such a part of RealTraders.  This seems to be all semantics.
I am a pure "system trader".  I develop pure "systems" that can be 
automatically
for one reason or another.
quite well for us.
his trading methods on a day by day, logic step by logic step basis.
about actual trading.
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  
  
  Sent: Sunday, October 23, 2005 01:54 
  PM
  Subject: Re: [RT] My impression is that 
  many had a bad day
  
  Ok, then you simply re-enforced the definition that I offered unto the 
  group.
   
  If by the "Not Automated" part you mean you simply execute the trades 
  manually,
  and needn't the help of a Automatic Execution algorithm, then ok. It is a 
  system that
  you simply manually place the trades. However, given this post as well as 
  your previous
  ones you also stated, that you *disregarded* some signals. So by your own 
  definition
  of ,>>a system is a set of rules which must be adhered to to enter 
  and exit trades without using discretion<<, your back to the basics of 
  Discretion.
   
  I understand from what you've described that you have several rules, 
  "multiple choices",
  "higher time frames", etc.. There again, if you in fact have written and 
  listed rules by
  which to enter and exit your trades then they could in fact be programmed 
  and allowed
  to be traded automatically. However, again as you described earlier, you 
  are choosing to
  disregard some signals. The Toolkit, indicator set, collage of 
  oscillators, etc.. are therefore
  simply allowing you to take precise trades at a specific time or tick 
  bar. But in the end
  you as the trader are having to consider "Market Structure" and then 
  simply REACT to what
  you are seeing. If you feel the signal makes no sense given the market 
  environment,
  then you simply negate that signal and move on. Is this correct?
   
  If so, then all I'm suggesting is that you simply use correct semantics. 
  
   
  By sharing with the group in your earlier post you were attempting to 
  share how your "system"
  and therefore "Systems" in general could potentially trade very 
  effectively in the market
  environment that some traders may find difficult. However, in reality all 
  you've shown is
  that your toolkit, pointed out some good points of entry in retrospect. 
  Which again brings us
  back to the reality that unless you as the trader REALLY took those 
  trades then the
  signals as a retrospective point of reference mean nothing. 
   
  What you are describing to us is more the fact that points of entry were 
  pointed out to go
  in the correct direction of market during the day. Well hopefully you 
  took those entry
  points. If so, then your discretionary mind REACTED to the right 
  "signals" being displayed
  on your charts.
   
  If you are really trying to make the arguement that your rules clearly 
  define when, where, and how to take a trade, then Why not automate?  
  
   
  My interpretation of this is that you cannot. Simply because your 
  "system" requires YOU behind the screens in order to take the correct 
  trades.
   
  Many that I have met in trading circles have come to me with this type of 
  thinking. That
  they have something that is effective and they have a burning desire to 
  share it, or even
  Worse attempt to share it with others so that they may setup some type of 
  profit share.
  In the end these individuals are deluding themselves into thinking they 
  have something
  concrete that can be easily transferable, "if only" the people they share 
  it with can
  Stick to the Rules!  In the end they meet with dismal failure. 
  Simply because they
  lack the understanding that the real truth of what they have or 
  claim to have exists just in
  their mind.
   
  So, I beg, beseech, implore you to consider what I'm saying and answer 
  truthfully if you
  understand.
   
   
   
  
jan4123@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
  
    
    It is a matter of definition.
    In my vocabulary, automated system has fully coded entry and 
    exit signals.
    Not automated, but still a system is a set of rules which must be 
    adhered to to enter and exit trades without using discretion (e.g. having 
    multiple choices). It can be a combination of coded signals with a set 
    of additional rules, e.g. requiring signal confirmation by a higher time 
    frame chart which I use.
     
    That is how I define it, but I may accept other definitions without 
    them affecting my stomach and I hope yours is better :-).
     
    Jan Philipp
-----Original Message----- 
From: momotrdr 
    
Sent: Oct 22, 2005 2:19 PM 
To: 
    realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
Cc: actionReactionLab@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
    
Subject: Re: [RT] My impression is that many had a bad day 
    
    
    I'd like to raise my hand and add to this topic the consideration for 
    labeling correctly
    what we are talking about. Assigning an operational definition if you 
    will. When I hear the likes of J. Phillip using the word "System" to 
    describe what he has it makes me sick to my stomach. For it is not a 
    "System" but more a "Toolkit" that allows for interest to be taken
    in "Statistically Significant points of interest" However, a System 
    does Not allow for
    any discretion to be added to the signals being delivered on the chart 
    or in fact
    executed by the program. 
     
    Appologies in advance to the list, just so tired of hearing people 
    describe what they have
    as a System then go on to describe how they took this trade but didn't 
    take that one, etc..
    etc..  
     
    I do mostly discretion myself, and have kicked and crawled my way up 
    the food chain
    from doing 1 and 2 lots to 100 and 200lots at a time. So, I feel I have 
    something to add here.
     
    However, I do have at my disposal,  Systems. They do help me by 
    drawing my attention
    to overall market structure throughout the day and potentially a bias 
    that *may* be forming or has already formed. For instance the Systems that I 
    run and have at my disposal are 100% automated, true Systems, no discretion 
    involved. Of the few only one has a track record of 8+years producing a 
    45deg. equity curve and back to back month to month profits.
     
    in the style of J.P. not trying to brag, but taking it one step 
    further, running a true system
    can and does produce real world profits. Furthermore, attempting to 
    backtest a so-called,
    "system" that was previously described doesn't produce a trackable 
    equity curve.
     
    the following is Not curve fitted(at all) and accounts for comms., and 
    slippage(in/out)
     
    Hope we can all call a System a System and anything else that is 
    discretionary with
    help of indicator sets, whether Strategy-based or not "a 
Toolkit."
     
    
EAdamy <eadamy@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
    
      
      There are some regulars who have been on this list for many, many 
      years and Tim Morge is one of them. I use quite a variety of tools (EW, 
      regression channels, forks, etc.) and apply the tools individually or in 
      combination as the market varies its character. I do use some of 
      Tim's methods and they do work well for me. I also enjoy reading Tim's 
      commentary because they describe in logical detail how he does his setups 
      and how he executes his trades as the market unfolds. I've been around 
      trading long enough to spot a BS artist from quite a distance and Tim is 
      not one of them.
       
      I submit that the long term "survivors" on this list are perfectly 
      capable of setting up trades "ahead of time" and executing their trading 
      plans. For discretionary traders, the market is part "art" and "sixth 
      sense" and it must work to the trader's advantage or they would not be 
      among the survivors. Finally, most wannabe traders will take a good system 
      and lose money with it because they will not have the discipline to 
      execute the system as it needs to be executed ... been there done that. I 
      tried system trading for some years before I threw it out and began 
      applying discretionary trading techniques. Discretionary works for me, but 
      you won't see me trashing system traders. In fact, I follow Clyde Lee's 
      posts on his cyclical systems with considerable interest.
       
      Earl
      
        ----- Original Message ----- 
        
        
        
        Sent: Friday, October 21, 2005 1:43 
        AM
        Subject: Re: [RT] My impression is 
        that many had a bad day
        
Tim,
It was never my intention to accuse you 
        of fitting forks into trades or vice versa. It's just that pichforks, 
        wave count, Wolve, etc. all of them prove well in hindsight, but are not 
        so easy to set up ahead of time to get good results. This all boils down 
        to the question: what is the accuracy of these methods which is hard to 
        answer because they are as much science as art. Not many traders will 
        get the same results using the same methodology of that sort.
I 
        mentioned the Median Line because I visited your "conference room" ystd 
        and watched your chart at the same time as I was trading my system (from 
        ~12:30 to 13:10) so it was the first thing that came to mind. And I did 
        say that pitchforks often work which obviously was the case of your 
        recent trades.
As to my trades of ystd, I just showed what a 
        system can do (not as evidence of my prowess) on a day which caused some 
        confusion among some traders on the list.
Let's not be too 
        sensitive and no bad feelings, please,
Jan 
      Philipp
 
    __________________________________________________
Do You 
    Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
    
http://mail.yahoo.com 
    
    
    
    
    
    
  
  
  Yahoo! 
  FareChase - Search multiple travel sites in one click. 
  
  
  
  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS