they are today and you didn't have all of the
volatility that you have today. For example, I seem to remember the margin
on world sugar being $2-300 (initial margin, that is). Heck, I've even got
a world sugar trading story from either the 50s or 60s when my dad refused
to believe the market moving against him and he rode 1 contract for a
$150-180,000 loss and then rode it the other way to finally take out
something like a $1,200 profit. Of course, if he would have followed the
system and taken his little loss and reversed, he would have made a couple
hundred grand, but he wasn't going to let the market show him... <G> We
Tanns tend to be quite bullheaded.
Regards
Guy
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Bob Jagow
Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 1999 2:54 PM
To: metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: Message to Guy. not even medium level generalities ?
Hi Guy,
Bet you never considered calling it True Range 40+ years ago :)
<<If a future gaps up (and doesn't close it during trading), we assume the
open was really the previous day's close, thereby eliminating the gap, and
vice versa (for gapping down).>>
Bob
bjagow@xxxxxxx <mailto:bjagow@xxxxxxx>
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Guy Tann
Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 1999 1:07 PM
To: metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: Message to Guy. not even medium level generalities ?
I did post a whole bunch of generalities and the philosophy behind our
methodology a while back, probably at least a couple of years or so. I'll
try to resurrect it. Hopefully it wasn't on that old computer that died.
Actually, just going through the methodology helped me to remember what
we're doing.
If I can't locate it, I'll put some thoughts together. They're really not
very mind boggling, but just a group of indicators that we built over the
years that appeared to work (some better than others, depending upon the
time or season). Everything we do is mathematical in nature. We really
don't plot any of our indicators, even though we used to when we first
started. We determined that for us, at least, how we drew the plot affected
how we interpreted our signals, so we went for a strictly mathematical
approach.
Here's a synopsis of what we do, without giving away any secrets. Keep in
mind that everything we do is based upon the daily price activity! All of
our indicators are derived from that. So what we're really doing is
analyzing what the market did today and sometimes compare it to what it did
yesterday. We don't use volume at all. We did use volume when originating
our indicators 40+ years ago, but discovered that it had a negligible impact
on our signals.
We have also looked at millions (probably a slight exaggeration <G>) of
indicators, including all of those in Metastock and the other packages out
there. The ONLY functions we use in Metastock are moving averages.
Everything else is our own. Prior to 6.52 we were never able to get our
stuff running in Metastock. I still haven't tried to convert it yet. Our
calculations go down 14 levels, and that might explain why MS trashed our
disk under Windows, whereas we're still using MS for DOS 4.5 daily, since
it's substantially faster than MS for Windows.
I'll try to start digging out some of our basic calculations to see if
there's anything I can say about them. One of our indicators (we developed
35 or 40 years ago) is very similar to the William's %R (we think ours is
better, but that's just our opinion <G>).
Another technique we use is to develop an adjusted range daily to eliminate
any gap openings (up or down). If a future gaps up (and doesn't close it
during trading), we assume the open was really the previous day's close,
thereby eliminating the gap, and vice versa (for gapping down).
That's all I have time for now, but I'll really try to locate what I wrote
the last time. Maybe I'll do it in Word and do an attachment.
Regards
Guy
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of BuyersG@xxxxxxx
Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 1999 11:06 AM
To: metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
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 >>
|