Turning point forecasted by our model

Discussion in 'Technical Analysis' started by harrytrader, Dec 6, 2002.

  1. nkhoi

    nkhoi Moderator

    took the quiz, got 7 out of 11 corrected, I am intrigue count me in.
     
    #11     Dec 6, 2002
  2. GD2KNO

    GD2KNO

    I've looked at your charts, but feel dumb as I don't understand what I'm looking at. Is there somewhere I can go to get the understanding?

    Also wondering how long you have been predicting daily market activity and what your ovwerall results have been.

    I am currently averaging 10+ S&P points daily (that's maybe 100+ Dow points) but am always intersted in learning anything truly useful.

    Thanks
    Marielle
     
    #12     Dec 8, 2002
  3. I just posted that in Gann thread. I copy it here since it can be interested for you to know the principle behind these equations:


    "Gann said he had discovered the law
    of offer and demand but he has never revealed them. Instead he had given mystical rules.

    Nevertheless he has given some foundation about float analysis which is a rational and economic approach see

    http://www.floatanalysis.com/understanding_fa.htm


    In fact our model is based on the same foundation than Gann, it is possible that we have rediscovered its equations, we won't never know but they can't be many possibilities.

    see http://www.harrytrader.com/

    For example today we projected a high of 8678

    http://perso.wanadoo.fr/harrytrader..._Plan_FUT1h.swf

    DJI Future made a high of 8675 on globex."
     
    #13     Dec 9, 2002
  4. Hello,

    At the origin all theses stuffs are for my own trading, that's why explanation was so scarce. I will improve it when I have time. In my mailing I try to illustrate the guide rules which are very abstracts that's why you have difficulties. But stay tuned as I will put more learning materials.

    >Looked but can't understand
    >I've looked at your charts, but feel dumb as I don't understand >what I'm looking at. Is there somewhere I can go to get the >understanding?

    >Also wondering how long you have been predicting daily market >activity and what your ovwerall results have been.

    >I am currently averaging 10+ S&P points daily (that's maybe >100+ Dow points) but am always intersted in learning anything >truly useful.

    >Thanks
     
    #14     Dec 9, 2002
  5. At the moment my focus is on automation of the charts because it waste me much time. After that I will have more time to cope with the learning part of the site.
     
    #15     Dec 9, 2002
  6. I'm a future trader not a researcher. It is not my first profession (I am rather in software and decision consulting) but I have been trading since many years and took very severe losses. As Gann I said myself enough is enough I don't want to lose any more :) ! So I think and I worked. Now I couldn't believe I could predict the market so accuratly, each time I said to myself, well it's just a coïncidence. After 4 years of saying myself every day it's just coïncidence, I have to tell myself: "well the probability of coïncidence is now so narrow that I have to admit the validity of the model".


    >marketsurfer
    >Elite Member

    >harry
    >i am enjoying your posts. keep em coming, i have a question. do >you trade your signals or is it more an intellectual exercise ??

    >best,

    >surfer
     
    #16     Dec 9, 2002
  7. Keep em coming Harry!!!
     
    #17     Dec 9, 2002
  8. >I see that you are a physicist, just like myself, but most people >here would probably want something more simplistic. In other >words, should I go short or long and at what price.

    >Can you make it so simple? After all physics is the most >successful science when it comes to making predictions.

    >__________________
    >Things should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler. - >A. Einstein

    I wanted to answer you the other day more thorougly I didn't have time but I will do it now.

    I am an ingenier with process in food and petroleum specialisation. I became an ingenier because I finally decided not to become an astrophysist. Professionnaly I have coped with statistics and software engineering. Although heteroclit (? sorry for my english if I made many mistakes) all those backgrounds helped me approach the market the way I did it. At first I approached from the stochastical point of view. Things kept very simple not doctorate math just a few indicators derived from moving averages. It worked very well as I was scalping on the pit of french futures market. Things changed when came electronisation, I began to lose. Like Livermore, I didn't first understand why. If you have read Livermore, there is a passage where he described a serie of losses he couldn't understand a first until he realises. What he realises is his tape reading skill that make him so successful at bookmakers shop was not enough at the New York Stock Exchange because the delay between his order and execution was not the same. And I realised the same thing a bit late also. So I divide the number of trades by 10 and goes up in upper scale. But I still wanted to scalp with the same success. So I looked for a more sophisticated approach of the market that could give me the precision needed to go down on the lower scale again by controlling the risk again. This is the origin of the complexification of my trading. A personal story.


    Now to the question can you make it simple ? As you quoted Einstein, make it simple but not SIMPLER. That means there is an irreductible complexity that you can't break without damaging the true picture by making too simplest. Complixity is not complication: complication is when you disguise things under unecessary coats. As for the model, I can't make it simpler. As for trading system, yes I can make it simpler because modelisation and trading system is not the same thing. I wll talk about trading system soon when I will have time and that let you the time also to approach the model Although you can't understand it thorougly, you can ask questions and I will try to answer in a FAQ.
     
    #18     Dec 9, 2002
  9. Sure :)

     
    #19     Dec 9, 2002
  10. #20     Dec 10, 2002