Maybe you do not understand trading. I do not blame you. Most in here do not. You sound like a very argumentative person with no real experience with trading and economics. I would not say this had you not called my logic ridiculous. It is you that sounds ridiculous and for big laughs. The answer is that trading is a zero-sum game. Driving and selling charting programs is a win-win game. You do not risk an edge when you teach someone how to drive. There is no edge there. As a matter of fact, you even learn better.
Don't worry about me understanding trading, fella, have been doing this long enough. Driving and trading is a skill like everything else. Teach someone else - you get more competition.
Oh yeah fella, - just tell us the tick value of your driving....oh, I forgot, you meant I drive and someone else must stay home - zero-sum game... Give us a break fella...please do...
I didn't say that. Please keep rereading my post until you understand it. Hint - teaching skills means more people have them.
Good point. My opinion, and experience is that people misunderstand what "machine designed" really is. It's actually human designed, with a search algo that does what a human wants it to do. It's never going to be as simple as "click and wait for money", no. Using machine learning is as complex and requires as much know-how as manually designing and testing strategies. The only benefit is that you can test more hypothesis and relationships more quickly. Often, the machine learning will give you ideas that you can modify slightly and improve upon. PAL is just one method. Using indicators is another, but considering indicators is just a derivative of OHLC, you could in theory claim that there should be no difference in results if using patterns or indicators. However due to market dynamics, and the fact that it's a time series problem, there are. In addition to patterns and indicators, there is a lot of data that can be incorporated into machine learning, and tested with statistics for it's trading value. For example, a synthetic instrument as a derivative of a basket of correlated instruments, and then applying cubic spline moving averages onto them. No existing machine learning product really lets you test these ideas easily, so it's really hard for anyone to make a complete claim - does it work or not. There are so many different approaches and small changes often mean a big difference. Like jcl said, he did testing for patterns, but probably missed a crucial detail. In my view, it's best to transform manually designed strategies (hypothesis) into indicators, and let machines try to use them. Nobody will ever have a straight answer, imho.
I agree 100% these are only tools that help you get where you want to be easier there still a lot of human interaction. but the results with using these tools (using them properly) is far Superior to anything you can get with out the tools. I can speak from personal results using TSL.
Did you really spend 60K+ to purchase TSL or you are an April fools' hoaxer ahead of time? If you did I really fee sorry about you paying that amount of money for something you can do in excel, i.e. curve-fitting.
Thanks for the input, but uh-oh, i have to warn you that since Mike Barna no longer allows people to interview previous clients of TSL, there are many potentially interested people here who would like to hear about your experience. Get ready for a torrent of questions, or quickly dismiss that you used TSL. I too would be interested in your experience, such as: - For a larger number of runs on different instruments and trade types, how many OOS charts were profitable in % terms. Was it 10, 20, 60%? I ask because i think Mike only shows the good results in his flash videos, and also seems to calculate limit fills when the price touches it, not when it breaks (which is unrealistic). PS - dont mind people like jimbojim, he isn't sure what he's talking about.
Really? Why don't you go back to your job of programming in assembly code before you get fired for spending too much time on forums and let questions about trading systems to more qualified individuals? Do you think there are people in this forum in a sane state of mind who would spend 60K+ for curve-fitted systems? You know, the type you develop...