|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
>Before buying another book, read: Winner take all by William Gallacher.
> In any event, I think we need to remember that there are always some
>traders making money and some losing, some with astrology, some with
>geometry, some with Point and Figure, and some with whatever system you
care
>to mention.
> Whatever you use, learn it well, understand it (and its quirks), and
>make it yours. Know when to get out when it hiccups, and play the
>statistics; ie., get out if your trade is going nowhere.
>Just a thought or two.
>Best
>Gram.
>-----Messaggio originale-----
>Da: cb <cpbow@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>A: realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Data: 17/01/2000 12:33
>Oggetto: [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
>>
>>
>
|