Herman, I have been trading for over 35 years. I have met many a trader who says indicators are the only way and I have met as many who say you are nuts to waste your time on them because of the randomness of the markets. Now, Those who use indicators and do relatively well are statistically in the minority. That is usually because even with a good system, they can not consistently use it. They alter their trading rules during the day. Personally, I have been with the Amibroker group for a long time. They have all been as helpful as possible. What I have noted about the group over the years is that it can be divided into groups. Group 1 has the programming language capability and good sense about trading rules. They put together their systems and really do not share their work. Personal choice. The 2nd group is a group who has a great mind for sequential formula development which assimilates the rules on paper,but does not have the programming skills. They seek advice from simple to complex issues of language. #rd, is the group who want everyone else to work out the bugs and then write out the formula and tell them when it is ready to use. That is strictly the way I read the group. I would love to see the great minds of the group work as a team and see what is there to assemble into a winning formula for the group to try and produce data for testing. It is called research. Then everyone has a stake in the development process and is not freeloading on the ph.d's and other brains. I would love to see it run as a separate group and have a large number of participants. That is only my feelings and would like as much feed back as humanly possible. Limited feedback means no takers and an interest level in work is nil. "Sey la vie". Marshall ----- Original Message ----- From: Herman To: [email protected] Sent: Monday, January 01, 2007 11:40 AM Subject: RE: [amibroker] Very profitable DOW system
Group efforts have failed consistently. People are ready and willing to help with programming and technical issues but when it comes to sharing serious ideas on trading systems it simply doesn't happen. Dimitri might have been an exception by sharing many excellent ideas however his systems were always long term, such systems are not easily jeopardized by over-trading. Many of his systems can be found in the library, I haven't tried any lately so it is hard to say whether any would still be working... most systems have a definitive lifetime. There are many private groups that share internally and appear (not sure) to do reasonably well. Perhaps there simply aren't many good mechanical systems around. Personally I believe that the most successful traders are successful because they use good judgement and money management, not because they have a good mechanical system. I also think that a trending market and lots of good luck are critical ingredients for many traders. Also, adequate money for a portfolio or a stomach for 13% DDs may be required to succeed - I wonder how many are in such a position? best regards, herman --- In [email protected], "kevinoversby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Thanks Randy! > > Your post just set off the lightbulb - that timing issue completely > explains the outperformance. > > Herman - your question is academic now unfortunately but I think the > answer would be that the results do not change much. > > There is some work I have been doing on tradeable instruments such as > DIA using the individual components (based on Dimitri's work). This > in turn was inspired by the results obtained by www.dowtrader.net > using a similar approach. Do you think there would be any interest in > collaborating on such an EOD system on this board? > > Kevin
