|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
> No further comment from me is
necessary.
Yep, I would think so. Facts can be that hard. We
will see you NEXT month with the agreed upon results tho, won't
we?
> My best offense is to let you talk.
The facts that has silenced the bluff. And made
it hard to put the money where the mouth is. Me
unraffling
the myths in public also makes me the target man to throw
some mud at, but it will not ever force me to step aside
and let the parrots (the talking heads) create
them into make believes.
No offence, Joe, but unless someone can come up with
facts on the myth for it being a valid
evidential theory,
which by the way no-one was ever capable in doing so for the
past 15 years that I am trading, I will
consider,
particularly in the halve-traders stockmarkets, its use in the
financial markets (or as a TA-tool) in the same
category as the below mentioned
"monkey-throwing-darts" quicksand-category*, eg
thus accidential.
Cute, but in and for TA
basicaly irrelivant info.
*methods solidly lacking fundamental evidential grounds,
and thus not qualifiying for being ever TA-related +
considdered.
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=joeduffy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
href="mailto:joeduffy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx";>Joe Duffy
Aan: <A title=metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
href="mailto:metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx";>metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Verzonden: donderdag 19 oktober 2000
3:55
Onderwerp: Re: Advanced Get versus
MetaStock
No further comment from me is necessary. My best offense is to let
you talk.
----- Original Message -----
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black">From:
A.J. Maas
To: <A title=metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
href="mailto:metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx";>metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2000 9:26
PM
Subject: Re: Advanced Get versus
MetaStock
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 on
the List been unraffled before,
including that of the further
man-made-ajointed myth of
"mother nature wonders", that either <FONT
size=2>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-set
that 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- <FONT
size=2>the natural relation and rythem between <FONT
size=2>figures.
Apart from the Decimal system being the natural related
figures, it also has a -now TRUE fair
dinkom evidentual- influencial effect
on humans on this globe that are all using it.
Easely the
humans 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 to
and 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 found
at the above
mentioned Fractal levels.
That the Fibionancy-myth calculations then only can come
close to is perhaps benificial to you, but
they are not ever based <FONT
size=2>on the mentioned "natural, relational, logical,
scientifical or on any other fact"
that the myth also tries <FONT
size=2>out everyone to believe.
<FONT
size=2>
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 + resistance
levels 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 Fibionancies
can only come close to, eg naturaly,
since that they are not "natural, relational, logical,
scientifical or
on any other fact"-based or related.
I will let you have the NEXT month to work this all
out and expect you to report back to the List with
example 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.
<FONT
size=2>
Oh, I forgot, seeing your mail's reference to you
trading Fibionancy as your major trading tool making
50 or 100 trades/month (that would be only 900
(75*12) trades/yearly !!!!!!!!!) now let me refer <FONT
size=2>to some
of 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
do
so 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
19
Group 3 are the follow up to 10 figures 20 to
29
etcetera etcetera.
<FONT
size=2>
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=joeduffy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
href="mailto:joeduffy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx";>Joe Duffy
Aan: <A title=metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
href="mailto:metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx";>metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Verzonden: woensdag 18 oktober 2000
13:40
Onderwerp: Re: Advanced Get versus
MetaStock
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
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.
|