|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
It's not a question of believing you, or not. I certainly have no reason to
doubt anything you or any other System follower/developer says-- but I find
it curious that results are generally represented as "hypothetical". There
is also the issue of back-testing on continuous data contracts that need to
be constructed by altering the actual historical market data from contract
to contract. Why not use the SPX data for testing-- which shouldn't need to
be altered in any way?
I have studied, tested, and written systems for 14 years. Many of my own--
and many developed and certified by some of the most recognizable names in
the business. I never found one to hold up in real-time trading for more
than a few weeks, at best. I still run Systems and consider their signals
as possibly worthwhile input in real-time trading, but rely on my
discretionary store of experience and techniques before pulling the trigger.
I don't doubt than there may be a couple of iconoclastic bicycle mechanics,
working in a garage in some place like Dayton Ohio, who might some day
invent a flying machine-- but I seriously doubt that the average
Trader/System-Developer will ever be the one who will be able to say-- I've
got a System that works-- period.
--------------------------------------------
At 08:46 AM 3/27/98 PST, you wrote:
>Ron Augustine wrote:
>
>> The obvious question is begged by your assertion "But it can be done" --
>>
>> Can it? -- Will you provide verifiable, audited, proof? If so, is it based
>> on back-testing or real-time trading?
>
>Well, I've been trading since 1992 and I'm still here and I'm profitable.
>I'd call that real time results. Will I provide an audited proof? To the
>IRS if I have to. But not to just anyone - if you choose not to believe me
>you can just as easily question the basis of my trades even if you I give
>you a blow by blow account via audited statements.
>
>As hans says ... I'm not selling a system. I don't care whether or not I'm
>believed. But I claim it can be done but not necessarily by everyone. I
>presume from your statement, you fall into the later group - we clearly have
>different trading styles. (My statement is not intended to demeen you (you
>may be a better trader than I) - it is just an observation of style).
>
>
>Chris Norrie
>
|