Discussion in 'Automated Trading' started by bwolinsky, Dec 13, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. What's not sane about it? I find it offensive that hershey thinks he can just proclaim himself as a guru and master technician just because he has a script that up until this point hasn't appeared to be viable until I came along.

    The point for me wasn't whether it was profitable, it was, is it good enough to trade? At this point, it's far from it. I wouldn't touch it with a ten foot pole. Nearly all of the WL top 25 limit and market order scripts would beat hershey at greater than 0.75:1 APR to DD on any scale.
    #51     Dec 15, 2008

    I'll quit with the saleman pitch. I'm about to post the backtest to as far back as I can, I think to 2004. I believe this will prove it's absolutely horrible to trade as a system.
    #52     Dec 15, 2008
  3. And that's the thought I have about a naive fool like you who's either a closet koolaid drinker or who actually believes debunking Hershey will take money out of his pocket.
    #53     Dec 15, 2008
  4. I couldn't get the backtest to change, I think because WL doesn't assume slippage on that kind of data.
    #54     Dec 15, 2008
  5. As they should because those are trading systems and unless you have reading comprehension issues, the Hershey Family of chartscripts are not trading systems.

    The chartscripts calculate rank (determines whether or not a specific equity meets the fundamental crieria for trading) or provides an automated function for Dry Up Volume (of the stocks which do have rank, which of those does one monitor the next morning looking for real time signals).

    Dunno' how you could have missed this since it is written into every chartscript or scan discription that I authored.

    - Spydertrader
    #55     Dec 15, 2008
  6. ehorn


    Here is something for you to code up. You will have to fill in the blank though (which may prove difficult). See if you can find the pattern...

    I find it offensive that (_______________) thinks he can just proclaim himself as a guru and master technician just because he has a script that up until this point hasn't appeared to be viable.


    "Life is how you perceive reality"
    #56     Dec 15, 2008
  7. At least since june of 2006 it hasn't: you know what:

    <i>BUT WAIT! THERE'S MORE! lol</i>

    Give me a second, calculating on 100,000 bars, which is beyond trades 64,500 maximum backtest size, takes awhile, and I'll have that backtest soon.

    Why would the Hershey fanatics be mad at me, though? It's not like I showed it completely unprofitable.... AT LEAST FOR THE LAST 2 YEARS?!
    #57     Dec 15, 2008
  8. Who would be mad at you? I find your antics rather laughable. You have something to sell - even linked to your subscription service. It pays for you to go way out of your way to disprove something never claimed in the first place.

    Imagine that.

    - Spydertrader
    #58     Dec 15, 2008
  9. Oh, good, you finally showed. Don't give me that shit. The only difference was the indicators. And since you haven't looked at the script, I'm using their indicators <i>with THEIR ENTRIES AND EXITS COPIED DIRECTLY FROM SCOTTD's TS easylanguagte program, but what's the difference?

    It's the fact that until now, no one actually had a hard coded version of the real script.

    #59     Dec 15, 2008
  10. Well my son, I am against debunking anyone and anything that distracts noobs and helps lead to most of their demise. This game is engineered so most will fail and the system NEEDS it to remain this way. J Hershey is but a small player I realize, but I'd like to see him and the like remain strong. Like I have mentioned to you in the past, if he's a fraud, most will still fall for his antics but the ones who are supposed to make it through to profitability, will.

    #60     Dec 15, 2008
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.