|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Hi Conrad
I think the question comes down to:
"Are you making money with the method you are using?"
What Norm or Bryce use successfully is relevant only to the extent
that their approach suit you; and hence, give you another possible
method to make money.
Whether you are a discretionary trader or mechanical, you still need
to take bet size, drawdowns etc into consideration - just as you
need to take winning psychology into account.
Quite apart from the above, there is my personal belief, and I stress, my
belief, that a good discretionary trader is likely to have smaller drawdowns
than the mechanical trader over a large sample size; he is also likely
to have smaller profits in a strongly trending market.
regards
ray
R Barros
101/25 Market Street
Sydney NSW 2000
Australia
Voice: 61 2 92673470
Fax: 61 2 92673478
E-Mail: rbarros@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
----- Original Message -----
From: cb <cpbow@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, January 17, 2000 10:25 PM
Subject: [RT] Re: Predicting vs. reacting was: Bryce, Gann, etc etc.
> You guys/gals really believe that beans respond to planets and geometry
> instead of being rather unpredictable depending on crops sizes, weather,
> farm bills etc.?
>
> I looked at a past example from someone saying that rye stopped at 103
> because pluto and mars were in conjunction at 103 deg. and it seems
> crazy. When I see a geometric chart with lines on it, I see something
> that might look neat on the wall but doesn't do anything predictive for
> me, maybe because I don't know the underlying principles.
>
> Then again, I contemplate my depleted trading account, and realize what
> I did in the past was terribly ineffective by method or by money
> management. And I know people like Mr. Winski runs a newsletter that
> have trades that are actually profitable acc. to third party monitoring
> (at least for the 2 years I was looking). So whether the planets help
> these guys isolate cycles in the markets (whether or not the planets per
> se having anything to do with it) or not, something is working (even if
> it's just because they manage trades well, and not due to the entries at
> all).
>
> Since curtailing and now actually suspending trading, I have worked on a
> system which needs testing but involves pretty much routine indicators.
> While i've tried to avoid large amounts of lag, the system is still for
> the most part reactive not predictive - in the sense that it gets on a
> trend or reversal that has occured, rather than trying to predict it.
> And after that for the most part it has only a trailing stop. No
> targets, but there can occassionally be a "loss of signal" exit. If the
> bet was right I'll make a profit. If the bet was wrong, I'll take a
> loss.
>
> I also subscribe to the omega list. To some extent it seems there's a
> gulf between most system traders and chartists. System traders seem to
> be more interested in managing betsize and drawdowns in order maximize
> profits gained by winning trades that their systems almost stumble on.
> (I'm exaggerating. but my point is the average system isn't too smart;
> it sticks it's toe in the water to see if a profit is there). Chartists
> seem to spend a lot more time on predicting. Or at least the ones that
> emphasize "order in the markets", do.
>
> Is this dichotomy (predicting vs. reacting) only in my own mind? Is
> predicting better for rebuilding a tiny account, because the drawdownss
> will be lower?
>
> I just spent almost $200 on 5 books: 2 on money management (Jones,
> Balsara), 1 on options (Natenburg), 1 on candlesticks (Morris), and 1 on
> cycles (Hurst). Should i have gotten Ewave, Gann, and astrological
> materials instead? Miner? Dinapoli or other fibonacci?
>
> Conrad Bowers
>
>
>
|