|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Funny that no one ever mentions good old common sense, experience, momentum
and market moods. To compare this market with half of all Americans in it,
to the market of 1929 which I will guess had maybe 5% or less of Americans
in it, seems a waste of time to me. This is true even five years ago and
the mind set out there is "it will come back". A very naive belief but if
it's believed, it's their fact and such an attitude is going to affect the
market, overall. You can't chart fear and you can't chart greed and you
can't chart ignorance. If we can agree that the markets have a whole new
look and that this is due to all the individuals who have entered and
believe in the "they always come back" theory, how can we find the future
in the past when the past was very, very, different in terms of the people
who made that past happen? I don't care what happened last month, let
alone last century. I care about what the mood will be tomorrow and it's
likely to be very sour. You don't need a system to know that, you just
need tv news.
Let me add that I am speaking exclusively of equities and that I respect
everyone's beliefs and hope you all have a great trading day tomorrow.
Bob
At 03:53 PM 5/23/2001 -0700, you wrote:
>It is funny that those who espouse a totally scientific approach fail to
>realize that almost every time the theorist enters the market he usually goes
>broke. Look at the major funds that have gone bust on derivatives. Their
>tested scientific theory, standard deviations, and probabilities cost them
>billions. So science is not the only answer to the markets and statistics
>can be as misleading as anything else. As they say, garbage in, garbage out.
>
>DH wrote:
>
> > > Trading is not about perfect science.
> >
> > Nothing is perfect but, if more traders adopted a rigorous scientific
> > attitude, there wouldn't be so many people losing money and unable to
> > understand why.
> >
> > > Each information input should be
> > > viewed as incremental and cumulative.
> >
> > That's where, with all due respect, we disagree. We are all constantly
> > bombarded with far more information than we can use. Much of it is
> > contradictory and much of it is irrelevant. The trick is to learn to
> > ignore information that doesn't significantly contribute to the bottom
> > line. There is a whole field of engineering called digital signal
> > processing where the goal is to discard irrelevant information and only
> > keep what is important. Examples include radar imaging, photo
> > enhancement, removing the static from an audio recording, using seismic
> > data for oil exploration, etc.
> >
> > How often have you seen a trader with a dozen indicators on his screen
> > and he can't decide what to do? Give him one pretty good indicator and
> > he will at least be able to make a decision. It may be right or it may
> > be wrong but he won't sit there, paralyzed, unable to pull the trigger.
> >
> > IMHO, injecting mysticism into the decision-making process makes the
> > picture less clear, not more clear. Trading ain't rocket science but we
> > could learn a thing or three from the rocket scientists about how they
> > approach problems.
> >
> > --
> > Dennis
> >
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >
> >
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
>
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
realtraders-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|