|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Well your consistent with your post Don still cynical with the added touch
of mindless questions coupled with smirky comments. Little help in the
discussion and naturally you take no stand either way. Principals before
personalities Don you intellectual giant. Take personal shots at me and I
will return them.
Robert
At 09:52 PM 7/25/1999 -0700, DonC wrote:
>>Date: Sun, 25 Jul 1999 15:22:09 -0500
>> From: Robert W Cummings <robert.cummings@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> To: countach@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> CC: omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx
>>References: 1
>>
>>Not really Don it's my understanding of what the term system trading means.
>
>What makes your "understanding" a definition?
>
>>Your implying that I'm just being obnoxious or unbending about this term.
>
>Well, uhh, yes.
>
>>I am obnoxious sometimes to avoid admitting I'm wrong but not now.
>
>How can we tell ?
>
>> I challenge you and Bob Fulks whom I have much respect to define in a
>>sentence that accurately defines what system trading means.
>>
>>Robert
>
>Where is this rigid definition written?
>Who decided this is what system trading must be?
>
>===================
>
>>Subject: Re: Price shocks and money management
>> Date: Sun, 25 Jul 1999 17:02:01 -0400
> >From: "The Omega Man" <editorial@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >To: "Bob Fulks" <bfulks@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Robert W Cummings"
><robert.cummings@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> CC: "Omega List" <omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>
>>Let's start by defining terms. Is everyone willing to accept the
>>definitions posted by Jake Bernstein at:
>>
>>http://www.trade-futures.com/TTSystem.html ?
>>
>>
>>I believe these definitions are correct and that they imply that system
>>trading is "mechanical" and leaves no room for interpretations that might
>>vary between two individuals looking at the same chart. If two individuals
>>could look at the same chart and, following the "system rules", arrive at
>>different conclusions, then we are not talking about a system by my
>>definition (or by Jake's, or Robert's).
>
>Excellent definitions by Jake. But you've shotten yourself in the foot.
>Jake's definition of system includes the following :
>
>"... combined with a set of decision making procedures and risk
>management rules,
>..."
>
>This implies to me that the procedures and rules are separate from the
>system, and protect you from shocks or weaknesses in the system.
>
>
>donc
>
>
|