Really he said that ? Is he the same person that does "Analysis of "Astro-Cycles" " then ? http://www.tradingtutor.com/
I don't talk about MM in particular perhaps it's crap, I don't judge MM I just comment the pundit I can read 10000000000 of times: It is not about predicting THE future (of the world) but about predicting the future of the market which is less ambitious . And it is very funny that some people pretending that they are so HUMBLE to recognize that they KNOW NOTHING, PRETEND to KNOW that it is IMPOSSIBLE to KNOW MORE . Is IGNORANCE the MOTHER of KNOWLEDGE ??? Then it would be a new paradigm and if so before Einstein, since nobody can know about Relativity then Einstein should have never discovered anything so his theory must be false by advance is what I should understand following your kind of argument ? Are you're are also ignorant of probabilities ? Randomness and Prediction are not antinomic. As a statistician said randomness leads to global certitude that's why some Universal Constant like the Number PI has been found by probabilities experiments like the Buffon's one. It is completely false to state that you cannot predict anything. You cannot predict the next occurence but you can predict that something will occur with x% probability which can be 80% probability if you want within y occurences. And in some market you don't even have to be true within the y occurences. This is the case for stocks. For options you have the y occurences constraint. For futures you have not this y occurences constraint but you have it implicitly if you are undercapitalised. So Futures are easier than Options except when you are not capitalised enough.
Harry dude. You have been warned NOT to play with the MurreyMadness wieries. They will f*ck with your little French mind, dude. Leave them alone! Your own system is obviously fine, so why argue with these clowns???? Best Regs W
"Your own system is obviously fine": obviously ? No for some people just because I pretend that my model is deterministic for them it is just out of possibilities. I don't know MM, so I don't discuss MM. I just say that you can't argue that MM is false only with general argument. As always before judging something you must examine the details. I didn't examine the details of MM so I just won't say nothing about MM. Some people judge that Fibonacci, Gann Square etc... are craps. This is rational attitude above all for Gann Square because Fibonacci has no more rational basis but it is less complex to prove by stochastic measure (see for example the Orlin Grabbe article I posted about the Haussdorf dimension of 1/PHI). So people that don't believe in Fibonacci are right to do so if they had never tried to observe it objectively. And it would be coherent attitude that they also doubt MM. What is incoherent is people who uses Gann stuff and says that MM stuff is crap without arguments. Gann Stuff is as much crap as anything else from the first point of view above all since it is based on Astrology cycle !
Yeah Harry, but the Murrey Madness people EAT BABIES. Everyone knows it. Gann people are all Vegans. And Homosexually inclined, according to Mr Market.
Mr Market wouldnt say. But as you may have noticed, his transvestite alter-ego 'ALICE' is still around. You could ask him / her / it. U trading 2day H-man?
Have you actually seen a program that is coded for MM produce correct MMLs one day and not the next? I routinely see MMLs on two programs (Tradestation and AmiBroker) and have never seen a variation from MM's software. Others have made your claim, but so far nobody has demonstrated what their claim is valid. Your 25% claim, I am sure, is incorrect for a correctly coded program since that would easily show up. Bottom line is that day after day, these program duplicate the MMLs in MM's software. Of course, whether MM is the best way to go with or without other supportive analysis, etc. is another matter. Until hard evidence is presented, claims that MMLs cannot be duplicated in other software are not meaningful. All it takes is a couple of gifs to prove that the coding is not equivalent. Enuf ced.
MM lines are simply ONE way of increasing probabilities of a successful trade. Following the rules of the system will increase the probability of entering a technically strong trade with clearly defined risk and reward.
Exactly. If that were not the case then one could easily demonstrate that MM was THE best trading system, which has not been done.