|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
I got into one of Robbins systems and lost over 50% in three months before I
bailed. Last time I do that.
Dave
-----Original Message-----
From: Peter Kiefer <xet73@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: Neal T. Weintraub <thevindicator@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Steven Buss
<sbuss@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx <omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wednesday, July 29, 1998 10:16 AM
Subject: Re: Weintraub on Backtesting Questions
>You can't be serious Allaron and Robbins are THE Worst .
>
>----------
>> From: Neal T. Weintraub <thevindicator@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> To: Steven Buss <sbuss@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Cc: omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx
>> Subject: Re: Weintraub on Backtesting Questions
>> Date: 29 July 1998 17:26
>>
>> Steven, I did not know that I had to prepare an academic report. this is
>> merely my opinion from knowing hundreds of trading and lecturing around
>the
>> country for Omega and BMI. When I speak at Futures West, and Trading
>> Technology seminar is New York I will be more accurate. Perhaps, you can
>> give me a list of questions or should I ask them about their experiences
>> with such brokerage firms like Allaron and Robbins that market systems
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Steven Buss <sbuss@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> To: Neal T. Weintraub <thevindicator@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Cc: omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx <omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> Date: Tuesday, July 28, 1998 9:12 AM
>> Subject: Re: Weintraub on Backtesting Questions
>>
>>
>> Comments inserted below.
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Neal T. Weintraub <thevindicator@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> To: Steven Buss <sbuss@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Date: Tuesday, July 28, 1998 7:47 AM
>> Subject: Re: Weintraub on Backtesting Questions
>>
>>
>> >Steve
>> >I will give Grant a call this evening and talk about this.
>>
>>
>> I'd love to hear more about what Grant says about preparing seriously to
>> trade the markets.
>>
>> >Back testing for futures is interesting and academic and may give you an
>> >indication but that is about it. It is not the Holy Grail.
>>
>>
>> An "indication" of what?
>>
>> So, your knowledge that backtesting provides interesting results that
>> provide little value other than academic knowledge is based on what....?
>> I'm looking for phrases like, "take a look at this book..." or "you know
>S&C
>> published this article not long ago..."
>>
>> I'd even settle for a "You know, I have access to a proprietary study
>done
>> by xyz trading company and they found...."
>>
>> No one on this list has used the word "Holy Grail" to describe the value
>of
>> backtesting that I know of so I don't know whose view you are arguing
>> against here.
>>
>> >Back testing is like predicting the weather based on every July 29th for
>> the
>> >past twenty years.
>>
>> And, your knowledge that backtesting provides as little predictive value
>of
>> the worth of a trading system as a prediction of the "weather on every
>July
>> 29th for the past twenty years" is based on what?
>>
>> >I spent six months doing consulting for Omega. I was in every nook.
>>
>> And, the "six months doing consulting for Omega" and the fact that you
>were
>> "in every nook" (whatever that means) provided you with what specific
>> information that has relevance to the issue of whether backtesting
>provides
>> value?
>>
>> > Let
>> >Omega trade a system
>>
>> And, whether or not "Omega" could trade a system has what specific
>relevance
>> to the issue of whether backtesting provides value or not?
>>
>> > After all even Boeing tests its own aircraft.
>>
>> And, whether or not Boeing tests its own aircraft has what specific
>> relevance to the issue of whether backtesting provides value or not?
>>
>> >the
>> >market will do what ever it takes to fool the most number of people.
>With
>> >all these back testers why are most people net losers?
>>
>>
>> So, what specific knowledge do you have about the relationship of the
>number
>> of folks who have done serious trading system backtesting to the number
>of
>> people who are net losers?
>>
>> >I know let,s back test that too!
>>
>>
>> By positioning yourself as a kind of "expert" on the markets (I'd be
>happy
>> to expound on the ways that you've done that if you like) it seems to me
>> that you'd want to substantiate the opinions that will appear in your
>book
>> and that you publish to the list or to its ftp site.
>>
>> IMO, the attempt at levity here does nothing to negate the fact that your
>> note doesn't substantiate your view that backtesting provides little
>value.
>>
>> I know that there are alot of folks who are members of this list
>(including
>> myself) who are sincerely and extremely interested in the backtesting
>value
>> question. If I may be so bold as to speak for some of these folks for a
>> moment, we just want to know whether there is substance to your views on
>> backtesting or whether you're just being chatty when you express them.
>>
>> Steven Buss
>> Who only wishes he had more expertise in backtesting trading systems
>>
>> >-----Original Message-----
>> >From: Steven Buss <sbuss@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> >To: Neal T. Weintraub <thevindicator@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> >Cc: Omega List <Omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> >Date: Tuesday, July 28, 1998 5:10 AM
>> >Subject: Weintraub on Backtesting Questions
>> >
>> >
>> >Neil,
>> >
>> >I'm trying to figure out what it is that you're saying about
>backtesting.
>> >In your interview with Grant Noble, he says on p. 6.
>> >
>> >"...You can have a good system but you don't trust it enough to follow
>> every
>> >signal. To get a system, you can trust and use, you must know its
>> parameters
>> >and strengths/weaknesses. In other words, you never are going to
>purchase a
>> >"system" whose results year and year out are better than the average
>trend
>> >following system. So you might as well design your own and stop
>frustrating
>> >yourself."
>> >
>> >And then you say:
>> >
>> >"Well, the people advertising trading systems won't like to hear this.
>And
>> >neither will people promoting back testing software packages."
>> >
>> >Question:
>> >
>> >What SPECIFICALLY is it that you believe Grant Noble said that back
>testing
>> >software package vendors won't want to hear? I would think that it is
>> >precisely system backtesting that would help to secure Mr. Noble's
>> suggested
>> >goal of "knowing...[a system's]...parameters and strengths/weakneses."
>I
>> >don't see anything that he said that would justify the last statement
>that
>> >you made. Your statement could imply that you believe software that may
>be
>> >used for backtesting, like TS, is no more valuable than some "trading
>> >system" software that can be purchased. Is this what you mean to imply?
>> Do
>> >you believe that backtesting a trading system doesn't provide value?
>> >
>> >On the following page the exchange goes like this:
>> >
>> >Grant: "The best advice is to read everything you can and practice
>before
>> >you trade real money. "It's amazing how people will spend years of study
>> and
>> >thousands of dollars to become a lawyer or a doctor, but somehow they
>think
>> >they can enter the high income profession of futures trader without
>doing a
>> >bit or preparation…Again and again I have seen public traders lose tens
>of
>> >thousands of dollars and be none the wiser after all their time and
>money.
>> >They should have put that lost 10,000 into buying every futures book
>they
>> >could find. All that time watching prices could have poured into a
>> >self-directed 'college course' learning about the market. "(Pg.46, "The
>> >Traders Edge"). Nothing is going to work until you have confidence it
>is
>> >going to work and that takes time."
>> >Neil: "So buying a piece of software won't cut it."
>> >Grant: "Right."
>> >
>> >Now again, your position, and Mr. Noble's, vis-a-vis trading system
>> >backtesting is unclear. I would think that backtesting is a terrific
>means
>> >of securing the objective Mr. Noble advocates of having confidence in a
>> >trading system. But Mr. Noble just advocates "practice." Does
>"practice"
>> >mean "paper trading"? I'm not clear that it could mean anything else
>> >because when you state that buying software won't help (including
>> >backtesting software like TS) Mr. Noble says "Right."
>> >
>> >I believe that if you explained your views on system backtesting clearly
>> and
>> >in detail to the list you'd get alot of feedback, which is, I assume,
>your
>> >purpose in posting the interview to the Omega list FTP site.
>> >
>> >If, in fact, you don't believe backtesting a system, using software like
>> TS,
>> >provides value, it would be helpful if you could point to your own
>> >experience with backtesting systems that led you to such a view or to
>other
>> >materials upon which your view is based.
>> >
>> >Steven Buss
>> >Walnut Creek, CA
>> >sbuss@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> >"There's nothing more practical than good theory."
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>
|