Hello Sursod, Thankyou.
I don't have the time to become involved in a lot of that type of discussion, and also the forum isn't the best possible place for it. On the other hand, I do have a bee in my bonnet about the absolute rubbish that is put around about trading on the net. I think collectively the forum can do a bit better with a little informal guidance here and there. You make some interesting points for discussion. To be fair to Mr Pardo. The book was written in the early 90's, its a short book and it appears to be intended as an introductory text. It does do a good job of that. It does set out all of the concepts in a logical and understandable way. I admit I am a very hard marker. It's certainly a book I that I go back to. I would like to have seen his more advanced concepts or a more in depth discussion of exceptions etc. When I say that I don't agree with all of his conclusions that is my way of placing a disclaimer to indicate that I don't believe people should follow anyone blindly. On the other hand, I appreciate that it is *a cheap shot* to make contrary statements without any supportive argument. At some time in the future, when I can do a proper job of it, I might lay out the arguments to support some of the statements I have made about stats and system design etc. and give the forum a chance to make their critique. Brian *:-) --- In [email protected], "sursod" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi Brian, > I enjoy your posts of ideas. > I agree with you regarding derivative indicators although I use > Stochastics (SRSI) and Bollinger Band of RSI, both derivative of > derivative of price. Personally I do not rate any TA indicator as > better than 35-65% accurate and often randomness decides when. It is > more important to know the indicator we use so we understand when it > might fail then to chase newer and fancier indicators thinking > computation sophistication equates the holy grail. > > I value Pardo's book on systems design very much but ultimately we > have to make our own rules and write our own script, there is no > holy bible and no absolute truth except the inconvenient truth at > the bottom line of the trading account. > Sursod > > --- In [email protected], "brian.z123" <brian.z123@> > wrote: > > > > Hello Bill, > > > > > > I'm pleased you read the reply as I hadn't seen you around for a > > couple of days and thought you might have disappeared. > > > > Trialling (it's not in my dictionary either - I haven't been to > > school for a while) = = trial and error (paper trading or virtual > > trading where you visualise the outcomes of your systems in your > > minds eye or imagination). > > > > I base this approach on my theory of success (template) = = theory > > (reading?)followed by practice (backtesting?) followed by > application > > (trading or virtual trading) and then back to the drawing board to > > fix up your mistakes - the path to success is perpetual > application > > of the above cycle (continuous improvement in business terms). > > > > I discussed *The Success Template* in more detail in a previous > topic > > on Trading Psychology. > > It was of minority interest only and some forum members didn't > like > > it at all so it may not be to your taste either. > > > > Trading bank = = trading capital = = the amount of money you have > to > > trade with. > > Depending on your definition of ruin i.e all of your capital is > gone > > or 50% of your capital is gone, once you trade to ruin it is game > > over until you can put together another stash (by the way ruin > isn't > > in my trading goals). > > > > I understand your point on AccDis. > > > > I am a liberal and free thinker. > > As far as I am concerned feel free to speculate and use examples > etc > > in discussions. > > There is no pressure on from me to be correct. > > It is only a discussion. > > > > If you are going to write a book etc it is a different matter. > > > > Brian*:-) > > > > P.S > > > > I am not a training guru so feel free not to believe anything you > > can't verify for yourself. > > When in doubt put it in the holding pen. > > If it doesn't stack up throw it in the rubbish bin. > > > > > > --- In [email protected], Bill Halliday <halliday_mo@> > > wrote: > > > > > > Brianzee123, > > > > > > Thank you for your response. I appreciate them very much. > > > > > > > > > Am I on the right track? > > > > > > Definitely. > > > It's a long way to the top though. > > > > > > Unquestionably true! > > > > > > Suggest improvements to your approach? > > > > > > Keep doing what you are doing (reading, thinking, questioning, > > > discussing, trialling; you are in good company with AmiBroker). > > > It will be interesting to see what you can do in a few years if > you > > > are still around. > > > > > > I will read, think, and question. Discussing my findings in > this > > > forum is the way I plan to verify/focus my approach. > > > Trialling isn't in my dictionary, what is it? > > > > > > Suggest improvements to your system development? > > > > > > I would say to think carefully about the criteria you use to > > evaluate > > > your systems (there is discussion in Pardo about this-I will > read > > it) and to > > > understand the principles of money management thoroughly (there > are > > > 1000's of systems but you only have one trading bank). > > > > > > I'm not faminiar with the term: trading bank, what is it? > > > > > > My initial reason for starting the document was to learn what > a > > > system was composed of and how to put one into practice. > > > It's a start! > > > > > > Soon I'll be up to the place where I can set realistic goals > for > > a system. > > > As you point out, the Accumulation/Distribution System wasn't > > intended > > > to be used as a system, but was only used for the purpose of > > learning > > > to think/write/plan etc. in "Systems". > > > > > > Thank you for reviewing my approach and providing comments on > it. > > > > > > I look forward to your comments on my next offering. > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------- > > > Have a burning question? Go to Yahoo! Answers and get answers > from > > real people who know. > > > > > >
