OT
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reference_desk_archive/July_2004#Difference_between_.22Shots_...

ajtj, the markets are just pricing in two more Heat losses. :)

You may have already seen this, but last week Paul Desmond followed up on his remarks from earlier this year:

http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=11183704

Anyone feeling like a contraire indicator as of late?

I've found it profitable to be contrary the thread contrarians albeit in a friendly, non-contrary way (unlike Mary who was altogether too contrary).

I personally find myself somehat ambivalent (if not just a tad contrary) to the whole concept of contrariness. IMO it's more inportant to be independent-minded - the concept of contrary investing has merit only when dealing with large numbers of people, not the small population of this thread.

I googled "Dr Brad Baker" - his site is shut down but one can still view cached copies.

The cached copy of the home page shows "my" market comments, a quote from the Bible, and a quote from the Dalai Lama. At least he didn't claim the quotes from the Bible and the Dalai Lama to be his own!

Googling

"Dr Brad Baker" About Me

also brings up a shut down page but the cached copy still has contact information on it.

no, whos on first, whats got the ball.

3 black crows on RUT, SML 15-minute.

pt, you missed my point by a mile.

Now 47% but Winning trade % gains more than doubles any losing trade losses

pt, I'm not talking about whther you make a profit or not - some systems can do that even with a small percentage of wins.

What I'm talking about is your advice to ajtj not to bet against the system when it is short. The stats show that when its short it is wrong about market direction more times than not, so why not bet against it?

I would be surprised to see any inverse head and shoulders patterns play out with CSGCOS being short.

Uh, pt, the last I saw only 45% of your system's short trades were winners. That means that most of the time that system goes short it is wrong.

With those stats going against the sytstem when it is short (as ajtj has done) is the higher percentage bet.

I don't know about your mirror argument but I do think we could be up from here to EOM.

Well, $MID just broke below local support - look at the 15 or 60 min.

husk, please note that you're the only one who said anything about blaming anyone for global warming.

By the way, do you have any take on the markets that you would like to share?

More on Au seasonality:

http://www.seasonalcharts.com/cash/metals/gold/chart.gif

http://www.gold-eagle.com/editorials_03/speck043003.html

http://www.gold-eagle.com/editorials_04/milhouse100704.html

The RUT already broke it to the downside (after making a new high!). If it doesn't find support at 756-758 it's going a lot farther.

I don't have volume data but the ones I see mentioned the most in newsgroups are JMO and LOL.

OT: That's pretty good for 4 fingers.

On the other hand (so to speak) there's a pitcher with 6:

http://www.baseballlibrary.com/baseballlibrary/ballplayers/A/Alfonseca_Antonio.stm

Three-white-recruits on $djgsp & $hui!

OT: Ooops, forgot the link to the alley oop(courtesy of wahz):

http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=10311889

OT: B-ball. Nice alley oop.

The kids can wear you out! Hope you've been able to catch some of the college hoops.

Re: "Jokerspam"

CJ, it's one thing to disagree with someone but it really serves no purpose to take it down to the level of personal insults. For the most part this thread stays above Yahoo-like behavior and I (and I'll bet others, too) appreciate that. JMO.

Newly, there I would differ because there is any number of TA techniques that give you a tradeable signal or event. Many of these are verifiable ideas capable of being backtested. The Bradley (at least as I have heard it explained) is not one of them, for the reasons I stated in other messages.

Yes, but how do (or can) you (or anyone) actually use the Bradley for anything? There's a gazillion things out there that are "interesting" but its useful that counts and while I maintain an open mind on it I've never heard a good explanation nor seen a good demonstration of how the Bradley is actually useful for anything.

That's a nice impassioned argument but now can you specifically tell me how to trade the Bradley? :))

Aside from its astrological origins I remain somewhat perplexed by a signal that could portend up, down, or sideways plus be off by a few days either way.

well, eventually you got a launch, but that doesn't preclude a year like 94 in the interim. 94 was the 3rd year in the presidential cycle, just like 06. A repeat of something like that could make both bull & bears dreams come true. :)

mt, I figured as much but I couldn't resist kidding you. Good trading.

That's a rather strange thing to say to yourself! gg

Precious Metals index DJGSP seems to be at a key juncture:

http://stockcharts.com/def/servlet/SC.web?c=$djgsp,uu[r,a]dacayyay[dc][pf][vc60][iut!ub14!li10,10!lh...

The apex of the RUT wedge could coincide with a double top:

http://stockcharts.com/def/servlet/SC.web?c=$rut,uu[r,a]gacayyay[d20][pc10!c20][vc60][ilb14!la12,26,...

ajtj, agree with you, my post was meant in humor.

ajtj, I think you should consider getting a Trunk Monkey to handle disputes on this thread:

http://www.trunkmonkey.com/content/view/28/51/

mvp, some good thoughts. With trading I find I'm constantly dealing with misconceptions and no where is that more true than on a message board. It's good to approach any message board with several salt blocks in hand and to critically evaluate assertions made on them. Or better yet turn the d#%# board off - I find I do much better when I spend less time posting or reading others posts.

In lieu of message board "hearsay" I find it's often good to have an independent reference - that's one reason I recommended Pardo's book to pt for learning about trading systems.

pt, hard for me to tell what you are doing there, surely not a 1% stoploss? I'm probably not understanding something.

pt, first let me apologize for the tone of the note - it came across negatively (at least to me when I re-read it).

To answer the questions:

Your system doesn't work because it has an unacceptably high drawdown (and I suspect particularly so if you look at only the past 5 years). To claim it works is to look entirely at the reward and to ignore the risk. It has a terrible (and I really mean terrible) risk-reward. Read any book on trading and the great traders start with risk management. You are ignoring that.

If you think a 90% return is great - I can show you some penny stocks that go up 10x in a lot less time. The risk-reward on those isn't so good either.

The systems that I and my friends use are intentionally NOT backtested or optimized over the last 20 years because to do so would create a strong bias toward bull market conditions. Really good systems work in a variety of markets - any system should be examined separately in many market conditions (bull, bear, sideways) to see how it performs then.

Do you know how your system performs independently in bull, bear, sideways markets? No, because you lump everything together and focus on one number - return - and for all 20 years. My guess is that you'll get a poor return except in a strong bull run, and even then you will get high drawdowns.

You absolutely need to examine systems like this critically, always asking how things could go wrong. You are not. There is a lot more to a good system than just having a good value for return. And systems do break, even ones that backtest for a long period of time.

There's more to this than I can state here - that's why I recommended a book.

pt, you're a sincere guy but you don't know much about trading systems. As I suggested months ago it would do you a lot a good to crack the books on just what makes for a successful trading system, and go about building one the right way:

http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=9347598

What you have doesn't work. You're compounding the mess by adding more & more conditions, increasing the odds that this system is a curvefitting nightmare that has little chance of behaving in the future as it has in the past, even if you control the drawdowns.

You've received a lot of good positive cooperation from others on this board. I would hate to see that camraderie end in burnout rather than something you can use, but if you ignore the lessons of others I think you'll most likely wind up wasting everyone's time.

in terms of returns how much do you aim at?

I don't aim at a return. I manage risk and get what the sytems give me.

mvp, that's a logical question so let me apologize and say I can't really get into the details...it's not just my work alone. I do trade several things and what works can be as ridiculously simple as a single moving average. I don't trade the NAS so this may not be a big loss to you. -hiker

A few points:

1) The only reason the system return is so high is because you've included the bubble top of an incredible bull market. Take that away - just look at the returns from the last 5 years for example - and they will be considerably lower. Expecting to get the system returns you've posted is equivalent to hoping the 90's bull market repeats itself (and good luck to that).

2) The system % max drawdown is about the same as the system return. What this means, in effect, is that when a trader hits the max drawdown it's likely that they will be underwater for over a year. (Do the math... if your system return is 40%, and you experience a drawdown of 40% then - assuming you get the system return - it will take well over a year to climb out of that hole.)

I have traded several mechanical systems for years. None of them have a system return / max drawdown ratio of less than 3. To trade a system with a ratio less than that is to take unacceptable levels of risk.

And risk management is what good trading is all about. It is also what I think you continually ignore about this system. You appear totally focussed on return - however it's quite easy to get excellent returns but to do so ignoring risk is suicidal.

Given your previous comments (and especially several declarations that this is the "holy grail") I'm skeptical that you will take my comments seriously. But I do hope that others who have followed this system will take pause. To those readers I would emphasize that this is NOT a holy grail, and if something sounds too good to be true.....

Burk is a very respected poster. No need to rib him.

CJ, I would say that's far from a universal opinion, but the ignore button is the most effective way to deal with that.