|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Igor,
Thanks for your contribution!
Could you please repost your formulas for the benefit of any newbies that
have joined the list since your last post. I'm looking forward to your
August article in "Technical Analysis of Stocks and Commodities".
Igor wrote:
> Spyros,
> Sorry that my English isn't that good and that you misunderstood me.
> I will try to explain my self again.
> I have a simple peak and trough formula. It gives on the tester on
> historical data, golden mountains. Once I use it in realtime true the
> advisor it sometimes gives signals that a little bit later disappear. It
> pulls the signals back like it never took this position. I trade futures
> on the DAX and I can't afford to have these bad signals or false
> signals.
> I can also believe that once I ad your SR zig on my little formula that
> I want have these false signals anymore. But when I will do my testing
> on historical data that these golden mountains melt in to little sand
> dunes or like I was saying in my previous mail that it want do better
> than a normal good working system. I am a bit convinced of this idea
> because I managed to build an other formula (bases on "bare since
> HHV..and bare since LLV") who can also describe a top and bottom on a
> way that when a signals occurs after a top and a bottom it will stay
> there and not disappear anymore. With this formula it proves already
> that there are no golden mountains to see.
> So I' am looking forward to have your SR zig formula so I can try it out
> on my simple little peak and trough formula and see if there are golden
> mountains to earn if it stays with little sand dunes...i will keep you
> informed if the results are satisfying and in that case also give you
> this little formula.
> Greetings igor
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: raftsp [mailto:raftsp@xxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: vrijdag 7 juni 2002 16:46
> To: Igor
> Subject: RE: peak trough ...zigzag validity(trading safely with zig)
>
> Igor,
>
> Since as you say the club is dying, let's try to keep it alive by
> posting a
> few useful messages (if we can).
> I write rarely so I feel somewhat responsible for this death myself. But
> again, I think that each one of us offers what he is able to offer or
> what
> he thinks it is better to offer. My contribution, compared to others',
> is
> arithmetically small. But I guess that each member's contribution cannot
> be
> measured with the number of messages only. Quality should be considered
> too.
>
> Due to language problems, I am afraid I did not clearly understand your
> points about zig and SR Zigzag Trend.
> First of all, are you asking for SR Zigzag Trend code, or do you have it
> already?
> If you don't have it I will be glad to give it to you.
>
> If you have already tested the indicator, are you saying that systems,
> which
> use it are no better than others?
> In this case I answer:
> I just provided an indicator that solves the problem of zig's revisions,
> once and for all. Now everyone who wishes he had a kind of zig, which
> would
> be suitable for back tests, has the chance to play the game safely.
> That's
> all.
> So far, I haven't suggested any systems. Maybe I will never have
> something
> like that to suggest. Every one of us may try his own ideas. Some might
> be
> profitable, some maybe not. But now, the fans of zigzag can be sure that
> whether the results of their systems are good or bad, at least those
> results
> are real. No more myths.
> I mean that, if one doesn't like the results, he'd better try another
> system
> or simply stop counting on a zigzag miracle.
>
> One more word about SR Zigzag trend:
> Regardless of the method one could use, the values returned by such an
> indicator cannot be improved in any way. What I mean is, this is
> zigzag's
> true picture. Like it or not, but it CANNOT BE CHANGED. That is, if
> someone
> wants to trade zig he'd better spend time to find good usages for SR
> Zigzag
> trend. He will never manage to make a more responsive indicator to
> validate
> zig, no matter what his approach is. If you have any doubts I will be
> glad
> to explain why.
>
> I haven't seen you indicator. Send it if you feel like to. I don't know
> what
> your hopes are but maybe your indicator is really good.
>
> I have no objections to any private mails. I will always be glad to hear
> from you privately or publically. Nevertheless, I would prefer go on
> with
> THIS very subject in public. I want to see everybody's reactions to this
> conversation. I want to see if any other users have understood what it
> is
> all about. I am almost sure that only a few have realized what SR ZigZag
> Trend is all about. Till now I was very disappointed by the feedback.
> So, I
> hope you understand.
>
> Best
> Spyros
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Igor [mailto:igor.devisscher@xxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 3:23 PM
> To: 'raftsp'
> Subject: RE: peak trough ...zigzag validity(trading safely with zig)
>
> Hy Spiros,
> Tnx very much for your reaction. Had the feeling that now one wanted to
> reply and that the newsletter is beginning to get a little club of 7-8
> persons who help each other and the rest can drop dead. Over the last 3
> months asked 3 rather simple questions and no answers.
> Is it possible to get this SR zig zag trendformula...?
> But I start to realize that ones you place the SR zig zag function with
> the peak and trough that the results will be in this way that this
> system want be better then an other average good working system. Now it
> makes VERY good results because it takes the liberty to throw away
> positions when it realizes that they are loosing trades. So ones you ad
> something that it can't do this anymore the results will be far worse.
> I made a formula that also can detect a top or bottom with a bars since
> HHv and bars since LLV and then it can not pull the signals back it is
> like you say WYSIWYG...and then I have a result witch is far worse. But
> you never know...and so I have still some (naive) hope that maybe it
> could be something.
> So I'm looking forward to your reaction with this SR zig zag.
> Greetings igor
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of raftsp
> Sent: vrijdag 7 juni 2002 11:26
> To: metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: peak trough ...zigzag validity(trading safely with zig)
>
> Igor:
> Some time ago I posted an indicator of mine called "ZigZag Validity"
> which
> checks if the last dynamic leg of Zig is trusty or not. It is a binary
> indicator that returns 1(=valid) or 0(=invalid). It is useful for
> validating only the CURRENT value of zig. It is NOT suitable for back
> tests
> and systems. If you want to be able to use a valid zig function in
> systems,
> then use my latest "SR ZigZag Trend". Read below.
>
> Owen:
> For better understanding the zigzag functions (zig, peaks and troughs)
> and
> how my ZigZag validity works, you may read my article (titled "ZigZag
> validity") that will be published in the August issue of the Stocks and
> Commodities magazine. In the meanwhile you can review my past messages.
> Everyone:
> A few days ago I posted a new indicator of mine called "SR ZigZag
> Trend",
> which, as I believe, solves for good every problem related to the
> dynamic
> nature of zig. To my surprise, there were no reactions, no replies,
> nothing!
> The enthusiasm about ZigZag validity (a simple, not very handy
> indicator)
> now gave place to total indifference to a new indicator, which actually
> marks the end of the zig myth! This is a also a binary indicator which
> returns 1(=confirmed uptrend) or -1(=confirmed downtrend). In my
> lengthy
> message to the group I explained that SR Zigzag Trend:
> 1. is always valid. To put it simply: WYSIWYG (What You See Is What You
> Get). No revisions, no redraws! Never!
> 2. can be used as a stand-alone indicator in Zig's place.
> 3. can be used safely in systems and back tests. Where one would like
> to
> use zig (but did not dare to), now he can use SR Zigzag trend and that's
> it!
> What's more, by pasting the code to his system one can even optimize the
> percent parameter!
> 4. can also be used in experts, explorations and everywhere as any
> other
> custom formula.
> Isn't this strange? An indicator which solves a problem as old as zig
> and
> which could be easily sold for $### is offered for free and nobody seems
> to
> have noticed it!
> Anyhow, try these indicators (especially SR ZigZag Trend) and tell me
> what
> you think. If you don't have the codes I can post them once more.
> Spyros
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Igor [mailto:igor.devisscher@xxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 3:23 PM
> To: 'raftsp'
> Subject: RE: peak trough ...zigzag validity(trading safely with zig)
>
> Hy Spiros,
> Tnx very much for your reaction. Had the feeling that now one wanted to
> reply and that the newsletter is beginning to get a little club of 7-8
> persons who help each other and the rest can drop dead. Over the last 3
> months asked 3 rather simple questions and no answers.
> Is it possible to get this SR zig zag trendformula...?
> But I start to realize that ones you place the SR zig zag function with
> the peak and trough that the results will be in this way that this
> system want be better then an other average good working system. Now it
> makes VERY good results because it takes the liberty to throw away
> positions when it realizes that they are loosing trades. So ones you ad
> something that it can't do this anymore the results will be far worse.
> I made a formula that also can detect a top or bottom with a bars since
> HHv and bars since LLV and then it can not pull the signals back it is
> like you say WYSIWYG...and then I have a result witch is far worse. But
> you never know...and so I have still some (naive) hope that maybe it
> could be something.
> So I'm looking forward to your reaction with this SR zig zag.
> Greetings igor
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of raftsp
> Sent: vrijdag 7 juni 2002 11:26
> To: metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: peak trough ...zigzag validity(trading safely with zig)
>
> Igor:
> Some time ago I posted an indicator of mine called "ZigZag Validity"
> which
> checks if the last dynamic leg of Zig is trusty or not. It is a binary
> indicator that returns 1(=valid) or 0(=invalid). It is useful for
> validating only the CURRENT value of zig. It is NOT suitable for back
> tests
> and systems. If you want to be able to use a valid zig function in
> systems,
> then use my latest "SR ZigZag Trend". Read below.
>
> Owen:
> For better understanding the zigzag functions (zig, peaks and troughs)
> and
> how my ZigZag validity works, you may read my article (titled "ZigZag
> validity") that will be published in the August issue of the Stocks and
> Commodities magazine. In the meanwhile you can review my past messages.
> Everyone:
> A few days ago I posted a new indicator of mine called "SR ZigZag
> Trend",
> which, as I believe, solves for good every problem related to the
> dynamic
> nature of zig. To my surprise, there were no reactions, no replies,
> nothing!
> The enthusiasm about ZigZag validity (a simple, not very handy
> indicator)
> now gave place to total indifference to a new indicator, which actually
> marks the end of the zig myth! This is a also a binary indicator which
> returns 1(=confirmed uptrend) or -1(=confirmed downtrend). In my
> lengthy
> message to the group I explained that SR Zigzag Trend:
> 1. is always valid. To put it simply: WYSIWYG (What You See Is What You
> Get). No revisions, no redraws! Never!
> 2. can be used as a stand-alone indicator in Zig's place.
> 3. can be used safely in systems and back tests. Where one would like
> to
> use zig (but did not dare to), now he can use SR Zigzag trend and that's
> it!
> What's more, by pasting the code to his system one can even optimize the
> percent parameter!
> 4. can also be used in experts, explorations and everywhere as any
> other
> custom formula.
> Isn't this strange? An indicator which solves a problem as old as zig
> and
> which could be easily sold for $### is offered for free and nobody seems
> to
> have noticed it!
> Anyhow, try these indicators (especially SR ZigZag Trend) and tell me
> what
> you think. If you don't have the codes I can post them once more.
> Spyros
>
> Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2002 01:32:51 +0200
> From: "Igor" <igor.devisscher@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: peak trough ...zigzag validity
>
> This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
>
> - ------=_NextPart_000_001A_01C20CFA.134A9F10
> Content-Type: text/plain;
> charset="US-ASCII"
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
> Hy list,
> I found this text on the internet. Is there a solution to this
> problem?...Is there a way that you know that a signal will stay and NOT
> afterwards disappear to call itself a winner in the results of the
> tester. Is the zigzag validity maybe a solution to this problem. There
> has to be a way that one knows that a peak or a trough is a 100% true
> signal.?...
> greetings
>
> To: <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: Peak and trough
> From: "Al Taglavore" <altag@xxxxxxxxxx <mailto:altag@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> >
> Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2001 13:27:55 -0500
> Reply-To: metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Sender: owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Perhaps the problem can be
> assigned to the Zig Zag feature that is used inPeaks and Troughs. Refer
> to MetaStock manual (ver 7.03) page 528:"Be forewarned, that the last
> leg (i.e., segment of the Zig Zag is dynamic,meaning that it can change.
> Therefore, be careful when designing systemtests, experts, etc. based on
> the Zig Zag indicator."Al Taglavore----------> From: Owen Davies
> <owen@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>> To: metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Subject: Peak and
> trough> Date: Wednesday, October 24, 2001 2:58 PM> > Among the many
> things I don't understand, this one has> been bothering me of late:> > A
> while back, I decided to check one of my assumptions> and test the
> higher-high, higher-low/lower-high, lower-low> definition of trends.
> The easy way was to create a system> using peak() and trough(). It
> worked beautifully. Virtually> any contract I ran the system past, it
> made money. This> I took to confirm the validity of the trend
> definition.> > Then the obvious dawned on me: Why not see whether
> there> was enough of the move left, on average, to make a buck from it>
> after the peak or trough was far enough behind us to get the> signal in
> real time? I wrote another system that included a delay> factor, so
> that one would enter or exit a trade only when the> price had retraced
> from the peak or trough by the appropriate> percentage. Again, it
> worked just fine. In historical testing, it> made money like magic on
> anything from 5-minute to daily bars.> > Problem: When I put it on
> real-time data, it gave a lot of bad> signals. Then it suddenly
> recalculated things, decided that the> minor up and down trends of the
> last few weeks--this was> on smallish intraday bars--had really been a
> long up trend,> gave a new set of signals, and declared itself a
> winner.> > Does anyone understand these functions well enough to>
> explain this behavior to me? I knew that peak() and trough()> backdate
> their results by putting their signal several bars> before it was
> possible to receive it; that is what I was trying> to correct with the
> delay factor. Now it seems that they> also recalculate their old
> percentages by comparing against> the latest data rather than limiting
> themselves to the data> that available in real time.> > No doubt this is
> a real beginner's mistake (despite having> played with this for years),
> but it would have seemed> reasonable to assume that a change of X% three
> weeks ago> should remain X%, even if we looked at it later. This sort>
> of thing has to be seen within its context, or it's useless.> Is there
> some reason the functions have to be written this way,> which I'm
> completely overlooking, or did someone just> butcher this piece of
> code?> > Many thanks.> > Owen Davies
> : 19/04/02
>
> ---
> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.351 / Virus Database: 197 - Release Date: 19/04/02
>
> ---
> Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.351 / Virus Database: 197 - Release Date: 19/04/02
>
> ---
> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.351 / Virus Database: 197 - Release Date: 19/04/02
|