|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Message-ID: <388C06A6.D68B5E75@xxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2000 00:00:38 -0800
From: Ira Tunik <ist@xxxxxx>
X-Sender: "Ira Tunik" <ist@xxxxxxxxxxx> (Unverified)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en]C-CCK-MCD (AccessPort) (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: scot.billington@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [RT] Systematic vs. Discretionary
References: <000d01bf6632$0ef071e0$189f41cf@xxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="------------815529360239ACBC2926014A"
<x-html><!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
<html>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
System trading is only good if the computer automatically enters the orders,
the stops and the exits. If not, if the individual decides to not
take a trade the system is flawed. I only know of one person that
is set up this way. He uses a break out system and it produces approximately
37% winning trades. His profit picture is about a 22% annualized
return. I did not see his sheets or look at his numbers. But
the computers do put in all the trades. I believed what he told me.
<p>Any system where an individual trader puts in the order is discretionary
to a degree. The party that says he is trading totally system may
be using the system as a crutch to blame for the losing trades.
<p>The system I use is 80% mechanical and 20% discretionary. If I
lose it is my mistake, the system has a 20% losing factor, but I have to
look at it as my error. I am not blaming myself for the lose, I am
saying that the lose is part of the system. I developed the system,
therefor the lose is mine. If I did everything the system said to
do, and took every trade the system gave me, then I could blame the system
if my percentage of winners to losers changes. If my profit per trade
goes down, or if the graph of my profits has lower highs and lower lows,
I look for a problem, not in the system, but in me.
<p>If you did what the system said and you lost money, it was still a good
trade. It is good only because you had the discipline to follow the
system. Did you bother to analyze the trade after the close to see
why the trade lost? Was there something that you didn't see?
Was it something that you over looked? With me, I usually find that
I got lazy and didn't do my homework. I assumed that because I was
successful that I was bullet proof. Not so. No one is bullet proof.
Self, ego, and the psychological need to be right are the discretionary
traders worst nightmare. The other problem is ones belief system.
<p>Taking everything into consideration, I still believe that the human
brain is the best computer ever developed. The thing that people
forget is that the brain sees in pictures and not in numbers. The
first thing most traders want to know is to were do I get in and how much
will I make. This is overbought or oversold. Volume is up or
volume is down. They start seeing numbers and figuring. They start
back testing. they start using indicators that they don't understand. They
look at the past rather then the future. Wrong, look at the picture and
it will tell you the whole story. Like a road map.
<p>A good trader can take almost any system, astro, volume, eliot, Gann,
even some of Larry Williams stuff and make a good living. He does
it because outside of the system he is looking at the chart and that picture
is what triggers his final decision. Like everything in life, you
have to visualize what you want to accomplish before you can get there.
Trading is a business. YOu need a plan for everyday that will take
care of the contingencies that might arise. With the proper planning
there are very few surprises. You won't get rich over night, but
you will be able to get there. Many have done it. Ira.
<p>Scot Billington wrote:
<blockquote TYPE=CITE><style></style>
<font size=-1>I think one of the
critical decisions a trader makes, and one of the true distinctions between
trading styles is systematic vs. discretionary. When I say systematic
trading, I mean mechanical trading, X closes under Z with A, B, C in line,
I sell with a stop at Y EVERY time.</font> </blockquote>
</body>
</html>
</x-html>From ???@??? Mon Jan 24 08:01:52 2000
Return-Path: <listmanager@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Received: from mail.thetrellis.net ([208.179.56.11])
by purebytes.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id JAA21201
for <neal@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Mon, 24 Jan 2000 09:07:17 -0800
Received: from REALTRADERS.COM
([208.179.56.198])
by mail.thetrellis.net; Mon, 24 Jan 2000 07:58:34 -0800
Received: from mailhost.ap.net by realtraders.com
with SMTP (MDaemon.v2.8.5.0.R)
for <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Mon, 24 Jan 2000 07:53:12 +0000
Received: from ap.net (D-01.Arch-03.ap.net [207.44.219.194])
by mailhost.ap.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id HAA14309
for <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Mon, 24 Jan 2000 07:55:35 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <388C75F2.60103E92@xxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2000 07:55:30 -0800
From: Ira Tunik <ist@xxxxxx>
X-Sender: "Ira Tunik" <ist@xxxxxxxxxxx> (Unverified)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en]C-CCK-MCD (AccessPort) (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [RT] [Fwd: Re: inflation/implication on bonds]
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
boundary="------------956E1B740AB07339BE02E794"
X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
X-Return-Path: ist@xxxxxx
Sender: listmanager@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
X-MDMailing-List: realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
X-MDSend-Notifications-To: listmanager@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Reply-To: ist@xxxxxx
Status:
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Message-ID: <388C0F2B.5884EFED@xxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2000 00:36:59 -0800
From: Ira Tunik <ist@xxxxxx>
X-Sender: "Ira Tunik" <ist@xxxxxxxxxxx> (Unverified)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en]C-CCK-MCD (AccessPort) (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: ggautier@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [RT] Re: inflation/implication on bonds
References: <9a.34e52b.25bb6556@xxxxxxx> <00c901bf6521$bead0740$a74788ce@xxxx> <388C03E7.DF74663@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
If you want to know what is so bad about inflation, look at Germany after world
war I and the US in the 70's. It appears that every up tick will be absorbed
after a while. there was the $1.00/gal of gas scream. Now who wouldn't welcome
$1.00/ gal gas. Nixon put in price controls when inflation reached 3%. Today
3% is low and everything is wonderful. Will your income keep up with $400 loaf
of bread or a $300,000 automobile, a $40 movie ticket and on and on. Things
compound at an awful rate. In 1956, 3% inflation added, $108 to a Corvette.
Now a comparable Corvette sells for over $50,000. 3% on that is $1500. I took
my car for service and walked through the new car area. Every car I looked at
had between $5000 and $7000 dealer markup over the Mfr. suggested sales price.
The salesman asked what I was worried about, a young man came in and bought he
and his wife matching Saleen Mustangs at $70,000 each. To me, no Mustang is
worth $70,000, but there are those that will pay. Fortunately real inflation
hasn't hit yet. At least by the governments numbers. Ira.
Gwenael Gautier wrote:
> Just a plain stupid question: everybody here seems to dread inflation like
> hell. Is there anything bad to it? I mean why would a 4% inflation be
> bearish...? It has been there before, and it didn't prevent markets from
> rising. BTW, in Ben's numbers, I am sorry, but really I am not impressed by
> any inflation except for oil. But then who cares about oil in our economies.
> In Europe Oil is 4 times more expensive than in the US, DOes it make a
> difference? NO.
>
> What is dangerous for markets, is lack of confidence. If people are scared
> of losing their wealth, they'll pull liquidity, but if not, they'll keep
> adding, with or without moderate inflation.
>
> IMHO
>
> Gwenn
>
> swp wrote:
>
> > Ben -
> >
> > 1) It is Poser, not Posner.
> >
> > 2) I am a technical analyst who happens to have a degree in economics.
> >
> > With that out of the way, I can give you lots of on the one hand and on
> > the other hand.
> >
> > First of all, before I get into all of my equivocating, be aware that I
> > do believe that inflation is likely to pick up. I would not be at all
> > surprised to see US CPI inflation reach 3.5% (core could only reach 3.0%
> > or so). Currently total is at 2.7% and core is around 1.9%. I doubt that
> > we can get as high as 4.0% total and 3.5% core. Given that the long bond
> > is at a real rate of 4.0%, which is relatively high historically, I
> > suspect that we could see a pinch sooner or later.
> >
> > As far as the CRB goes, it does not have a sterling record as far as I
> > can tell predicting inflation. Studies have been done on it, and that is
> > what it has shown. Much of the CRB itself focuses on the non-core food
> > and energy sectors. The remainder is manufacturing based commodities.
> > The US is no longer a commodity based or manufacturing based economy. If
> > I remember correctly, US GDP is more than 60% services. Of course,
> > services by heat and electric and that is affected by energy inputs.
> > But, did your electric bill go down when oil fell? I do not think that
> > regulators will allow utilities to raise rates, and competition will
> > keep electric prices better in check. Heating oil and nat. gas are a
> > different story, but at least a correction, and a deep one, is due from
> > $30-$32 per barrel in oil.
> >
> > Going quickly back to the CRB, there is a possible wave count that says
> > the bottom from last year was not the final bottom. It is not my
> > preferred count, but we only last week retraced even 38% of that fall.
> > The CRB is barely above where it was when the Russian debt crisis began
> > and caused a deflationary scare.
> >
> > Of course, much of the inflation in the USA is wealth effect related.
> > But, if the stock market crumbles at some point this year, that will be
> > largely ameliorated. If it happens quickly enough, the psyche of the
> > consumer will not become inflation oriented and prices will stabilize. I
> > do not think we need a crash in equities for that, just a nice 30% or so
> > drop over a year or so to remind people that it is not a one way bet
> > (and enough to clobber some of the nasty equity borrowing habits going
> > on out there).
> >
> > Note that it is not just the Fed. Yes, the US economy is stronger than
> > just about anywhere else, but rates are near nil in Japan and extremely
> > low in Europe (except the UK). We shifted from deflation scare to
> > inflation pretty quickly. But, much of what caused the disinflation of
> > the 1990s still exists:
> >
> > Productivity gains, which are probably still under reported.
> >
> > Competition from emerging markets.
> >
> > Free trade.
> >
> > The internet.
> >
> > Overall, I am concerned and do expect that inflation has higher to go. I
> > do not believe that commodity prices are a fair measure. Also, look at
> > producer prices. You will see lots of time with deflation (falling
> > prices), but consumer prices did not fall. So, you have a situation of
> > lower raw materials and better productivity, but stable to slightly
> > higher prices. That means margins increased. Companies will likely be
> > able to hold prices steady a while longer before margins are
> > significantly pressured.
> >
> > So, yes, inflation has bottomed for now. Yes, inflation is likely to
> > increase. Yes, the Fed has messed up. It never should have cut in
> > November 1998 and should have started raising rates sooner. But, no we
> > are not likely to get an inflation spiral, and a crash is possible in
> > equities, but unless you consider 30% a crash, my opinion is that it is
> > not super likely.
> >
> > Steve
> >
> > ---
> > Steven W. Poser, President
> > Poser Global Market Strategies Inc.
> >
> > url: http://www.poserglobal.com
> > email: swp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >
> > Tel: 201-995-0845
> > Fax: 201-995-0846
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: <Proffittak@xxxxxxx>
> > To: OnWingsOfEagles@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Sent: Saturday, January 22, 2000 2:56 PM
> > Subject: [RT] inflation/implication on bonds
> >
> > > Hello
> > >
> > > This is now the 9Th week in which inflation is showing in full
> > force
> > >
> > > Where?
> > >
> > > here are the Prof
> > >
> > > Baron's page MW 15 this weekend
> > >
> > > year ago last week today
> > > crb 190.50 208.01 211.51
> > >
> > > industrial 183.90 202.19 205.21
> > >
> > > grains/oils 172.7 169.78 171.69
> > >
> > > livestock 208.90 248.19 249.94
> > >
> > > energy 132.5 233.39 243.45
> > >
> > > precious metals234.7 243.88 250.15
> > >
> > >
> > > Steve posner and all other economist feedback welcome
> > >
> > > have a great weekend
> > > Ben
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
|