Yeah my bad, had you mixed up with dbanks. I read through a bunch of your journal, did a couple of searches. Looks like NoiseBox is your trading entry and it appears sometimes exit method. But from what I can glean it isn't strictly a random trade entry mechanism: Would you care to expand on what exactly NoiseBox is as these pithy descriptions seem to indicate to me that Noisebox is something other than a random entry generator. I'm not asking for method divulgence, just general clarification. Thanks,
Well damir indeed has been posting realtime in the journal for a long time it appears, so this is an added kudo to him for showing his stuff where all can see it here on ET. Damir's journal definitely hasn't received the acclaim or attention that it deserves relative to the other journals in this regard.
I thought something along those lines at the outset of this thread also. And damir is like the lone man in the wilderness taking tons of heat. But think of this, if his method Noisebox, which he has traded in realtime via posts in his journal (according to my calculation) since 7/25/03 is in reality a purely random entry system with his custom money management as an exit, then he has achieved something truly remarkable and mind blowing. His willingness to trade it with nitro's random signals, or even off lottery balls (at the very least) shows he has confidence in his ability to continue to produce good results with his method, and like Commisso I'd like to hear how he achieved such great results.
i hear that a lot. mostly from people who have time to make thousands of posts yet "not have the time" to post actual trades. since you only have a couple hundred posts to you credit, you're clearly not one of "those people". so, you willing to go trade-for-trade with lottery balls?
rather than argue with people who'd rather be "right" than make money and are too busy filtering to hear, i'm going to take the excellent lottery-result suggestion and generate an automaton that uses daily lottery results to initiate trades. i will start a journal and post the day's trades in advance. she will be known as LottoGirl. and i will happily wager she will outperfom virtually everyone on ET. i will further wager that within 6 weeks of nice results an argument will start over whether LottoGirl isn't in fact non-random and it's all some kind of hoax blah blah blah. our minds are built for survival, not truth, this will be a truth few will(would) be willing to accept. details soon...
I am definitely not alluding to anyone specifically by posting this, but I recently read a quote by Albert Einstein that sure applies to many posts and threads on ET. Now Al might not be the end all, but it is "generally accepted" that he was a bright guy. So here it is: "Condemnation without investigation is the height of ignorance."
Hey Damir, In your journal you wrote of your "NoiseBox": "it's not complicated: if day starts down, buy. if day starts up, short. " Just wondering if you no longer rely on this (as in random)? Is it better than random to use this filter on your particular system? Thanks PS - tested this idea on the DIA (2yrs - daily data) with your usual profit (about 0.2%) as a target - seemed to be workable: http://smitty1.home.insightbb.com/test2.jpg
I never stated that it is not possible to make money with a random entry, I took exception to the statement that "there is no edge in picking entries, none whatsoever". I can't be bothered arguing the point really, or getting into a trading competition as I have nothing to prove.
Entering long on a second (lower) bottom, entering short on a second (higher) top, but then again, whether your entry is good depends also on your exit and thus a stop loss, which is what most tend to forget. This is based on the assumption that the market eventually returns to the mean, so the further from the mean you enter, the better your chance of success, statistically speaking, because the market is more likely to reverse if it is further from the mean. If your stop loss is wide enough entering on either bottom or top is OK as long as the market has a significant reversal. Of course, not both entries are equally good, but that's a question of risk to reward ratio and not a question of winning rate. I guess that this is again a typical nonsensical discussion, except that in disguise, of what is more important: a high winning rate or a high reward to risk ratio. The answer is: you want to maximize both, however, you can still do well if you only find a method that allows you to maximize just one of these elements, leaving the other one at a decent level.