RE: Sad Stochastic

["Bob Jagow" <bjagow@xxxxxxx>]

Lionel,
  The argument for built-ins is that they are faster [sometimes far faster]
and that Equis unlike us can have multiple colors and such.
  The argument against built-ins is that they were built by the bureaucracy
so we have to implore George to concede that they don't work right :)

Bob

bjagow@xxxxxxx <mailto:bjagow@xxxxxxx>


-----Original Message-----
From: owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Lionel Issen
Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 1999 8:49 PM
To: metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Sad Stochastic


This sounds like another argument for writing your own indicators and
taking nothing for granted.

Lionel Issen

----- Original Message -----
From: Craig DeHaan <cdehaan@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 1999 8:08 PM
Subject: Re: Sad Stochastic


Bob,
Why sure they're listening.  Don't forget to add Perspicaciously
Persistent to split pea soup. ;-(!บก)
CP


> Bob Jagow wrote:
>
> Has anyone ever asked Equis to fix their stochastic oscillator?
>    Their custom %K is correct but the builtin still uses the A to Z
> description,
> -----
> "The above example used a %K Slowing Period of 1-day (no slowing). If
> you use a value greater than
> one, you average the highest-high and the lowest-low over the number
> of %K Slowing Periods before
>  performing the division."
> ------
> which is just plain wrong. Would be nice to get the correct #s.
>
> Are you listening, Equis?
>
> Bob
> bjagow@xxxxxxx <mailto:bjagow@xxxxxxx>