Thank you Brian for your reply and thank you all for your replies. I was not looking for an easy answer, but rather what people thought about Breakouts and moving averages as main indicators. Of course I will build my own system, but I believe knowing what people with more experience are doing can help.
Louis 2008/3/24, brian_z111 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > Louis, > > As long as you understand I don't deal (intentionally) in the base > human emotions (they have no value to me). > > My philosphical points were addressed 'To Whom It May Concern'. > > People are totally mistaken if they think there is no relevance to > trading in my 'philosphical' post, however few are interested and I > don't have the time to do the subject justice anyway. > > My 'easy' answer to you was c) none of the above, but, IMO the > problem is that you don't have the experience to make the necessary > distinctions for yourself (is it my fault that you are in such a > hurry?). Also, it is not a good thing to 'lift' your trades from > others. People trade best wnen they develop their own systems/styles > etc so that is why I gave you that answer - it is in your best > interests. As well as that, good opinion on this subject abounds in > the forum and the books you have purchased e.g. Howard has given his > opinion on the importance of people choosing their own Objective > Function and the fact that his recommended approach sidelines trading > pyschology, so it is not as if the question went unanswered. (I > understand that my esoteric answers are not to everyones taste, > perhaps not yours, but there are plenty of other people prepared to > give an opinion. > > However that is just my answer - there are another 7000+ people who > can give you any answer they like. > > Cheers, > > brian_z > > --- In [email protected] <amibroker%40yahoogroups.com>, "Louis > Préfontaine" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Ok I was naive; I thought I could simply ask and get some easy > answers which > > would get me right on track to get new ideas on how to build a > hourly > > system... > > > > I'll stick around and try to get some piece of wisdom and maybe I > will be > > able to build something with those that will eventually allow me to > build > > the system I want to build! > > > > Louis > > > > > > 2008/3/21, brian_z111 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > > > > (Subjective) investigations into the 'human condition' have been > > > going on, in parallel with our search for objective truths, as > long > > > as humanity has been around. > > > > > > This body of information has been collected and preserved, by the > > > few, for the benefit of mankind (the many) and consitutes a > SCIENCE > > > to its guardians, adherents and students. > > > > > > From that body of WISDOM two principles can be extracted that are > > > relevant to your comments: > > > > > > holism is universally persistent (all things are made in the > IMAGE of > > > the creator) > > > > > > and, > > > > > > flowing from that, we derive the principle of CORRESPONDENCE > > > (operating principles in one sphere, have their corresponding > > > principle in another)... > > > > > > ...but that is going to far OT. > > > > > > Over to trading (OR how the above relates to trading): > > > > > > Over the long term the bias of the (stock) market is a function of > > > the earnings performance of the component companies. > > > > > > This is skewed by the behaviour of market participants, which > > > introduces randomness to the markets. > > > > > > The shorter the timeframe the more dominant is 'randomness' > (which of > > > course is not true randomness). > > > > > > (If you are interested in the subject of organising principles and > > > holism Carl Jung's work on Psychological Archetypes is a wonderful > > > example of how the universal paradigms play out in the affairs of > > > wo/mankind). > > > > > > brian_z *:-) > > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected] <amibroker%40yahoogroups.com><amibroker% > 40yahoogroups.com>, "Ronald > > > Davis" <xokie7@> wrote: > > > > > > > > I maintain the view that algorithms exist in nature, and that > > > people who develop algorighms are only discovering another one of > > > nature's secrets. > > > > > > > > When my son first showed me Amibroker several years ago, I > looked > > > at charts with Stochastics, and RSI, and I became convinced that > > > mother nature has algorithms that can find the central core of > all of > > > that volatility. > > > > > > > > I have yet to discover mother nature's algorighms, but my > attempts > > > have led me to some conclusions. > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------- > > > ---------------------------------------------------------- > > > ------ > > > > > > > > My results WERE BEST when I "AVERAGED THE LAST SEVERAL HUNDRED > DAYS > > > OF ACTIVITY" > > > > > > > > and watched the LAST 9 DAYS>of the performance of this average > of > > > hundreds of days. > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------- > > > ---------------------------------------------------------- > > > ------ > > > > > > > > My results WERE LESS GOOD when I "AVERAGED OF LAST 9 DAYS OF > > > ACTIVITY" > > > > > > > > and watched the LAST 9 DAYS>of the performance of this average > of > > > only 9 days. > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------- > > > ---------------------------------------------------------- > > > ----- > > > > > > > > Hope this helps someone. Ron D > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------- > > > ---------------------------- > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > From: Louis Préfontaine > > > > To: [email protected] > > > > <amibroker%40yahoogroups.com><amibroker%40yahoogroups.com> > > > > Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2008 10:25 PM > > > > Subject: [amibroker] Philosophical question > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi group, > > > > > > > > I just began reading Howard Bandy's book (even though I did not > > > finish Aronson's book yet...), and a somehow philosophical > question > > > came to my mind when he speaks about the market's inefficiency and > > > how we must take advantage of it. He talks both about moving > > > averages and breakout, and I was wondering which one of the two > > > techniques do you think is the more promising for such a system? > > > > > > > > I ask this because as far as subjective technical analysis is > > > concerned, I am more used with breakout techniques. But the real > > > inefficiency in breakout techniques comes from time, that is if > one > > > can act quickly enough to make a profit from the sudden change in > > > price. But from my experience it seems to be more difficult with > EOD > > > or hourly data. And it is less profitable for someone (like me) > who > > > is using options, which tend to anticipate the change quicker > than it > > > really happens. > > > > > > > > Moving averages techniques, on the other side, seems a bit > > > mystical to me, and maybe a bit too simple or too « easy ». I > don't > > > know much about them... > > > > > > > > But anyway, my question is: which one of those two techniques do > > > you prefer, or do you use both for entering a trade, or shorting a > > > trade? What can be a good way to trade for someone (like me) who > > > wants to trade hourly data and can't always get the beginning of a > > > breakout? > > > > > > > > Thanks! > > > > > > > > Louis > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
