Actually, what Jack is saying is that he is about producing exicitement rather than fear in a relationship. Always check to make sure that you are experiencing eustress rather than distress. Hope that helps Regards Oddi...trader---and registered nurse.
From Education of Speculator, Vic used math models to find anamolies in the market. I think what happened is one his anamolies turned out to be a black swan for him. It worked every other time, but that time it didn't, and boom!:eek:
Someone asked for a definition of random -- so I gave my definition. All of a sudden, everyone is asking how to defeat the randomness of the market, or stating that they don't find market outcomes to normally distributed. I propose that you actually undertake to analyze and play the game that I set forth earlier in this thread. It is not at all hypothetical, and if you can't win the game, then you can't win in the market.
Trends do not exist before they occur, they are created in real-time. Once they are created, they exist until they change. We know a trend is in place by reading those extreme tops & bottoms in our confined trading environment. Trends are established when 3 extreme points in that confined environment confirm; either 3 points confirming a Bull or a Bear. Prior to the creation of that trend, price is either in a corresponding Trend or transitioning. By tracking the sequential extreme tops and bottom we expect that existing trend will continue until it changes.
My opinions on proflogic are the same as Jack's (Grob's). I know what NLP is too but that has nothing to do with reading price. That's like implying that one must obtain a college degree to read USA Today.
Random means unpatterned. If a series (of numbers, events) is random, there is no causal relationship between one element of the series and the next. Now... At first I wrote "If a series (of numbers, events) is random, we cannot predict the next element of the series, since all outcomes are equally likely" However, I suppose there's nothing stopping you from predicting the next element. You can go ahead. The chance you have of being right is then related to the number of possible outcomes. For example, in Roulette, there are 38 numbers. The series which represents the consecutive results of the spinning of the roulette ball is random; however, there are only 38 possible outcomes (Roulette numbers go 0,00, and then 1-36, don't they?). So you have a fixed chance of being right when you guess at the result if any particular spin. Now, if we consider the time series which is MSFT's closing price, what are the possible outcomes? Well, there is nothing to say that MSFT will not close at $4000 tomorrow morning. Intuition tells me that this is less likely than MSFT closing within +/- $4 of it's closing price today. Doesn't that show in a crude way that the series which is the closing price of MSFT is not random? Help - I am in way over my head here.
So market outcomes are normally distributed? You wrote that I assume that you believe that market outcomes do fall into such a distribution. I am not sure about that as a definition of randomness (see my previous post).