Attached is an extension to the daily time frame of one of the systems I trade on one-minute. I call it Insistence. With only the change of one constant, Insistence works on any time frame unmaginable, from the undividual tick to the year.
Indeed I can, Happy. It is something I discovered while studying SCT. SCT has the great gooey gobby flaw of being binary decision-based. It is either long or short, never standing aside. In my experience there are times you MUST stand aside. So I invented a new sub-branch of mathematics called ternary decision theory, which decides which of the three states you should be in based on the recent history of the market. Hence the stoplight presentation. The adaptation of the method to different time frames also is revelatory as to the differences in the behaviors of those frames.
Those who truly understand binary decision theory and how it is applied or misapplied to trading will appreciate the unvention of ternary decision theory. Similarly those who understand the folly of the theory that price behavior is the same over all time frames will understand what I meant. And the question of standing aside is similarly a central choice. So you just failed my test. And some people do take me unseriously.
########################################################### I couldn't agree more - in particular with regard to this absolutely central choice >standing aside<. Would love to see how it works intraday ( 1 min. or ticks or...). If there are too many ignorants from your pov - simply PM me. Ch.
Thank you for your kind credulity. Attached is an example of how badly Insistence works when its single constant is tuned to one minute. Since I do not seem to be able to get it across, would YOU explain to ET what Ternary Decision Theory is?
But why stop at three? You replace a binary choice (either +100 (long) or -100 (short)) with a ternary one: either +100 (long) or 0 (standaside) or -100 (short). Why do you not invent a quintenary sub-branch of mathematics which embraces a five-way choice: +100: 100% long, full-size long position +50: 50% long, i.e., half-size long position 0: stand aside, no position long or short -50: 50% short, i.e., half-size short position -100: 100% short, full-size short position This would enable you to plot your undicator using five colors rather than three, engaging the powerful nonlinear processing capabilities of the visual cortex to discern patterns that may or may not be present.
If I might interject a logician's opinion, I believe you stray here into the realm of fuzzy logic if you wish to extend digital n-ary decision making to analog choices. Therefore I would refer you to Jack Hershey, ET's emeritus fuzzy logician, to address your suggestion.
Thank you all for your ignorant replies. Attached is an example of how poorly Insistence works when tuned to five minutes. This a gift to Hersheyites who might be going blind looking for elusive ephemera on that time scale. This algorithm is so pathetically simple it takes only 49 SLOCs (logical) to implement in EasySignal. As opposed to SCT, which could not be implemented on a Cray to run in real time, even if you had the algorithms to describe it (software does not like to imagine things).