|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
teclogeo,
My apologies if the Mark Twain quote came across as a complete
dismissal of statistics or statisticians. I had meant the comment in
the same way as I believe Twain wrote it (with humor, irony, and a
recognition that it will sometimes be true). And I am one of the real
people that uses statistics in his every day work.
I agree that the whole discussion of Stationarity has gone to far
(and I was the nut case that started it, shame on me). The point I
was trying to make is that academically it can be shown that trading
models that rely on filters (moving averages, transforms, etc.) are
not the holy grail of trading and that academically the holy grail
cannot exist. Since this applies to trading with adaptive indicators
offered here, I thought it was appropriate for this message board.
However, superfragilist put it best:
"Adaptive tools, in general, do test out a bit better than non-
adaptive tools. However, in reality I'm not sure they're going to
beat a couple of moving averages in live trading. I use several
adaptive tools and feel comfortable with them and the concepts behind
them."
If you can confidently trade with adaptive indicators and you believe
that you will get slightly better performance, then you will be a
better trader. Confidence in the execution of your trades is far more
important than any improvement you may (or may not) get from using an
adaptive indicator or a standard (classic) indicator.
Again, this is the difference between developing indicators and
trading. I am simply stating my belief that a trading holy grail not
only doesn't exist, it can't exist. This does NOT affect my trading.
A good trader accepts indicators and systems that are "good enough".
A good trader accepts that some things may have to be assumed as
irrelavent to the trade (then hope like hell that the assumption
doesn't come back and bite the trader in the pocket book).
jawjahtek
PS: John Ehlers would not agree with my thoughts. He describes his
job as "finding theoretically sound principles" that can be
implemented in trading. If it is not theoretically sound, he
considers it a failure. Classic example of a developer that will
never be a good trader.
--- In Metastockusers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "teclogeo" <teclogeo@xxxx>
wrote:
> Brad,
>
>
>
> I think you're right about the stationarity stuff. Anyway, I didn't
want to
> hold up geostatistics as particularly having any direct relevance to
> trading. It has its detractors in any case, who hold it to be the
greatest
> work of evil since Mein Kampf (miners can also be rather fanatical
> sometimes!). I just wanted to point out that statistics is not just
> practiced by politicians and beardy-weirdy university types. Real
people can
> use it too.!
>
>
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Metastockusers/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Metastockusers-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|