Something very simplistic

Discussion in 'Journals' started by Quah, Sep 11, 2002.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Quah

    Quah

    Thanks ANCHOR. :)
     
    #121     Sep 13, 2002
  2. If the system holds up that long, why limit yourself?
     
    #122     Sep 13, 2002
  3. Quah

    Quah

    Comfort mostly. No reason to keep going up and up on contracts that I can see - for me, that would be just begging for a disaster.

    At some point, enough is enough - no reason to try for more just because you can.

    Funny things tend to happen to me when I start getting greedy. Or not so funny.
     
    #123     Sep 13, 2002
  4. corvus

    corvus

    I want to thank quah for adding another arrow to my quiver. This is a really unique approach, and it's refreshing. It wouldn't be what I would always use or even prefer, but perhaps there are days where an approach like this is better for my mindset or the market conditions.

    To stretch AAA's baseball analogy a bit, there's a time to hit homers, and there's a time to hit singles.
     
    #124     Sep 13, 2002
  5. Quah,

    If you didn't sweep your account each month, your capital base would grow and, if you increased contracts, you would still be taking on the same amount of risk each time as compared to your net worth (percentage of risked capital would remain the same).

    However, it is important to do what you are comfortable with.
     
    #125     Sep 13, 2002
  6. ZZZ

    ZZZ

    Nice system Quah. Very simple and elegant.
     
    #126     Sep 13, 2002
  7. quah, can you explain this a bit more?

    for others: rtharp said stochastics don't work well in trends. above is quah's response.
     
    #127     Sep 13, 2002
  8. Hey AAA...:)

    Just so you won't be waiting too eagerly, I don't intend
    on posting my results. I don't want to appear as though
    I'm giving the definitive approval or disapproval of Quahs
    idea.

    Besides, I'm not using his idea,verbatim. So, it wouldn't
    be right to post poor or great results.

    But, since you were eager...:D , I'll send you a PM with
    what I ended up with.
     
    #128     Sep 13, 2002
  9. Quah

    Quah

    No, I can't really explain it any more than I already have.

    It doesn't really matter if stochastics don't work well in trends. When you make a statement like that, the assumption there is that the stochastics are being used in the "normal" way, and that they are the only thing being used.

    This system obviously does care about trend or chop - that's not part of the rules. If we are in a trend at 10:59 that isn't going to change anything about where the stochastics sit at 10:59.

    You ever use a kitchen knife as a screwdriver? It doesn't make a very good screwdriver, does it? But it works okay as long as the screw isn't too tight.
     
    #129     Sep 13, 2002
  10. I do think rtharp brought up a very valid point. There is usually only ONE way someone can use an indicator -- because if you could use it TWO ways, how would you know when to use either one?

    If your system relies on the Stochastic being in an oversold position to enter, that oversold position may either signify:

    a) A dip of an oscillation period

    * OR *

    b) A strong trend pusing up

    Obviously, the guesswork of when to take the trade has been removed as it relates to both time and money-management. You've already determined how much you are willing to win and lose for each trade -- and you know when each trade is to take place.

    That merely leaves a decision of "Do I go LONG or SHORT" at each of these times.

    So far, you've been right more than you have been wrong. I'm not sure how you are using the Stochastic or how you are using other indicators, but it will be interesting to see how it performs when the market changes gears and starts running strong again. These past few days have really been somewhat choppy at times.
     
    #130     Sep 13, 2002
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.