Top Gun Software

Discussion in 'Forex' started by RapidFireFX, Dec 26, 2006.

  1. Dan, Chris has been told a few times that he is an asshole, I've been the target of his bluntness a couple of times but all I'm interested in is software that gets me ahead of the game, just an edge, thats all I can ask for. I've stuck around long enough to know that Chris is the public face and Michael Fritz is the programmer brains. These guys are working by themselves to get this thing off the ground and certainly I've tried software that has a big programming staff but leaves a lot to be desired. Multicharts comes to mind, I bought Multicharts and got tired of all the bugs.

    Chris does the marketing, takes care of the office stuff, back tests the software, takes care of the training, working on the autotrade management software etc etc. This guy is yawning half the time in his training that he does religiously every day at noon. He gets cranky with all the newbie questions, dumb questions, and traders that don't follow the rules or are too lazy to draw fibs.

    He's admitted that he gets called an asshole sometimes, but a lot of guys on Elite Trader are assholes as well, we all can be at times. I'm sure Chris isn't going to hold it against you if you are back in the room, just tell him that he is an asshole sometimes.
    #31     Jan 11, 2007
  2. taowave


    Hi Kp,

    That statement on optimisation is always a mistake is very interesting..Would you elaborate a bit???

    How do you decide if a system or indictor is robust if not by optimising and seeing if it is profitable across a wide range of variables??

    Thankyou in advance
    #32     Jan 11, 2007
  3. taowave


    OK..I thought he may be trading against the MA of his equity curve
    #33     Jan 12, 2007
  4. dat5150


    Glad to hear I'm not the only person who noticed the guy has attitude 'issues'. I'm impressed by the software, but I'm turned off by having to put up with him on any basis much less give a jerk some of my money.
    #34     Jan 17, 2007
  5. Gentlemen and Ladies. the attitude of the trading "coach" should not matter, the question is, does the software or system work or not in FOREX.

    Years ago when I was just a hatchling viper I joined a trading site run by J Yu, he used to get tough with some of the newbies, and he really emotionally spent himself trying to get people to listen and they just would not.

    I remember one occasion where siebl was running so fast that you could not even see the quotes and he said, newbies stay out, did they listen, no, thousands were lost that day by people trying to fade the trend. This may be what is happening with Chris, I don't know him or his site, but like I said, if it works.

    The Ever Interested VIPER
    #35     Jan 18, 2007
  6. There are newbies in Chris' room who simply want to be told what to do when and where without any experimentation. Chris is trying to get these people to understand that until they spend time with the software, tweaking it to work for them, they'll never know what they're doing and why.

    Some people just want to eat the fish.
    #36     Jan 18, 2007
  7. Exactly, what is the quote, don't cut off your nose to spite your face. Like many coaches who are jerks, he is only trying to prod you to do better. I hardly have any interaction with him after learning to use the software. Doesn't matter to me as long as the software gets results.

    If his being a jerk or asshole bothers you, then your emotions are going to get the better of you when you are trading. I can bet that trading and losing bothers you, the markets are ruthless and unforgiving most of the time.
    #37     Jan 20, 2007
  8. We all have different believe systems and different personalities. Not everyone will respond to the same type of coaching. I have seen some of the videos and he can be a condescending jerk. Yes, some of the tools are cool looking. But I can do a better job just reading the chart (price & volume) with Volume Spread Analysis. In truth, most people could.

    My point: He should check his attitude at the door, because not only do some people not respond well to it , there is a better alternative.

    You get more flies with honey. You sell more eye-candy with a smile than a frown. If, however, the product was actually a niche product for "those in the know" and did what no other product did, then he could have all the 'tude he wanted. He has the 'tude as if this was the case; just not the product. Mass markters should at least make an attempt to appeal to the masses.
    #38     Jan 20, 2007
  9. I don't think this is the appropriate thread to answer this question. Not to mention the complexity involed (in the question and the answer). However, here is just one thought:
    #39     Jan 20, 2007
  10. I don't think this is the appropriate thread to answer this question. Not to mention the complexity involved (in the question and the answer). However, here is just a few thoughts:

    First, take a look at the original statement. "optimize every 10 days."

    Problem one, once you begin to optimize you have to keep on optimizing. As I understand the term, optimal, it means the best. But if it is the best, why do you have to continue to re-optimize? Moreover, since you are looking at past data, what you end up with is the best fit for the past. What if this new "number" is not what you were using? Then the "number" you were using was not the best. How can that be, If you had just optimized 10 days ago?

    Problem two. Market conditions change. In my opinion the best tools/numbers would naturally adapt to changing market conditions. But we have established that Optimized things do not. If they did, we would not have to continually optimize them. More to the point the number/tool would never change. But a static number/tool implies a non optimized number/tool. As we know optimized things will usually change with each subsequent optimization. Tools/numbers that work in different markets and on different timeframes are in my opinion best. By definition this can not be an optimized tool/number as it is curve fit to a specific set of past data. We have to trade on the live edge of the chart however.

    Problem three. Man tends to see complexity where simplicity is best. Trading needs not be complex. Trading is simple, but not easy. Complexity moves us away from its essence, not closer.
    #40     Jan 20, 2007