|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Hi Jimmy, thanks for responding to my post/inquiry. Here are some
questions/responses to your response:
> When you sign this email Tradestation 7 Easylanguage Specialist does
> that mean that you are or have ever worked for Omega/Tradestation? If
> so then it is true there is no system that makes money commercial or
> non-commercial.
I don't understand what Tradestation has to do with any of this, so I'll
assume you're just kidding here. On the other hand, maybe you know of an
alternative development platform for 100% mechanical emini systems. I am
purely focused on Tradestation because it meets the most of my needs, but
I'm opened to other ideas. The Tradestation 7 Specialist certification is
just for fun and vanity. Anyone who offers their services as an Easylanguage
programmer for TS 6-7 can get it. Other than that, it doesn't mean much.
> If you do no nor ever have had a position at Omega/Tradestation then
> yes there are plenty of systems that make money trading the eminis.
I believe you, and I don't want to sound like I don't. However, my
hypothesis is that there's no proof. If I understand you correctly, you're
agreeing that there's no proof, but you are saying you can personally
testify that such systems exist. I just want to establish the fact that
there is no proof anyone is making money on eminis with a 100% mechanical
system. Does this make any sense? I know it's weird, but maybe there's
someone out there who understands the point I'm trying to make.
> I would never buy a system from a vendor. I could never trade
> a system that didn't suit my trading beliefs. I figure nearly all of
> them are trash or will be soon anyway. Just my opinion.
I share your opinion in general, but I think we have to acknowledge systems
like R-Mesa, and that the problem might be the eminis....not necessarily the
movement of the stock indexes. I'm just speculating and seeking to expand my
understanding on the subject. Your revelations are helpful and I thank you
for taking the time to respond to each of my points as you have.
> Ask yourself
> why would anyone sell a system. If they can't trade it themselves why
> don't they hire a monkey to do it for them. They will make more in
> the market than they ever will selling systems.
100% agreement. Systems trading is highly-speculative, and I just don't see
any proof that anyone is doing it for real on the lower-risk emini futures.
I've seen no evidence or proof in 8 years, and I just want to see if anyone
else has reached some of the same conclusions I have about the futility of
trying to trade a single static system short-term on the eminis.
> So my BS is all opinion because I don't trade my own systems. I'll be
> glad to send you a report on the one I'm working on but I don't
> trade it so what value will it have?
Agreed. I trade a system, but that doesn't mean I expect it to make money. I
HOPE it makes money, and I think there's a chance it will. However, I'm
going in with a preset stop-loss based on the max drawdown. I've accepted
the loss, and I plan to stick it out all the way to max drawdown if
necessary. I have decided that this type of expectation is the most
appropriate for ME. I understand that everyone has different reasons/limits
with what systems they trade.
> Better yet change your
> approach to the market and build your own system. One really smart
> guy posted to this list quite some time ago that you need to see
> something in the market that works then code it. Now that isn't
> exactly how he said it but it is close enough. Think about that.
> They guy knows what he is talking about. Take any pattern that
> happens then code it up. If it doesn't work then figure out what the
> difference is between when it works and when it doesn't. Then code
> that in. The guy that builds a good system is the guy that can see
> what the market does and he can also figure out how to code it. I'm
> al lousy coder but I can see the market pretty fair.
I have thought about and tried this many times in my 8 years as an
Easylanguage programmer, and I think I understand the process you're
describing. However, what you just described can also sound like
curve-fitting. I believe that it's possible to make money consistently with
adaptive and/or evolving systems, but I don't consider these "100%
mechanical." I'm not talking about adaptive systems with my 3 hypotheses,
I'm thinking more along the lines of "static" and commercially-available
(for sale) systems on vendor web sites.
>
> Then the really big trick is if you have the system can you actually
> follow it? Can you do what it tells you? That alone probably takes
> more than half the traders that buy or build a system out of the game.
I totally agree and can speak from experience of having traded 6 emini
system for 6 months. Slippage and trader-errors is a serious problem, and
Tradestation 7-like automation is a powerful solution.
>
> Anyone agree with any of that BS?
Thanks again Jimmy for entertaining my topic of discussion and being so
kind. I've been monitoring this newsgroup for years, and this was my first
attempt to join in the discussion.
>
>
> Best regards,
> Jimmy Snowden
> mailto:jhsnowden@xxxxxxx
>
>
> Monday, February 2, 2004, 3:48:37 PM, you wrote:
>
> RH> I would like to entertain/stimulate a discussion about the
> myths/truths of
> RH> emini stock index futures day trading systems. I have done a
> lot of research
> RH> on this subject, and I'm not just trying to bait or badger
> system ideas out
> RH> of anyone. I am sincerely interested in testing my own
> theories and debating
> RH> the topic with others who share my interest....so here goes:
>
> RH> My 8+ years of research so far on this subject has led me to
> hypothesize the
> RH> following:
>
> RH> 1. There is no proof that anyone has made money consistently
> using a 100%
> RH> mechanical system to day trade emini stock index futures.
> This is not meant
> RH> to insult those who claim to be doing so, or to call them liars. I am
> RH> well-aware that many CLAIM to be making money consistently
> day-trading a
> RH> 100% mechanical system on eminis, and I sincerely trust the
> honesty and
> RH> integrity of these people. However, I have seen no PROOF that
> anyone does it
> RH> consistently, year-after-year. I don't know or care how it
> would/could be
> RH> proven, I just want to state my hypothesis that no such proof
> is available
> RH> to the public. In other words, "the suggestion that one can
> day trade the
> RH> emini stock index futures with an automated system has not
> been publicly
> RH> proven."
>
> RH> 2. One of the most "robust" commercially-available 100%
> mechanical systems
> RH> for day trading the big S&P contract is the R-Mesa program.
> This conclusion
> RH> is based on my search for the last 8 years of a viable system
> for trading
> RH> the eminis. I have learned a lot about curve-fitting and
> "robustness." I
> RH> understand that most systems are simply fit to past data.
> However, judging
> RH> by published track records for every commercial S&P system
> I've ever seen,
> RH> R-Mesa seems to be the only one that has performed
> consistently since 1985.
>
> RH> I have asked the developer of R-Mesa (John Ehlers) and others
> about using
> RH> mechanical systems on the eminis. The consensus seems to be
> that even the
> RH> best big contract S&P systems will not "work" as well on the
> eminis, and
> RH> that maybe NO system can work on the eminis. These ideas have
> led me to the
> RH> following "master" hypothesis:
>
> RH> 3. There is no commercially-available 100% mechanical system
> for day trading
> RH> the emini futures that can show a "reasonably robust"
> performance record
> RH> over the entire life history of the emini futures (works on over the
> RH> life-of-contract for all 7 emini markets <2-7 years depending on the
> contract>>). If such a system exists, then it is in very high demand and
> RH> would become well-known to the public very quickly. Therefore, I have
> RH> concluded it is "reasonable to assume" that no such system has been
> RH> available since the emini futures began trading.
>
> RH> Okay, those are three of the hypotheses I'm working with. I
> would appreciate
> RH> an opportunity to discuss/debate this topic with
> others....assuming anyone
> RH> else shares my fascination about this. I have even thought
> about writing a
> RH> book about this, and I'm hoping that creating a thread here
> will help me
> RH> gauge public interest in such a book. Maybe it's old news and
> I'm just slow
> RH> to realize what everyone else already knows. Maybe I've missed some
> RH> important information, or maybe I'm missing out on some great
> opportunities
> RH> to become an emini systems day trader.
>
> RH> I'm just another wannabe trader like everyone else. I've
> never made a dime
> RH> trading futures, and I don't claim to have any secret power
> to help anyone
> RH> else do so. I'm just a Tradestation "enthusiast" who's
> fascinated by the
> RH> mystique and fantasy of day trading the emini futures. I'm
> currently trading
> RH> a system on the YM, but I feel my expectations are reasonable. I don't
> RH> "expect" the system to make money, and I've accepted it as at
> least 50%
> RH> possible that I willI lose the max drawdown amount ($4000.00)
> of my system.
>
> RH> I understand that there might be system-assist brokers or
> system vendors of
> RH> questionable systems who will attack my ideas aggressively
> here (as they
> RH> have on TradestationWorld). I only ask that we keep the
> conversation civil
> RH> and avoid personal attacks. Attack my hypotheses, attack my
> research, but
> RH> please don't start the name-calling that sometimes results when anyone
> RH> proposes the notion that "mechanical systems trading is
> highly-speculative"
> RH> I am sincerely opened to opposing views, and I promise to
> debate without
> RH> resorting to personal attacks.
>
>
> RH> Ron Hudson
> RH> Tradestation 7 Easylanguage Specialist
>
>
>
>
> Outgoing mail scanned by Norton
>
>
|