|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
The question of whether cycles are actually there or not is just idle
speculation. What is more interesting is whether there is something useful
in any of this.
I look at what are called cycles as swings. The recent discussion with
Clyde Lee and Bob R has been most pertinent to this. Maybe the cycle
purists wouldn't agree, but looking for swing probabilities seems to me
what it is all about.
I was just wondering if Hurst's course had more useful info in this vein.
David Cicia
At 08:41 AM 11/8/98 +1100, Chris Jackson wrote:
>You might want to look at this site. Our very own Marik Jurik.
>
>http://www.jurikres.com/faq/faq_cfb.htm#dominant
>
>"The big, obvious cycles you do see on price charts are actually the
>result of a combination of many weak cyclic forces that sometimes line
>up in phase to produce APPARENT dominant cycles that suggest the
>presence of a dominant, slow cyclic force that, in fact, does not
>exist".
>
>On the other hand I know people who use cycles. One of them uses Hurst's
>stuff. I have the book - did not know of a course.
>
>Some say that fixed len cycles are not the way to go.
|