|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
At 09:43 PM 12/7/98 -0800, martin graffman wrote:
>DeMark's observations are not valuable unless they can be
>objectively analysed, and this will require that the "observations" must
>be coded as an indicator that can be used as a system. The ability to
>systematize and analyze is one of the great vitues of TS. We are wasting
>too much time with personality bashing. Does the DeMark system have any
>statistal validity or does it not? That is the question.
> Furthermore, if the system utilizing DeMark's "observation"
>(indicator) requires any discretionary intervention, then we cannot know
>if the "obervation" has any validity. The discretionary intervention has
>contaminated the analysis.
> So, I throw the ball into Mr. DeMark's court. Can you prove that
>the "observation" has statistical merit? If so, the we applaud your
>efforts and we can discuss how we can use it. If not, then let's discuss
>other potential aids to investing.
> Marting
>
Hello Martin,
Consider this: Anyone's observation **could** be valuable EVEN IF they cannot
be objectively analyzed.
My view differs from yours (drastically). There are many
very successful discretionary traders. I am one, and I know many.
I spoke to another one just a few days ago, a discretionary trader,
he has more than 50 monitors in front of him, he "kills" the
S&P market, has been doing so consistently for years.
It is my observation (I may be wrong on this) that there are more
successful discretionary traders than system traders. Even if this is
not accurate, there are MANY successful discretionary traders.
These traders would gladly learn about Tom DeMark's (or Tom, Dick, and
Harry's)
tools, and evaluate whether they apply to their own discretionary systems,
without "objective evaluation".
So I request that you consider other perspectives, and do not deprive
discretionary traders of exposure to (potential) tools.
Not everyone has your perspective, and other perspectives are as
correct as yours. Even if yours might be more correct in your mind..
That's just my opinion, I don't care if anyone agrees, but thought you
could appreciate an opinion completely different to yours.
The really difficult part is keeping an open mind. Discretionary traders
struggle with this every day, we live in a grey world, not black-and-white,
we have to try to observe what the market's next move is, without holding
a firm opinion (blinkers not allowed). We have little faith in back-tests,
we think we live in the real-world, which often deviates from back-tests.
Regardless of what Mr X, Y or Z says, regardless of what indicator
A, B or C says, regardless of what the backtested perfection of system
P, Q, and R is, discretionary traders live on their wits, we respect price
action despite our technical tools.. It's a thrill really (it would be a
religion if it were connected to the afterlife!!)..
But we use tools, we use indicators, and most importantly, we use our
brains. Please do not stand between us and any (potential) tools,
because just you are governed by "objective analysis".
Please take this in a positive way, I understand your point of view,
but I'm asking that you understand ours. Sorry if this email seems too
one-sided, it is because I'm providing a counter-point-of-view
(to what discretionary traders might incorrectly call "myths" and
what system traders usually call "common knowledge" or "common sense").
It's fun communicating with you, thanks for the opportunity! You're invited
to walk all over my ideas when I post a narrow-minded discretionary
perspective
one day! Especially if my perspectives one day suppress the discussion of some
nifty systems-trading concepts..
-Neal.
-----------------
Neal on the 'net.
Trade well. Train hard.
http://www.halcyon.com/neal/
|