Inputs marked with variables. For any input not specified, output is generated. A% of prior cases where we have gone B days without a C% retracement, we retrace D% over the next E days. Not a programmer. Could probably figure this out, but also wondering if someone has done this since this seems like a fairly rudimentary way to dissect market data that i have in prior cases just eyeballed. I know I am asking without offering, so let me present a piece of advice as a gift: As a person's insistence upon giving advice goes up, their ratio of useful information divided by words spoken goes down as a linear function. At some point, the function crosses the 0 on the y-axis, and at this point, the person's advice becomes with each word more and more deleterious should it be taken.
TraderZz obviously doesn't need anyone to defend him. Though there's some brilliance in your reply, I question why exercise wit? When you could be writing the anti-thesis of what you imply is lacking in merit, or at least lacking in easy readability. A skilled trader knows how to fill in the missing specifications with logical assumptions. However the basis for what he wants is clearly stated, albeit in a format that I've not seen before but it works, at least I understand what he wants. What I question is the basis for stats when there's nothing of value to me, at least from the pov I perceive viable strategies. I don't have time or inclination or permission to elaborate but the parry back and forth that exists on ET is sometimes better left unmentioned. So consider this my binge, and accept my apology for not exercising restratint but anyone who exhibits TraderZz's intelligence should be appaulded for even logging in and posting.
If you make the effort to get started and you get stuck then ask for help and you will be more apt to receive it. Meantime thanks for stimulating and thought provoking post. Edit ... just to clarify, stats are fine when there's a reason for them but ...what value do you perceive in knowing somethings that are imo lacking in value to know. And please don't take that as an insult it's just I don't want to take the time to formulate the proper words to describe what I think is missing from your premise and at the same time don't think it's appropriate to discuss the merits of these things in the public domain. Technically, I am already over my line just by drawing attention to what seems like baseless searching of the data for no apparent reason that I can surmise.
Rofl. Thanks guys. I actually did want to clarify my initial post, which I admit was written haphazardly. Also, my analogy was false as that function would never go negative. A concaved parabola would have been a better example. So far, we've got at least two jests at my intelligence, but no answer to the query. I'm confident both of you understood what I was getting at. To be fair, I suppose I didn't asshole proof my post. I will work on this later as I have time. In the meantime, I'm sure someone around here speaks idiot and can translate what I want and possibly provide an answer.
u should learn to code, and work on u'r comprehension, I only see 1 jest. You have a brilliant mind. Use it.
I appreciate your response and agree that I would have received a better welcome had I done the work you suggested. To answer your inquiry: This isn't the basis for a trading strategy or method, just a means of risk control and timing. You could say I'm wrong for using it in that matter, too. You may be right about that as well.
Ever heard of making a ass {of} u {&} me. I try not to. Especially when it comes to trading itself and discussions related to it.
Assumptions are necessary for success in trading. In business it's better to ask for a clarification of the specification and then write code that exactly matches the specs only to find out later that formal specs are only to cover payment for work that isn't satisfactory. In trading, one needs to define various unspecified details the way the coder would define them as if writing the program for their own use. This insures the results exceed the unwritten specs on the 1st try. You might laugh but I mulled over your idea for 60 minutes because I do that tyupe of thing a lot and I learn from it. In the past I have spent 80 hours + writing free code and giving it away. I only code for free. Money can't buy access to my skills. Unfortunately as much as I enjoyed helping others in the past ...it's in my past and not my present. If you are still interested in your project then have a go at it and I will likely help but I can't take on the task of managing it from the pov of though it was my very own holy grail. I've done a bunch of that but in the present I have too much on my plate to do more than offer direction. If you are still interested then I am happy to help in a limited capacity but we've already blown my time budget on this discourse so you're going to need some reasonable skills and only minor suggestions because I just can't waste time like I do here on ET any longer. Sorry, that's not your fault. I accept it's mine and take responsibility for making sure it doesn't continue to happen. Meanwhile I heartily suggest immersing yourself in your project and writing the hopefully ever changing specification that exceeds your original in ways that are rarely imagined until fully immersed in it. If you build that, and you need help then I am here for you brother, as I expect everyone will be. Build it. We will come.
You've got me mixed up with the OP. I'm not looking for coding assistance. I found long ago what works for me. Thnx anyway.