|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Hi Mark,
We agree in principle.
Would I be correct in my understanding if I said "The Due Effect" is a
stop-loss you put on the system. So, if the system is exceeding the pucker
factor you pull the plug (so to speak).
Regards,
Michael
*----******------*******
I know what you are trying to say.
However, my point on it is if you have an
employee doing 250 sorts consistently, then
you would be crazy to fire them!
In reality you cannot get Consistency from a
discretionary being!
-m
--- Michael McGahee <mikem33@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Mark,
>
> It's like an employee the only sorts 250 sheets of
> paper a day. As long as
> the company makes money and survives on the sorting
> of 250 sheets a day it's
> perfectly OK. However, if all of a sudden the
> company needs 300 sheets
> sorted a day (market changes it's overall pattern)
> and will take a dump if
> the employee continues to sort 250 then the employee
> is no longer
> functional. So the employee is not discretionary
> they are more or less
> robotic. Having run a company for years, I can tell
> you the above is not too
> far off of a true statement.
>
> Regards,
> Michael
>
>
> *******---------**********--------
>
> Mark-
>
> I too am interested in what you have to say.
> I completely agree with "confidence-level" of
> your chosen system.
>
>
> However, my only comment to the employee scenario
> would be, yes, no one particular employee is
> perfect.
> But, by definition humans are discretionary
> creatures.
> Whereas, a system, is more robotic, or at least
> should
> be in my opinion.
>
> I suppose if your system is a neuralnet thats a
> different story.. ;-)
>
>
> in any case speak on...
>
>
> -m
>
> --- Charles Johnson <cmjohnsonxx@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Mark Brown writes:
> >
> > i think to be successful with any system you have
> to
> > have a confidence
> > level with it. know what it does, so that you can
> > begin to suspect
> > when it will make a killing and when it may get
> > whacked. it's call the
> > due effect (trade mark ;) it's what i have lived
> by.
> > i did not invent
> > the due effect i was taught it by someone, and it
> > can be quantified. i
> > think systems are like employees, you have to
> > understand what they do
> > well and what they don't and then take it at that.
> > you will never get
> > a perfect employee but that doesn't mean that they
> > can't get the job
> > done.
> >
> > ----------------
> >
> > Mark, can you go into this more? Sounds like you
> are
> > talking about
> > overlaying onto mechanical systems a discretionary
> > trade/do not trade
> > decision.
> >
> > When you say "it can be quantified," do you mean
> it
> > can be systematized --
> > i.e., you take a system and you add more rules to
> > it?
> >
> >
>
|