|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Jose,
Obviously you and Jim have some regrettable personal history. This is unfortunate. But, I can see no advantage for you or any other member of this community in your admittedly personal attacks.
I hope you can read my comments with a friendly perspective. I have purchased both your URSC Kit and the MACD Divergence Kit and I have not been disappointed with products themselves or the service that followed. I also see you as being very generous in your willingness to help others write MS code. As an aside, I want to suggest that the Filter DLL that is included in the URSC Kit is an exceptional value as it can be used to accomplish many other tasks outside of the original design. All in all, you are a credit to this community.
Where we all lose is in the deterioration of the etiquette of this community. In my opinion, Jim?s comments are far from insidious and vacuous. He has made very meaningful contributions to my education as a trader and an investor and I am very grateful for this. I believe that there are others who also appreciate Jim?s comments. Because of your animosity towards Jim we are all missing a moderated, thoughtful discussion on the points of difference. Perhaps, the harsh tone of this discussion is also discouraging others making thoughtful posts.
Jose, I also want to call you out for making a number of, what I see as, exaggerated claims. For example: Snake Oil Sales Man, Hidden Agenda, Shady Character. From what I have read, you have made no attempt to substantiate these claims. This makes it appear that you have fallen to the level of name calling and in doing so you have risked tarnishing your reputation for little or no apparent gain. It?s a little silly, don?t you think?
Other than a few books, I have never seen Jim attempt to sell anything. In my opinion, Jim supports a select few of MetaStock add-on because he genuinely believes that they can add value and because he has demonstrable evidence to support these claims. Jim?s support for the SpyGlass / Fire product was presented with a very meaningful amount of evidence and economically significant results over two issues of MSTT. Jim has also made comments in support of ICE, I can?t see a problem with this. If I made a comment is support of John Slauson or ICE would you attack me?
I?m getting to the point where I am beginning to ramble to I?ll stop. I hope you can see the intent of my comments and I hope understand that my comments are not meant to be a person attack.
Cheers,
Cameron
To: equismetastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx: josesilva22@xxxxxxxxxxxxx: Fri, 2 Mar 2007 18:42:38 +0000Subject: [EquisMetaStock Group] Re: RSC isn't the issue
Rvalue, you are absolutely right - I am "thrashing" Super/Jim/ValLine, and I strongly believe that I have not only a good reason, but a duty to our usergroup to keep shady characters in check.I find it difficult to stay idle by the sidelines when someone with a gift of the gab and hidden agenda keeps pushing nothing more than snake-oil to "newies" (as he's fond of calling them). > Having multiple names is not a crime on the internet, particularly when> you aren't selling software..Well, Rv, you'd be surprised at finding out who is selling what. ;)Caveat emptor.jose '-)http://www.metastocktools.com--- In equismetastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "rvalue1" <rvalue1@xxx> wrote:>> I get the impression that Super is hardly trashing Jose; rather that > Jose is trashing Super. In any case Super has a right to his > opinions and if they don't track Jose's or heap superlatives on his > software - its not a valid reason to trash him. > I have used many add-ons; but do not own Jose's. I can say that I've > certainly bought some usless ones and Jose's would certainly be > much, much better, I am sure. But after buying MS10 and Ehler's add-> on, I am laying off buying more right now. I did pick up a very good > idea from the RMO - I have incorporated it into my own system. RMO > was of great value to me.> Also, I have learned a lot from Super's posts and suggestions - > probably the most - some were very basic concepts but for whatever > reasons, they had eluded me for a while. I don't thing Super > deserves trashing from Jose, so I hope Jose would get off it and > stick to Metastock posts and quality support he continues to provide > many. Providing positive opinions on add-ons that deserve it or > negative ones on those that don't is useful ... Having multiple > names is not a crime on the internet, particularly when you aren't > selling software..> As for strategies - I prefer hedged system trading, biased to long > or short side based on the trading systems I apply. On the day the > DJ dropped 416, my account went up - and its for
p or down, based on stock behavior. > Last several months I have been working on an aggressive return > system using options and directional trading, tuning it and adding > position sizing methods to get much more from it. Manual walk > backtested results were unbelievable - which is why I am cautious > and don't fully believe it. But I am ready for real money testing - > and thats what I am doing - with my own money. Don't plan to toot my > horn or sell it. If it makes me a good money; I will be richer for > it.. and will keep it. > If you get me real upset, I might share a couple of well-known money > making services that totally bombed for me, not that anyone would > realize it from there constant ads and emails. But even that would > get them unnecessary attention I'd rather not give them.> >> --- In equismetastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "Jose Silva" > <josesilva22@> wrote:> >> > > I think there's a miss understanding I need to correct. I'm not> > > trashing Jose. > > > > No problem - I care little about personal attacks anyway.> > What matters to me ultimately is truth, specially if it can help > those of > > us that are open to it, and those that don't have any hidden > agendas.> > > > > > > My point about testing indicators is really simple. In every > test run> > > by professional systems developers like Stridsman where I have > seen> > > the data, favorites like relative strength and stochastics have> > > produced erratic, inconsistent results. > > > > There is little point in harping about testing indicators to see > if they > > are profitable or not, because there are an infinite number of > variables/> > combinations/permutations involved in backtesting each one.> > > > For example, let's take the Simple Moving Average:> > > > > > 1) Should we test it on a simple price/crossover strategy?> > Cross(C,Mov(C,periods,S))> > > > Well, if one wants to be safe and part of the crowd, and watch > one's > > capital slowly bleed to nothing, the answer is YES.> > Changing periodicities, MA types, data arrays, will resu
tions. No one lives long > enough to > > be able to backtest all of them.> > > > > > 2) Should we use it in a contrarian way then?> > Cross(Mov(C,periods,S),C)> > > > Yes, provided the fundamental strength of the market is known, and > we are > > prepared for the inevitable drawdowns that betting against the > market > > brings. Again, the myriad of permutations is akin to looking for > a needle > > in a haystack.> > > > > > 3) And what about the other infinite number of strategies using > the SMA, > > other than crossovers?> > > > > > As one can see, "testing indicators for profitability" is a > totally > > meaningless concept - it couldn't be done objectively even if the > whole > > Human Genome Project team were assigned to it for the next 1000 > years.> > > > Throw in the fact that the markets are constantly evolving and > dynamic, > > and it soon becomes clear that making a career out of backtesting > > indicators is a path to a meaningless existence.> > > > > > > I didn't want to write my own DLLs.> > > > Shure - as if Mr superfragalist had the option.> > Playing around with some ancient mainframe back in college does > not offer > > one much in the way of programming skills. I'll bet my reputation > that Mr > > superfragalist couldn't put any meaningful MetaStock code together > if his > > life depended on it, much less put together a useful DLL.> > > > > > > If Jose had something that helped me, I would use it.> > > > Well, Jose did have something to help you, but not in the way you > intended,> > Mr superfragalist/valuelinetrader/Jim/Bob/John/Bill/William/Stan.> > > > Cutting deals with Equis behind my back to sell my valuable > software for > > 20% "royalties", and attempting to get a large kickback from Equis > as the > > middleman, is definitely not my idea of helping anyone.> > > > There are words that come to mind whenever I stumble on Mr > superfragalist's > > insidious and vacuous posts, but etiquette prevents me from > writing more.> > > > > > Caveat emptor.> > > > > > jose '-)> > http://www.meta
tastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, superfragalist <no_reply@> > > wrote:> > >> > > I think there's a miss understanding I need to correct. I'm not> > > trashing Jose. > > > > > > I should have errased the heading RSC. > > > > > > The point I was making didn't involve the RSC. I was refering to > all> > > of the plug-ins and the lack of specific information that gives a> > > buyer any way to evaluate what they are getting. It's not just a> > > problem in MS. Every TA program has the same issues.> > > > > > The RMO is a good example. Right now there is only antidotal> > > information on it. It's practically impossible to test, but it's> > > touted as being a great performing system by Rahul Mohindar. > > > > > > There will be people who say it works great for them. And there > will> > > be others who say it doesn't. Both opinions are subjective. I > like> > > objective data. > > > > > > I've used parts of the RMO in a few systems I put together to > see if> > > any of it was useful. Mostly I used the Rainbow portion. I used > it as> > > an potential trade flag, and then used other criteria to > determine if> > > the signal was a good trade. In that form it work pretty good.> > > However, a lot of other things would have worked just as well. (I> > > substituted a few.)> > > > > > My point about testing indicators is really simple. In every > test run> > > by professional systems developers like Stridsman where I have > seen> > > the data, favorites like relative strength and stochastics have> > > produced erratic, inconsistent results. > > > > > > I mentioned I had tested all kinds of momentum formulas and the> > > results were marginal with the exception of a couple of things. I> > > mentioned the slope of the price curve and the external relative > > strength.> > > > > > Basically the reason I posted what I had seen in the tests was > to give> > > anyone interested in momentum indicators a direction they might > want> > > to look in to do their own tests. > > > > > > I really don't care what formulas someone uses to figure
ate external relative strength. I > use> > > SpyGlass because it's the only method I've found for external > relative> > > strength that is easy, works consistently and is cheap. I didn't > want> > > to write my own DLLs.> > > > > > May be someone else can do a search and find another way to do > the> > > same thing in MS with another tool. If there is something else, I> > > would like to know. I will probably buy it and test it. (For > those who> > > care, I don't use Fire.) > > > > > > Using Relative Strength Comparatives has been around a long time.> > > There are many ways to get the RSC results. I've heard using RSC> > > works. It seems logical, but I haven't seen anything but > antidotal> > > evidence. > > > > > > In my own trading I used a variety of sources for the relative> > > strength calculations. I used my own formulas, and I subscribed > to> > > vendors who provided the rankings. It worked so, so for me. It > didn't> > > provide the consistency I was looking for. However, I certainly > didn't> > > try all of the ways to use RSC values. I'm sure there are 1000s > of> > > other trading methods that can be used with the RSC rankings. > > > > > > I'm always looking for ways to improve what I do. If Jose had> > > something that helped me, I would use it. No quesiton. I would > base> > > what I was willing to pay on how much it helped me. How would I > know> > > if it helped me. First I would test it, and if the test results > were> > > good according to my criteria, I would incorporate into my > trading and> > > then see what happened in real time. > > > > > > To me, it doesn't matter about the skills of the tool provider. > It> > > doesn't matter about the cost. It doesn't matter how much free > stuff I> > > get. It doesn't matter how much support the vendor provides. I > care> > > about the objective data on performance and how well it works in > live> > > trading.> > > > > > My point in the post was no one provides objective data. If they > did> > > it would either kill the sales of their product or g
pears on the financial news occasionally in > India. If> > > someone runs across him, they should ask about the test results > from> > > the RMO, since it is his system.> > > > > > Back in the late 1990's a lot of traders were commenting on all > kinds> > > of things that were making them big money. Then in 2000, they > were> > > posting about how the tools had failed them and they lost most > of the> > > the money they made in the 1990's. > > > > > > Consistency is really hard to achieve. Finding something that > works> > > sometimes isn't. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In equismetastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "Scott and Sarah Gorman"> > > <TradingFloor@> wrote:> > > >> > > > I agree! Although I'm in the background of the discussions, I > read> > > each one.> > > > It's getting to a point that a great number of postings are not> > > related to> > > > learning and applying Metastock formulae. Also, trashing Jose > is highly> > > > inappropriate. Afterall, he's giving his time and expertise > to the> > > group.> > > > We should all appreciate Jose's efforts and show him nothing > but> > > respect. > > > > > > > > Scott> > > > > > > > (On the Trading Floor) > > > > > > > > "Don't let the market make a monkey out of you" > > > > > > > > Dr. Scott Gorman> > > > 6340 NE 19th Avenue> > > > Fort Lauderdale, FL 33308> > > > Tel: (954) 202-3536> > > > Fax: (954) 337-0704> > > > Cell: (954) 288-2020> > > > > > > > PLEASE NOTE: Any attachments to this message have been > scanned by> > > Norton> > > > AntiVirus and have been found to be free from infection. Virus> > > definitions> > > > are updated daily.> > > > > > > > IMPORTANT NOTE: This e-mail, including any attachments, is > intended> > > for the> > > > use of the person to whom it is addressed and may contain> > > information that> > > > is privileged and confidential. If the reader of this e-mail > is not the> > > > intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible to > deliver> > > it to> > > > the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any > dis
nformation is STRICTLY > PROHIBITED.> > > If you> > > > have received this e-mail message in error, please notify us> > > immediately and> > > > delete the related e-mail and any attachments.> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________> > > > > > > > From: equismetastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > [mailto:equismetastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]> > > > On Behalf Of Lionel Issen> > > > Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2007 8:38 AM> > > > To: equismetastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > Subject: RE: [EquisMetaStock Group] Re: RSC-Price?> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This thread is getting too personal.> > > > > > > > Perhaps the participants could continue this via private > emails.> > > > > > > > Lionel> > > > > > > > From: equismetastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > <mailto:equismetastock%40yahoogroups.com>> > > > [mailto:equismetastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > <mailto:equismetastock%40yahoogroups.com> ]> > > > On Behalf Of Eduardo Gontan Pulgarin> > > > Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2007 4:25 AM> > > > To: equismetastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > <mailto:equismetastock%40yahoogroups.com>> > > > > > > > Subject: Re: [EquisMetaStock Group] Re: RSC-Price?> > > > > > > > No, I cannot tell in % or otherwise; I have also got TradeSim: > I sent > > an> > > > e-mail about a problem, and never received an answer; luckily > I was> > > able to> > > > sort the matter out myself. They do offer a forum like this > one, > > though,> > > > where you can get feedback from other users.> > > > I have got AlphOmega; don't use it anymore, though, as I lost > faith in> > > > Elliott Wave, but I keep it as sometimes studying the code > helps me> > > getting> > > > answers to my questions.> > > > I still think that "Get lost" is the answer you deserve; there > is a> > > price> > > > for a good/product, take it or leave it. I can live with that, > why > > can't> > > > you?> > > > As for seeing the goods on display, how do you know you are > going to> > > like> > > > the taste of it? Not all beef taste the same, you see; some > contains> > > more> > > >
o to sell > it, it> > > must,> > > > per force, be cheaper! Not all cows are fed on grassland!> > > > There is a lot going on about add-ons, and there is a lot of > > information> > > > about them, too, as much by satisfied as by unsatisfied users -> just> > > search> > > > for the posts, for Goodness sake, or ask about it, and people > will> > > reply.> > > > So far I haven't seen a complain about Jose's products, while > there is> > > > plenty about others.> > > > What incenses me is, who do you think you are to tell others > how to> > > price> > > > their goods? Have you got any idea of the work involved? My > (now> > > retired)> > > > father-in-law, along with my brother-in-law, own a sewing > machine > > shop,> > > > selling sewing machines and, when possible, repairing them, to > keep> > > their> > > > custom satisfied; occasionally they may make deals, but if > somebody > > came> > > > into the shop telling them what you have posted earlier, the > answer> > > would be> > > > a clear "get lost" - and so it should! Perhaps you might want > to try> > > all the> > > > sewing machines on display, too? To make sure that they do some> > > sewing, who> > > > knows...> > > > Speak your mind by all means, but then, don't get too upset by > the> > > answers> > > > you'll receive when others do the same!> > > > Eduardo.> > > > > > > > a a <swptec@ <mailto:swptec%40yahoo.com>> > > > <mailto:swptec%40yahoo.com> > wrote:> > > > Hi Eduardo,> > > > > > > > I was merely voicing my opinion, I don't think it merits a > comment> > > such as> > > > "Get Lost".> > > > > > > > Your analogy of a butcher and supermarket is not correct. > There you> > > can see> > > > beforehand the stuff you are buying. In any case the cost is > low and> > > you can> > > > try both before settling down into a preference.> > > > > > > > With so many add ons available claiming to achieve all sorts of> > > wonderful> > > > things, one has to shoot "blind" i.e buy something first for $ > 1000> > > and then> > > > try it and maybe lose some money trying
t become important.> > > > > > > > Maybe you could tell me what kind of money (in percentage > terms per> > > annum> > > > and over how many years) you manage to make from URSC to help > me> > > make up my> > > > mind. Also how many other add ons you have tried (and perhaps)> > > abandoned and> > > > how much money you lost trying them.> > > > > > > > You have the benefit of experience, I don't.> > > > > > > > Thanks.> > > > > > > > Eduardo Gontan Pulgarin <con051204@> > > > <mailto:con051204%40yahoo.co.uk> > > > > <mailto:con051204%40yahoo.co.uk> > wrote:> > > > What a strange post; so, if I went, say, to my butcher, and > told him> > > to set> > > > his prices to what the supermarket charges, on the ground that > his> > > beef is> > > > not an award winner, and that increase in sales will make up > for the> > > > diffference in price, what answer should I expect?> > > > You have got a funny way of looking at life, mate; if you can't> > > afford it,> > > > then do as I have done for a long time - don't buy it!> > > > When I bought Jose's URSC kit, I couldn't care less about how > much > > other> > > > add-ons cost, or if it was an award winning one; I cannot > speak for> > > other> > > > users, of course, but I would be surprised if they didn't feel > like> > > I do!> > > > The kit does what it says it does; Jose's support is terrific -> > > sometimes I> > > > get an answer to my e-mail within minutes, I live in UK and > Jose in> > > > Thailand; that's the other side of the world, for you! Any > coding> > > query is> > > > dealt with swiftly, at no charge; and I have seen some silly > ones! No> > > > matter, they are answered, and promptly!> > > > Do you find this is the case with other add-ons suppliers?> > > > People find Jose a dependable developper, and his products > work; as a> > > > result, I think that Jose is well entitled to charge what he > sees> > > fit, don't> > > > you think?> > > > I am not Jose, but quite frankly, if I was, I would tell you > to get> > > lost!> > > > > > > > Eduardo.> > > > > > >
mailto:swptec%40yahoo.com> > wrote:> > > > Hi Jose,> > > > > > > > URSC kit + MACDH kit will set a person back US $ 1040, more > than the> > > cost of> > > > Metastock 10 EOD. A lot of people, myself included, simply > cannot> > > even think> > > > of such an expensive add on. Kindly re-look your prices and > bring> > > them at> > > > par with other add-ons. Increased sales will offset reduction > in> > > price. Let> > > > us not forget that your stuff is not even a nominee in TASC > awards, let> > > > alone being an award winner.> > > > > > > > Thanks.> > > > > > > > Jose Silva <josesilva22@ <mailto:josesilva22%40yahoo.com>> > > > <mailto:josesilva22%40yahoo.com> > wrote:> > > > Eric, price for the URSC tool-kit is Eur 395.> > > > See here for price in other currencies:> > > > http://www.metastocktools.com/URSC/URSC.htm> > > > <http://www.metastocktools.com/URSC/URSC.htm> > > > > > > > > The URSC kit has many useful tools, but does not come with the> > > Long/Short > > > > SmartStop Initial/Trailing stop found in the Divergence kit:> > > > http://www.metastocktools.com/MACDH/MACDHdiverg.htm> > > > <http://www.metastocktools.com/MACDH/MACDHdiverg.htm> > > > > > > > > For risk-normalized backtesting tools found with the URSC kit, > see > > this > > > > article on Trading System Evaluation/Development Tools:> > > > > > > > http://www.metastocktools.com/URSC/sysdev.htm> > > > <http://www.metastocktools.com/URSC/sysdev.htm> > > > > http://www.metastocktools.com/URSC/sysdev2.htm> > > > <http://www.metastocktools.com/URSC/sysdev2.htm> > > > > > > > > jose '-)> > > > http://www.metastocktools.com <http://www.metastocktools.com> > > > > > > > > --- In equismetastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > <mailto:equismetastock%40yahoogroups.com> > > > > <mailto:equismetastock%40yahoogroups.com> , "erc90" <erc90@> > wrote:> > > > >> > > > > Jose, > > > > > > > > > > What is the price? Are we able to set stop loss orders using > the > > URSC > > > > > DDLs? I wish to back test using the explorer or the system > tester.> > > > > > > > > >
_________________________________________________________________
Discover the new Windows Vista
http://search.msn.com/results.aspx?q=windows+vista&mkt=en-US&form=QBRE
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
Transfer from your equities account.
Receive up to $1,000 from GFT. Click here to learn more.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/aZttyC/X_xQAA/cosFAA/BefplB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/equismetastock/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/equismetastock/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:equismetastock-digest@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
mailto:equismetastock-fullfeatured@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
equismetastock-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|