How well do you read the market, Jack? You LOST 24% in a trading contest and unsuccessfully tried to obfuscate your way out of it on Usenet: http://groups.google.com/group/misc...a927db8ba840?hl=en&lnk=st&q=hershey+loses+24# If you read the market so well, what happened to your promise to your former IBD group to turn $10,000 into $1 Million in 100 days and document it on ET? http://www.mediafire.com/?1gi2qygm3yh
im pretty sure i read a thread that said if you were to test strat there is actually no upside its pretty much a 45 degree right angle straight into the dirt
I and others have tested some of Jack's "methods" and found them to be lacking, yes. But Jack has disputed those results which is why in my posts here I cited Jack's own words, performance and claims... that way he can't put it off on me or anyone else.
P.S. You quoted me but if you were referring to SPM (which is what Jack was referring to), here are my comments on that: http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=2138667&#post2138667 And as I pointed out... with Jack's thinking about stochastics being a leading indicator, his hindsight drills, -24% performance in a trading contest, etc., he's in no position to make comments like that.
So, you are interested in doing some back testing and is looking for some ideas for the same. Please read the following threads, they might help you: http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=104393 http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=108534
Does the above statement by LBR mean that (1) Consistently profitable mechanical systems do not exist? No, it means that LBR knows only 2 people who have one. (2) that tape reading cannot be programmed? No, this is an implied red herring fallacy by LBR. Especially, when computers can monitor hundreds of instrumnets much faster than humans. (3) the professional traders LBR met are representative sample of those who use mechanical systems profitably. No, it is a small sample anyway. The statement carries no value. It is an attempt to scare people away from mechanical trading systems and into the classes of self-proclaimed tape readers.
One can successfully implement a simple moving average crossover system playing ATM options. In that case you have very small losses on Delta but you gain Theta and on average you are neutral Vega. If you choose a security (like SPX, for example) that has tight Bid/Ask spreads on options you can have 25% winning trades producing very good resuts overall. I have been running similar system for years where I sell ATM puts when the faster moving average crosses over slower moving average and sell Calls when the opposite happens. As any simplistic system this system also has huge limitations and drawbacks, but for a beginner it is a good place to start.
Mostly anyone can learn to trade successfully. Often, however, the learning environment can slow one's progress down. Beginning with a foundation and adding bulding blocks can be a very helpful approach simply because it assures that the mind is growing in a critical path manner. I recommend math based indicators to everyone as I said in my post to you. I posted to you so that you could consider those people who invented the original indicators so long ago a used them successfully. Using indicators leads to great financial success and it also leads to being able to consider many of the other successful appproaches that abound. In building a foundation or creating the building blocks that sit in the foundation level by level must be done very scientifically and rigorously. Using a multi fractal approach as you suggest above is really helpful too. The faster fractals "telegraph" signals or contexts to the slower freactals. Having this is an advantage for trading a slower fractal whereby looking at the signals from the faster fractal gives youadvance warning as the future comes into the present on the slower traded fractal. You opinion and mistaken conclusions on my post to you are just temporary failures ,probably. There is a chance that when other information comes to you, you will get a wake up call or an aha or AHA. But it is also true that dummies abound in the learning to trade process so easily seen in ET. Some mistaken people are actually unkind. Others are very difficult to understand because of their cast-in-stone irrationality. A crossover of two lines of an indicator is dscribed in the contxt of the role of each line as designed. The absolute indicator MACD's designer made this very clear at a time when the ticker tape still operated just as the telegraph operated electro-mechanically, both in an alpha-numeric tape output context. Convergence crossover divergence as a three part sequence applies to the beginning of channel overlap. Usin two fractals to see this, you get to observe the faster fractal context unfolding before the slower fractal context. During this trending other difffernt kinds of crossovers (as yet to be differentiated by you and your kind and lesser functional kinds) occur. All crossovers, no matter what kind are isolated from each other by intervening phenomena in two clesses of differentiation (signal and contextual). Don't even try to go there since your mind is a blank canvas in this arena. Maybe you could consider as possibility however. what if you were simply given the ATS which handles all of these things? what if you were working on a team of people who created this ATS and who were working on other things all muchmore sophisiticated. This is not even a possibility for the run of the mill person who embarks on learning to trade or who embarks on "backtesting" anything. The landscape is continually being strewn with people who are learning failure and ultimately bet the house on their mistaken beliefs. The bottom line in trading is that the market offers unlimited opportunity. Unlimited capital is available for the taking all the time these days. The proof of this is a priori and not debatable. Most people excuse themselves fron this opportunity. You continue to do so because it is your nature. A lot of others do so as well. What is the purpose of those who debate another's success in trading? Usually it is that person's preference to prove to others something or other. They are often satisfied they have accomplished that task. Of if not, they continue to dwell on succeeding in achieving that eventuality. Some people I have heard a bout have at least a decade into proving something is not possible. Their dilemma will never go away as we all know. The fact that you failed you probation at a prop firm is not unusual; your were unsuitable for fitting into their profit making routine. This proof you provided is common. What is nice about continually taking the market's unlimited offer is the consequence of being rich. to decide not to do that is a choice that many many people have made. Those I have colleagual relations with get to experience the opposite.
As a summary comment that can tie all the issues various people have aflicked themselves with, do the following: 1. Use the mechanical system cash cow v 1.3 as the hershey standard of trading intraday on the ES 5 minute intrabar (See 2 for intrabar adjustment). 2. Use version Cash cow 1.3 on YM 2 minute and take each leading signal of the YM 2 minute end of bar to trade intrabar ES (See 1 above). 3. Take the bighog trading contest that bighog passed on and use it as a way to get through a 100 day transition. As bighog would not do the cash and winner take all, take that reality aspect out and substitute the non cash teasingtara approach. As an alternative use the capital offer made in the past and apply it to an account that uses the Cash cow v 1.3 ES YM intra bar combo. 4. Make note that indicators and their context and signals are used in four applications on cash cow v1.3. 5. All signals can be observed somewhere as yet unknown. This is the way it goes in most situations. I am not going to provide the signals; the ATS provides the signals from a location that will not be made available to anyone except to the public on a site that is approved by the signal provider for whom I am not speaking. In other words, the signals time stamped are generated and probably will not arrive to the public until the public site can transmit them from wherever they first arrived and became available. 6. There is no concept of "a contest" involved. We do not care in any way what others are doing. The only thing that will occur is that the ATS will start with capital (ala bighog levels) and it will be compounded for 100 days. At that time the public can observe the consequences of cash cow v 1.3 compounded action outputs performing in real time, time stamped actions as a consequence, and an end result in 100 days. 7. Do not pm or email me about where the output data will be sent. Have the public organization post here in this thread their proposals for handling the information. As happened in all other trading outgoing offers from us in the past, they were rejected by the persons and organizations we made offers to. Bighog rejected the offer made on the basis of size and consequences. 8. The cash cow ATS in any version will be extended to others on the basis and in the manner that is determined by the those in control and that does not include me. 9. The only purpose of this posting is to simply make it known that I am not a standard and I do not set standards. The market is the standard and the market offers. Any ATS can be created from the substantive content of my viewpoint and it will extract the offer. In this case, we will be operating on a beginner level. After 100 days, there will be no further stuff regarding iterative refinement of the beginner level of cash cow v 1.3. Anyone can lookup and post references to the expected posted performance levels of beginners who extract the offer using this stuff. 10 Doing this for 100 days is an inductive result of using an ATS and as a consequence it proves nothing at all as usual. All it does is shut down all the B people in ET.