|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
I have a rather extensive background in software development and spent the
last decade of my career building trading indicators and systems as a hobby
and I've continued to develop indicators and systems since becoming a full
time trader. While I've hardly exhausted all possible avenues, I've been
down a great many and my own trading has evolved away from indicators and
systems to pivots, patterns and channels which keep me pretty close to the
price action. The one thing I have found is that the more I deal in
identifying and trading price moves, the more difficult the programming
becomes. I constantly try to automate the routine parts of how I trade and
am amazed at the complexity involved ... what appears to be a few simple
rules turns out to be a very complex eye/brain cognitive process.
I believe that the widespread use of computers and computer software in
trading is based in large part on the apparent ease of trading using formula
based indicators .... a myth which is heavily promoted by the mass market
trading software vendors who promote their software based on indicator count
and system count. Yet, that ease is deceiving ... those who trade
successfully something like a simple RSI or Stochastic (and there are
traders who do), know that the secret lies in recognizing and trading the
subtle patterns of confirmation and divergence rather than simplistic line
cross-overs and those patterns are far more difficult to program than A
Cross Below B.
Earl
-----Original Message-----
From: Timothy Morge <tmorge@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: Gabe Hanover <gabeh@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Omega-list <omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Monday, October 19, 1998 5:47 PM
Subject: Re: Indicators, Beagle or human
>If you read Gabe's statement above, I beleive he is saying that given
today's
>technology, someone with coding expertise could investigate the tools I use
to
>trade and replicate my trading success and style. I am not willing to go
down
>that road with what I know about trading. By the same token, if you showed
me, a
>discretionary trader, exactly how a complex trading program or indicator
worked,
>I'm not willing to say that I could replicate the system's or indicator's
>success. I don't know that either is easily transfered from human
discretionary
>trader to code on the one hand or from code to human discretionary trader.
I'm
>not willing to say it's simply a matter of being able to 'identify,
quantify and
>systemize.'
>
>But again, that doesn't mean both approaches aren't successful, valid and
>perfectly useful. I just don't see them as automatic versus 'tended' human
>trading.
>
>Best,
>
>Tim Morge
>
|