As you edit, you are digging a hole. And it is not to put me in. Frankly, you could have been reading thoroughly what I have said. My views are founded and they are substantive. Neither of us needs to point out that there is no one upmanship going on. Certainly you can answer your own Q's about any proofs you have been needing. Please understand that when a person such as myself takes on an endeavor, fuzzy or too anything are not in the cards. There are many levels of people here. Four levels suffice for explaining to you that in some places critical thinking is going on. there are people who wish to learn purposefully. They ask and they learn and they, then, do a lot of tranferring to others to help. Many people assess and take what they want. Others just observe and inquire occasionally. And lastly there are the B people who either need a whipping post or have personal issues where I and those above are the butt of their venting. It is true, you operate by criticizing. You feel that raises questions and you feel they are unanswered by various categories of people. You feel that you have not gotten your due. A while back, a very considered response and planned effort was profferred to you. Now as the years pass and a lot of people in various places are making tangible displays, it appears an even broader support system or so is coming into being. We will see. A comprehensive display has always been desirable. And there are many many scripts that support many platforms at this point. I feel that your criticism has been only so good so far. I can see that you are puzzled in some ways. The template is a complete paradigm. This model has been developed in a complete manner as well. I am speaking about the mechanical nature of PVT, SCT and sector rotation. Testing it has been done in a way that is very thorough and exceeds what you do to test and develop what you do. For example, when 18,000 was used for extrordinary volume as an annotated ray, it was verified to be 18,040 or so. The rounded value was 18,000. Creating a model and doing a development around the model for various markets was a delightful endeavor. You can verify this by beginning, from now on, to read between the lines. I do not post much anymore and I probably will do less in the future. For my stay in ET, I haven't had the luxury of being able to exchange thoughts with many people in a climate of intellectual pursuits. People choose, as you do to be critics, instead and the criticism is usually rapid fire and not always thought through. there is an ungraciousness here that stems from the due dilligence aspect of some people's needs. What I talk about are characterised as "claims" most of the time and they will always be unbelievable simply because people do not use the market as a standard but they use, perhaps, their performance as a standard. I enjoy seeing pm's from people on their progress. and I get a lot of my posts deleted by moderators either when I attract so many nuisance posts or the OP has started a thread to bury what I espouse. So you do not get it as yet and you hope your criticisms get anqwered as if they were always valid criticisms. You are shooting par for the course you play on. I believe I made a contribution in this thread that was helpful and it also raised the level of trading and coding considerations. It also put one other thing on the table; how by thinking about my comments a person can do better in his thought process. Certainly, you, as usual pop up with a criticism of my writing. Have a laugh.
Indeed I am falling out of my chair. If you put one-tenth the time into quantifying SCT as you do in long-winded posting, you might put the critics to shame. A trader trades. But first a trader codes.
Check in with hypost, he may be able to understand what has been going on and explain it to you. There is a common recitation of about 39 steps to becoming a trader. For those that are purposeful it is only about 9 steps to expert. Quant is fun but qual is where a person gets to expert. Logic is where that happens. Look at the difference between OODA and MADA to see the difference between quant and qual. Critics need to rise to the occasion at some point. When I suggest that there are about 70 degrees of freedom involved, you or your colleagues can conclude that iterative refinement started decades ago. Not much changed after the first 25 years except during the following 25 years technology caught up and bandwidth increased. Check out the display supporting script as a warm up drill. Check out the ATS of PVT. Taking PVT to expet is simply an effectiveness and efficiency exercise. Read IBD MeetUp Number Five: Putting the Pieces Together. There you see a rate of 100 turns per year in action and you see the turns well exceeding 10%, the nominal turn. The logic for this is precise, explicit and it is very very safe to say that it has been done (coded) by many and shared throughout the world. Spyder has posted the link. So anyone can use it to do 100 turns a year at better than 10% a turn. The template for PVT is the same as the template for SCT as has been stated. There are several people here who's handles are well known who are working on making use of the template to facilitate their trading in the same way. As I see it anyone can join with them since they have extrended the invitation. they do not do the critic thing, however. Their orientation is to the qual of trading using technology. the fork you took was one where you do not do qual and you chose to criticize from a quant point of view. The template bounds the opportunity with the if then statements I posted for Maestro recently. This forms a complete qualitative paradigm that defines the template model. No one has questioned this offering in ET. Perhaps it is because it is cast in concrete of the logic statements and their integrated holistic character. In any system this logic structure is complemented by the process that goes on in the non stationary times sereis where a time modulated window is used to produce the system results. The results are measured in terms of the ATR and I have expressed that as 3 times and recently the 6 times has been made public by Spyder and before that MAK (7 times). The logic is thee as if-thens, the sweeps shows the modulated window as the process, and the system results have been articulated. All sorts of criticisms cover the spectrum and they are replete as expressions of people who analyze and compare and contrast our paradigm with many other paradigms and testing devices. All of these things help people decide whether or not to use or not use a display we post as the display to use; whether or not to use the logic we posted; or whether or not to use the sweeps process we posted. We also spent about four years, formally answering questions and managing an orderly learning process for those who wished to learn to make money. Since books to not present a method of learning (they are unilateral and learning is bilateral), I am now compiling 50 years work into five reference books for the benefit of known users. The glossary is about 750 words and it is crossrefenced to five other systems by page reference into each of those systems. It is also uniquely arranged in two dimensions for interlocking all terms to, first sources (vertically)and, second to applications (horizontal by skill requirements). Naturally, 4 out of 5 people continue to reject the paradigm. There is a heirarchy of how they step off the path and there is a heirarchy of 80 edges that form a continuum of CW alternatives. Both these things will be helpful to users of our paradigm. I believe. There will be little formal criticism of the work I am completing; critics don't require a five volume reference series now, they never have and things will probably not change. I feel that people throughout the world can use our paradigm to be financial free. Just as micro loans and micro economics free people occupationally and wealth building wise, I feel that pool extraction frees anyone who chooses to have an income stream that allows them to have inter generational support and surpluses to contribute to local problem solving. This has proven to be true since about 1960 when the first life trust was set up for a young adult woman who was challenged mentally. At some point I lost track of the repetition of this fix for people but I do remember one day where three were completed as a consequence of 31 trades that netted 17 poiints on 100,000 shares of a 28 dollar stock using PVT. The world has changed and freedom is now available to all. global electronics made this freedom available. Pragmatically, pool extraction makes it possible for anyone to tap into capital pools and take money out and use it for their personal and local community purposes. I am not glad that a poll was done long ago to prove that 4 out of 5 people reject this concept. The poll was just humor to me because it was the typical superficial reactive response to something that might cause a little mental pain because thinking was required. In AZ, our educational system is sinking to newer lows every year. Kids get social promotions if they flunk their courses and now we have jr and sr high schoole where few can read, do math or know anything about science. Crime and drugs come across the border at unprecidented levels. Charter schooling is definitely on the rise. I chose freedom as the cure. Gradually people will turn away from learning failure and superficial things. Work will always be there for people to do. Using the global electronic world to work in is a very good choice; it defines freedom. Being a critic forever is just standing beside opportunity and not accepting the opportunity to be free. Take a moment and ask a few people just what it is like to be helping another person to gain freedom after the person has experienced gaining freedom. Freedom is what quietly extinguishes problems large and small. I give freedom to others by working to help others.
Hi Joe, thought you were starting a new gig? Here is how I spent part of the day in the Hill Country having fun with PV, TLs, and crayons. DS
Nice chart. But why is it 10 minute? Won't that get you excommunicated? Bet you spent the rest of the day hiding under the bed from the storms. I have a break in my assignment, so I have time to hair-ass Jack and Spydie, and correspond with the rest of the B-Team.
Why are my posts being censored here? All I did was: 1) provide a link showing that Jack's been promising software that automates his "methods" for over EIGHT YEARS but still hasn't delivered and 2) ask Spydie for the profitable code he claims some traders from "Down Under" wrote based on Jack's equity trading. Given Jack's claims of trading prowess (like being able to routinely capture 3X daily range) I'd think this site would welcome opposing views. Especially since newbies who might get sucked in by such claims might not realize that Hershey actually did -24% in a trading contest unless there are people to post these FACTS.
OOOPS. I meant to show the 30 min but messed up and posted the one I trade with. While I don't mean to criticize, but I've seen you do better hair-assing Jack and Spyder. Usually, I laugh my ass off at some of your stuff. This thread seems too serious. Are you pre-occupied with the job? DS ps-the storms passed us around midnight so it was a nice cool and calm day. We did need the rain.