|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
<x-html><!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
<html>
Ken,
<br>I'm a very computer orientated person, but Earl is right! I'm still
<br>trying to pull myself out of the mire after trading a black box system.
You've got to get yourself in sync with the market and <b>see</b> what
it's telling you.
<p>Rob
<p>Earl Adamy wrote:
<blockquote TYPE=CITE>-----Original Message-----
<br>From: ken weiner <traderksw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
<br>To: eadamy@xxxxxxxxxx <eadamy@xxxxxxxxxx>
<br>Date: Sunday, February 07, 1999 11:06 AM
<br>Subject: Re: S&P Wedges
<p>>Earl,
<br>> I had a question or two on your experience not only with triangles
but
<br>>breaks of trendlines, per se.
<br>>(1)Would you assign greater relative significance to a break of a
TL
<br>>extending back 6 mths with only 3 hits/contact points or to a shorter
TL
<br>>(say 3 mths)with more hits?
<p>I would pay attention to both, however action generally favors the TL
with
<br>more hits. Generally, for longer term analysis I will use charts of
a higher
<br>time frame e.g. base time is daily, then weekly and/or monthly charts.
The
<br>higher time frame patterns are frequently different, more developed,
and
<br>more reliable because the patterns reflect longer term market psychology.
<p>,(2)Is an upward sloping TL under the mkt of
<br>>any greater import (as an indication of support of course) than a
<br>>downward sloping TL also under the mkt?
<p>Upward sloping across bottoms in rising market and downward sloping
across
<br>tops in declining markets. Slope often becomes steeper as a move in
new
<br>direction gets underway.
<p>(3)If you are aware of any
<br>>material in the public domain which treats TL breaks from an empirical
<br>>versus theoretical basis, I'd be grateful
<p>See Edwards & Magee
<p>(4)Also, given your experience
<br>>with programming, have you ever come across a SW program which draws
TLs
<br>>and will give exact price levels for the TL for the latest and/or
<br>>selected bars and ideally one bar (tomorrow) in the future (I have
SC
<br>>4.0 which gives only approx values for the TLs)?
<p>IMO, this comes to the heart of why so few traders are successful!!!
The
<br>trading software developers pander to the mass market by offering programs
<br>which include hundreds of indicators, systems, and paint bars. None
of this
<br>challenges the mind or forces the trader to learn about market psychology.
<br>These traders depend upon the computer to tell them when to buy/sell
and ent
<p>er/exit - all contained in some little black box which is rarely understood
<br>by the trader using it. I spent 30+ years in the computer business
and have
<br>great respect for software, but if I go in for surgery, I sure as hell
don't
<br>want some damn robot poking around and doing the surgery!
<p>This is not a blanket castigation of using computer-based tools, it
is
<br>blanket castigation of attempting to trade without first learning how
to
<br>read the markets - like doing laser surgery without learning biology
and
<br>anatomy. I've been there and done that and it does not a successful
trader
<br>make. IMO, the reason that the mass software does not do patterns and
trends
<br>is that the programming required to replicate the ability of the eye/brain
<br>remains well beyond the scope of current personal computer technology.
<p>> My sincere thanks in advance, Ken</blockquote>
</html>
</x-html>From ???@??? Wed Feb 10 06:40:26 1999
Received: from list.listserver.com (198.68.191.15)
by mail05.rapidsite.net (RS ver 1.0.2) with SMTP id 24746
for <neal@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Wed, 10 Feb 1999 05:34:50 -0500 (EST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by accessone.com (8.8.5/8.8.5/PIH) with SMTP id CAA19272;
Wed, 10 Feb 1999 02:33:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mtiwmhc04.worldnet.att.net (mtiwmhc04.worldnet.att.net [204.127.131.39])
by accessone.com (8.8.5/8.8.5/PIH) with ESMTP id CAA19143
for <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Wed, 10 Feb 1999 02:31:41 -0800 (PST)
Received: from daytrader ([12.75.144.233]) by mtiwmhc04.worldnet.att.net
(InterMail v03.02.07 118 124) with SMTP
id <19990210103108.ETTS28455@xxxxxxxxx>;
Wed, 10 Feb 1999 10:31:08 +0000
Message-Id: <002501be54e0$7b86ec80$e9904b0c@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 10 Feb 1999 04:31:10 -0600
Reply-To: bheisler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sender: owner-realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
From: "Bob Heisler" <bheisler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: RealTraders Discussion Group <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: CL_Signal OnLine & TimberHill down
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0022_01BE54AE.2F180AA0"
X-To: <znmeb@xxxxxxxxxxxx>,
"RealTraders Discussion Group" <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3155.0
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3155.0
X-Listprocessor-Version: 8.1 -- ListProcessor(tm) by CREN
X-Loop-Detect: 1
X-UIDL: 3197c031e292ef343bf310ccb7ecacb9.03
<x-html><!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META content=text/html;charset=iso-8859-1 http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META content='"MSHTML 4.72.3612.1700"' name=GENERATOR>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV>I enjoyed your post, but would like to comment that trading and gambling
are two <STRONG><U><FONT color=#ff0000>very</FONT></U></STRONG> different
animals.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Bob </DIV>
<DIV>www.rjhtrading.com</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>-----Original Message-----<BR>From: M. Edward
Borasky <<A
href="mailto:znmeb@xxxxxxxxxxxx";>znmeb@xxxxxxxxxxxx</A>><BR>To: RealTraders
Discussion Group <<A
href="mailto:realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx";>realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx</A>><BR>Date:
Wednesday, February 10, 1999 12:19 AM<BR>Subject: Re: CL_Signal OnLine &
TimberHill down<BR><BR></DIV></FONT>>I think I want to take advantage of this
opportunity to engage in a<BR>>minor rant. First of all, I should note that I
am not a "trader" as you<BR>>folks understand the term. I don't
have either the capital or the time<BR>>to do this sort of trading, nor do I
think I could handle the emotional<BR>>part of the game. I lived in Las Vegas
for nine years, so I've seen the<BR>>symptoms.<BR>><BR>>What I do for a
living is computer performance analysis. Along with the<BR>>art and the
obvious required skills in interpreting data, there is a<BR>>great deal of
mathematics and statistics involved. Trading and computer<BR>>performance
analysis have a great deal of common mathematics. And the<BR>>stories I am
hearing from Earl and others on this mailing list and in<BR>>some of the
Usenet groups lead me to believe that the current rage for<BR>>electronic
trading, especially browser clients and Windows N T or UN IX<BR>>servers,
presents us with a classic example of the sorts of things that<BR>>can happen
to you if you don't get your computer performance analysis<BR>>and capacity
planning right.<BR>><BR>>The math is pretty hairy, but fortunately some
pretty simple pictures<BR>>tell the story, and when I figure out how to post
them here I will. But<BR>>the basic concepts are throughput -- the number of
transactions a system<BR>>is processing in a given amount of time -- and
response time -- the time<BR>>from when the client submits a request to the
server to when the client<BR>>receives the response back from the server. And
*any* system has a<BR>>*finite* capacity in transactions per second. An idle
system (no<BR>>transactions) has a very fast response time. Add some load --
increase<BR>>the throughput -- and the response time gets longer.
Exceed the<BR>>capacity of the system -- increase the throughput beyond a
certain<BR>>point -- and the response time becomes essentially infinte. The
system<BR>>can't handle the transactions, and it either ignores them, or
just<BR>>collapses in a ragged heap.<BR>><BR>>What Earl is describing,
and what I've heard about the E-trade problems<BR>>and to some extent certain
events during the 1987 stock market crash<BR>>sounds to me very much like
what happens when you try to pump 1000<BR>>transactions per second through a
system that only has a capacity of 100<BR>>transactions per second. I can't
be sure, of course, without looking at<BR>>NT PerfMon or UNIX 'sar' traces,
but the educated guess of this<BR>>performance analyst is that a number of
the computer systems that<BR>>high-freqency traders depend on are operating
dangerously near their<BR>>capacity limits. So on top of all the other risks
of high-frequency<BR>>trading, you should be aware that all computers have a
finite capacity<BR>>and that bad things can happen to you when that capacity
is exceeded.<BR>>--<BR>>M. Edward Borasky <A
href="mailto:znmeb@xxxxxxxxxxxx";>znmeb@xxxxxxxxxxxx</A> <A
href="http://www.teleport.com/~znmeb";>http://www.teleport.com/~znmeb</A><BR>><BR>>If
God had meant carrots to be eaten cooked, He would have given
rabbits<BR>>fire.<BR>><BR>>-----Original Message-----<BR>>From: Earl
Adamy <<A
href="mailto:eadamy@xxxxxxxxxx";>eadamy@xxxxxxxxxx</A>><BR>>To: RealTraders
Discussion Group <<A
href="mailto:realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx";>realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx</A>><BR>>Date:
Tuesday, February 09, 1999 08:54<BR>>Subject: CL_Signal OnLine &
TimberHill down<BR>><BR>><BR>>>One of those mornings where
everything which can go wrong does.<BR>>TimberHill<BR>>>price feed went
down around 830 mountain - if customers noticed
no<BR>>price<BR>>>changes coming in that was fine, otherwise tough s__t
for some 15+<BR>>minutes<BR>>>until they sent out a bulletin about 5
minutes before they got the feed<BR>>back<BR>>>up. Next Signal Online
feeds went down and now they won't stay down nor<BR>>will<BR>>>they
stay up.<BR>>><BR>>>Earl<BR>>><BR>></BODY></HTML>
</x-html>From ???@??? Wed Feb 10 06:40:40 1999
Received: from list.listserver.com (198.68.191.15)
by mail02.rapidsite.net (RS ver 1.0.2) with SMTP id 15130
for <neal@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Wed, 10 Feb 1999 07:31:13 -0500 (EST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by accessone.com (8.8.5/8.8.5/PIH) with SMTP id EAA21072;
Wed, 10 Feb 1999 04:30:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from imo27.mx.aol.com (imo27.mx.aol.com [198.81.17.71])
by accessone.com (8.8.5/8.8.5/PIH) with ESMTP id EAA20927
for <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Wed, 10 Feb 1999 04:27:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from HBernst963@xxxxxxx
by imo27.mx.aol.com (IMOv18.1) id 1IAZa26231;
Wed, 10 Feb 1999 07:26:36 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <e178c7a5.36c17afc@xxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 10 Feb 1999 07:26:36 EST
Reply-To: HBernst963@xxxxxxx
Sender: owner-realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
From: HBernst963@xxxxxxx
To: RealTraders Discussion Group <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: GEN: TC2000 A/D Line Revisited
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-To: rturner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
X-Mailer: AOL 4.0 for Windows 95 sub 4
X-Listprocessor-Version: 8.1 -- ListProcessor(tm) by CREN
X-Loop-Detect: 1
X-UIDL: a435a39e0b5c366f164c112943c4bd00.09
The TC2000 AD line is not correct. I collect the AD line myself and have also
seen in Barron's that we are 7000 issues from a new low. The AD line has been
weak but it is not near the Oct. lows.
Howard
|