|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
A childs dream is easely full filled.
It's the hard-core TA that we're after, not softies
stuff.
TA is NOT an art !!!!. If your aim is also to get
right to the scientifical (and therefore evidential) bottom of it.
The Bartjens mails+links that have been
posted:
"Subject:
Bartjens
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 17:47:04"
"Subject: Re:
Bartjens
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 03:16:11"
"Subject: Re:
Bartjens
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 00:52:56"
"Subject: Re: What options to
sell? Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000
01:02:17"
Must have been posted in one of that long lasting phases,
periods of months in a row, when the List is more
of an old ladies Chat box instead then
that it is used as what it was set out to be: a MSK or TA discussioning
List.
(reason you probably missed the posts !!!).
Regards,Ton Maas<A
href="mailto:ms-irb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx";>ms-irb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxDismiss the
".nospam" bit (including the dot) when replying.Homepage <A
href="http://home.planet.nl/~anthmaas";>http://home.planet.nl/~anthmaas
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
----- Oorspronkelijk bericht -----
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black">Van:
<A title=giancarlogaydou@xxxxxxxxxxxx
href="mailto:giancarlogaydou@xxxxxxxxxxxx";>Giancarlo Gaydou
Aan: <A title=metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
href="mailto:metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx";>metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Verzonden: donderdag 19 oktober 2000
12:16
Onderwerp: Re: Advanced Get versus
MetaStock
Poor Mr. Fibonacci, (that's the right spelling)he's
certainly turning around in his grave, let him RIP.He didn't know that
his theory one day was to be used in TA by traders, neither he knew that close
enough won't be just good enough.I guess that if you would spend a
little more time to explain the theory of Mr. Bartjens, maybe only mailing the
links were some documentation could be found, we all may become Mr. Bartjens'
fans.For the little that I've learned the boys that crunch 8th grade
math do have a fair edge on markets, but from what they say they are
happyto be "close enough".FWIW, in this list many good traders
have already explained that:"No indicator, no oscillator, no FIB's, or
what else, works unless you develop the right feeling about it, but once you
have thefeeling anything works"and to me that mean: Holy Grails
& Hens of the Golden Eggs, if they exists, are well secured in armoured
safes, not sold in the shopsfor little or big monies. Beside the
above another good remark was mailed here:"TA it's an ART not an exact
science"and to me that mean: Everybody can buy a fiddle "but" (VB BUT)
only "few" (VB FEW) will be able to master it, a pennywhistle maybe
too much for many.I'm not so fond of the Fibonacci's theory but some
times have found it "just good enough" because it was "close enough" even
closerthan other tools, but always "after" because I don't have particular
feelings about it.ggAt 02:26 AM 19/10/2000
+0100, you wrote:
Thanks for your contribution. It will be most
helpfull to the many. There are many ways
that can lead one to the room of glory.Even the monkeys are
capable to make money throwing darts. No big deal in that
!!!. The incorrect Fibionancy-myth of
"figures being relational to one another" has indeed here onthe
List been unraffled before, including that of the further man-made-ajointed
myth of"mother nature wonders", that either would be caused by it or
that would be related to the myth. The Mr. W.
Bartjens Law shows a straight out correct relation between the standard
figures-setthat was first introduced in the 10 Century, a set
that today is still in use, and the Cyfferringe(that is the Law) also
shows WHY the figures are TRUELY related. The
modern day Decimal** system, that is directly based on the standard
figures-set, provides-along with its Fractals- the natural
relation and rythem between figures. Apart from
the Decimal system being the natural related figures, it also has a
-now TRUE fairdinkom evidentual- influencial effect on
humans on this globe that are all using it. Easely thehumans then refer
to "halves", "thirds", "quarters" and "tenths" of something
: -"Oh it only costs halve the original
price" -"Profits have rissen one thirds compared to
last year" -"The quarterly figures
are............" -"It's only roughly been a ten
percent increase{rise}". Check the levels derived
from splitting "a whole" 100 into the Decimalic Fractals and then compare
toand find that the from the Fibionancy-myth calculated ones then
"only come close to".That explains too why one can make money from the
Natural Human support and resistances foundat the above mentioned
Fractal levels. That the Fibionancy-myth
calculations then only can come close to is perhaps benificial to you,
butthey are not ever based on the mentioned "natural, relational,
logical, scientifical or on any other fact"that the myth also tries out
everyone to believe. Check out the previous sent
Bartjens mail(s) to find the 1st Group and mail showing
why they are related.Check the previous sent Fractals
Retracements mail(s) to find the Natural Human support +
resistancelevels equivelant for the financial
markets. Then compare results to the
Fibionancy-myth and the myth is straight out
unraffled.Now place the Fractal Retracements on your Charts and
see why they work, and why the Fibionanciescan only come close to, eg
naturaly, since that they are not "natural, relational, logical,
scientifical oron any other fact"-based or related. <FONT
size=2>I will let you have the NEXT month to work this all out and expect
you to report back to the List withexample Charts holding the
BASED ON FACTS Natural Human support & resistance
levels. Then if you like, you may still post
comparisson results of your beloved Fibionancy vs the above.Doubt
that anyone is interested in them after seeing both versions, eg after they
have seen"the Humans have prooven their point" Fractal
retracements. Oh, I forgot, seeing your mail's
reference to you trading Fibionancy as your major trading tool
making50 or 100 trades/month (that would be only 900 (75*12)
trades/yearly !!!!!!!!!) now let me refer to someof my previously sent
stunning trade example mails.I only trade 50 or 100 trades/year (!!!!!)
, most of the time less, to achieve my b€loved goal$, and doso trading
REAL TA-tools. ** Decimal
system: -------------------------Group
1 are the figures 1 up to 9 and where the 0 is niks, nada.Group 2 are
the follow up to 9 figures 10 to 19Group 3 are the follow up to 10
figures 20 to 29etcetera etcetera.Regards,Ton Maas<A
href="mailto:ms-irb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx";>ms-irb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxDismiss
the ".nospam" bit (including the dot) when replying.Homepage <A
href="http://home.planet.nl/~anthmaas";>http://home.planet.nl/~anthmaas
----- Oorspronkelijk bericht -----
Van: Joe
Duffy
Aan: <A
href="mailto:metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx";>metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Verzonden: woensdag 18 oktober 2000 13:40
Onderwerp: Re: Advanced Get versus MetaStock<FONT
face=arial>
A.J. Maas wrote;
now based on the Fibionancy-myth, a myth that here
on the List also has been unraffled before.
=================================
I guess I have read the above from you once to often, so I will
comment. You may not be able to make money using Fibonacci. That has
no relation to its use in trading.
I use Fibonacci as my major trading tool. I make 50 to 100 trades
per month. I am willing to post a monthly statement, from NEXT month
if you like. If my Fibonacci based trades make money, you can submit a
$1K check to my favorite charity. If they don't, I will submit one to
yours.
|