14 replies to this topic

[CLK]

Airedale is the only one I've seen calling this a mid channel pause.


Does no one even consider this ???

Airedale is very successful with his methods. I don't understand his methods, though I still have this hurst book I intend to go through at some time.

Once I understand his methods, I may consider it, but as I posted in Greenie's post, you can find about a dime a dozen opinions on which way the market is going to go at any nano second of the market. So with all respect to Airdale, whom I've seen as a good trader, one should never get into guruitis.

This was last January, poll taken on the down Fri. for the following Mon. 23rd. I don't know if you meant the herd being the pollees or not.


Actual Position Poll for Monday, 1/23/6 Options

What is your actual position?
What is your actual position?
Fully Long [ 12 ] [22.64%]
Partially Long [ 13 ] [24.53%]
Flat [ 11 ] [20.75%]
Partially Short [ 8 ] [15.09%]
Fully Short [ 9 ] [16.98%]

Total Votes: 53







I just use others ideas to support my own work, I think we are going higher,
maybe well into March. IT tops don't usually start this early.
From my chart below we already are coming out of the running correction.

When we top, I expect a 300+ point down day.

Its a nice fuzzy herdy feeling to be with the crowd, even if they are good traders. But again, unless you understand the various methods and agree with the conclusions, one shouldn't base their trading decisions with "the crowd".

This is why I like to study many methods (there's always something new around the corner), and if I find that upon backtesting or logical theory behind why it should work, then I find it useful when many of the different methods agree to the same outcome.

You will find, amongst the newsletter writers, that they are all "good traders" who are profitable. But what you will also find is that when all these "good traders" all lean too much to one side, they're usually all wrong, no matter what their track record is.

[dcengr]

The FF polls, as much as I've looked at them, doesn't seem to provide a statistical edge towards trading unless they are heavily leaning one direction or another, for a number of days. And it is rather short term at that, since the data fluctuates quite a bit. Someone like Mark, who's studied it much longer, probably has found more use out of it. Again, one should do their own homework.. if one finds that when x qty of y set of traders go long, the market goes up the next day, then sure that's a valid trading strategy even if you don't understand their methods. My only advice (and it is only advice = opinion) is that one should try to understand and believe the methods different successful traders use, though one may find that many times, those methods often contradict each other.

[CLK]

I'm sticking with my hourly system, if this is a waterfall decline, then I'll have a bad signal. I'd rather trade for the normal moves than for the 1 or 2 times out of the year that the market craters. Maybe I'll catch it if it does, maybe not. If I trade 50 scalps for a profit and get it wrong at an IT top, the odds are in my favor.

[dcengr]

I'm sticking with my hourly system, if this is a waterfall
decline, then I'll have a bad signal. I'd rather trade for
the normal moves than for the 1 or 2 times out of the year
that the market craters. Maybe I'll catch it if it does, maybe not.

If I trade 50 scalps for a profit and get it wrong at an IT top,
the odds are in my favor.

There you go, now you're talking sense. Just because you hear crash talk from some crazies on a board should not affect your trading strategy which you've proven to have worked over x amount of time.

There's only two things that are observed truths in the market:

1. Market has a positive drift, if only because inflation is always rising.
2. When too many are loaded up on one side, its time for a reversal.

[arbman]

Your time series analysis methods are what Victor Neiderhoffer uses, I believe. Works great when there isn't a high sigma event. One of the problems of following a system is that it is rigid, and does not allow for human interference, otherwise it totally jacks up the system. Thus high sigma events, even if you had sniffings of it, cannot be accounted for. That was probably a reason why Victor took it in the rear with 98 melt down.

Nope, you don't have a slightest clue about what I am doing, I measure much more higher order changes than simple decomposition of the signals into the dominant frequencies. Every decomposition I do allows an exponential change of the signal magnitudes and I measure the advection from one pattern to another, nothing is static in that sense in my model. It is hardly a straight forward DSP decomposition anyway since it is iterative... In fact, all I care is to measure what's changing to make a forecast, anyway enough said...

This is in no way scientific, but I think a high sigma event maybe coming our way.

I've been saying the market could crash in spring of 2007 much before xD have been saying it since October. I actually thought and posted here in numerous calls in the first half of 2006 including Airedale, especially if the market had run over 1400 significantly in later 2006. The funny part is I gave so little odds of it happening that I even fought the uptrend during Sep-Oct period...

I do expect a large decline in excess of 10%, but I still hold off on a crash call, it is just silly since even calling for a crash here will not make me go buy some 3 or 4 standard deviation out puts for March now...

- kisa