|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Thanks for your polite words Jim about dumbing down.
===================
When the chapter refers to "information traders" ... what the author is
referring to is "inefficiency traders".
Regardless if you use standard Metastock indicators or hybrid combinations
or "non-standard" indicators as Guy alludes to using, it is the inefficiency
that the indicator points to that earns you the money. The indicator is only
the "pointer" ... not the inefficiency. Noise traders are continually
focused on the wrong "thing". That's why noise traders are regarded as
"fresh meat" in the market.
The chapter is relatively free of math. If you squint you hardly notice it
<G>. It does have an important expected value section that can easily be
included in Excel. In developing a "Stochastic Trader" (i.e., Stochastic
trading system) it shows you how to develop the expected value for different
stochastic settings and the 5 day forward change in the market / stock that
you are working with.
The chapter then goes on to describe how to preprocess using moving averages
and a whole range of indicators.
===================
Several traders have reported that the Stuttgart download is good for
learning but too general for financial use. Whether that is true or not ...
I don't know. There is more than enough work for me to do extending the
value of Metastock indicators into a good preprocessing routine using Excel.
Whether the step beyond preprocessing is towards neural nets or towards
rough sets is still in doubt for me.
Best regards
Walter
----- Original Message -----
From: Jim Michael <genepool@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, July 15, 1999 7:04 AM
Subject: Re: noise traders
>
>
> On Wed, 14 Jul 1999, Lionel Issen wrote:
>
> > Some chapters in the book are worth reading. This one is not. A book
for
> > traders should not require a ph.d. (piled higher and deeper) in
statistics
> > and data mining.
>
> Is this the ignorance is bliss approach, or a variation on Mo Tzu's
> theory of opposites - The less you know, the more you know?
> Don't you think that those who do understand these things might have a
> slight advantage over those who don't?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Jim
>
|