Thanks Jose..if that really is your name?!
It did take me
time to type all that with just the one hand though…Man, that divergence
indicator is sharp!
From:
equismetastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:equismetastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Jose Silva
Sent: Tuesday, May 10, 2005 7:31
PM
To: equismetastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [EquisMetaStock Group]
Re: optimize--MG's question
Well said - not bad for an anonymous poster. ;)
> I was told that instead of all that "a
successful trader today needs
> sharp trading tools".
A successful trader needs both. A trader
with sharp tools and no
skills will just cut their trading account to
pieces.
It's the application of trading tools *and*
skills, and not the tools
themselves that make the difference. This is
the main reason I
provide trading tools and not complete mechanical
trading systems.
jose '-)
http://www.metastocktools.com
--- In equismetastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,
"TecloGeo" <teclogeo@xxxx>
wrote:
> Super,
>
> Interesting analogy you use with sports
athletes of past eras not
> being able to cut in the modern age. Here's
my take on that for what
> it's worth.
>
> Whatever situation you take, it has always
been, and will always be,
> that in order for a certain group of traders
to make money then the
> majority must lose. That's basic stuff and
applies directly to the
> althetic analogy - how many athletes do
history remember out of all
> those that have ever taken part? Not many.
>
> I think that to say that "Babe Ruth and
Jim Thorpe probably wouldn't
> have been much of a force in today's
world" is actually probably
> incorrect. Yes, there were different
techiques, training and
> technology in the old days. But what if.what
if, we had a teleport
> machine at our disposal and zapped those old
guys forward to our day
> and zapped modern day heros like Johnny Wilkinson and Steve Redgrave
> back to their days? Sorry if you don't know
who they are but I'm a
> Limey and I have to give honourable mention
to our own legends!
>
> If you compare apples with apples on a level
playing field and
> remove all the external influences on a
participant, be they in the
> sporting or trading arena, I think you will
find that legends will
> still be legends. Give Babe Ruth access to
all the modern day
> techniques, etc and I bet you he would still
have been a hero.it's
> just he would have whipped everyone's ass
with even more skill !!
> Take away Johnny
Wilkinson's modern day training ground and he STILL
> would have drop-goaled the Aussies in the
rugby World Cup final.!
> Why? Because at any given time, the
techniques available to one are
> generally available to all.it's the
application of those techniques
> and skills that counts, not the details of
the techniques
> themselves. Getting one up on your current
competitors is all that
> matters.tomorrows competitors are not
relevant.
>
> It may be a bit pedantic of me to take issue
with your simple
> analogy, but it does actually re-inforce what
you seem to suggest.
> The real danger now is in the OVER-use of
technology. What sets a
> successful trader or sportsman apart from the
crowd is mainly
> comprised of self-disipline, guts, instinct,
sheer determination and
> an unstoppable will to succeed. These
are all things that lie
> within and can be found neither on a training
ground nor a computer
> screen, no matter how good the algorithm.
>
> I got (politely) taken to task recently for
voicing an opinion on a
> strategy that I have found reasonably
successful.one that involves
> "traditional" methods of multi-time
frame analysis, basic trend
> recognition, indicator divergence and an appreciation
of the overall
> macro-economic situation. I was told that
instead of all that "a
> successful trader today needs sharp trading
tools". Well I disagree
> with that statement.what a successful trader
needs today is exactly
> the same as what a successful trader has
always needed - a sharp
> mind, not sharp tools. You can give sharp
tools to the village idiot
> and he will eventually cut his hand off!
>
> In summary.it seems to me that the
"crowd" is doing exactly as you
> say - they are moving to products like MS in
the search for a holy
> grail and ending up with indicator
fascination/paralysis. Just like
> they trusted their fund managers in the 80's
and 90's, now they are
> moving instead to trust that buy signal on
the latest black box
> plug-in they bought. Well rather than follow
the crowd I would
> rather stick with simple tools that I
understand inside-out and
> spend most of my time focussing on how I can
use them the way they
> were meant to be used.
>
> So I think we agree with each other?!
>
> PS, no responses from Aussies about the
present day state of the
> English rugby team please!!
Yahoo! Groups Links