Search results

so you are basically saying that god represents this backbone that we must hang our minute lives on to keep the cumulative impact of our species in harmony with the universe? i must admit that this discussion goes well beyond my level of preparedness, so don't expect strong opposition from...

so true. i've used similar argument against people who advocate solipsism: you can't stop a stone flying at you by thinking "hey, everything is just my imagination, so the stone does not really exist!" therefore solipsism is irrelevant: if you think that the outside world is just your...

yes, very good point. it is also our experience that once you try to design a system that could handle really big money (FX, futures, even the most liquid stocks), you'll be competing with boys that have much bigger R&D budgets than you. hence, the more liquid an instrument, the more random is...

oh, ok, then i misunderstood you indeed. i would like to make your statement above more precise, and say that in real life setups with (historical) edge you never know the probability of the outcome, because the historical edge may not survive the market changes. the lady's system with random...

yup, no argument there :) - jaan

i can see the discussion taking the "discretionary vs. system" path again, that has been done numerous times here on ET, so let me give you a summary of the argument that will follow: joe discretionary: "you can't apply a mechanical system to market, because there are too many hidden...

hehe, i bet the real sabena will be pissed once he returns from his vacation, only to find out what his kid has done with his ET account... :) - jaan

of course, but that's just another way of saying "if you can see the future, then you can always make money consistently". anyhow, i don't really want an argument on a thread that's quickly degenerating into the "TraderRX+NVDA=BIG CACHINGO" realm, so i'll just say that: if you really think...

so what? if you toss a balanced coin 10 times, and happen to end up with 10 tails in a row, would you say that the probability of a tail for the balanced coin is 100%? the point is (and i believe that's also close to magna's original point), having a 50% chance of a win does not necessarily...

note that there's much more to market environment than "bull, bear, sideways". every trading system out there is designed to exploit some correlation. the problem with correlations on the market is that they are not stationary -- ie they can and will change over time. hell, i would be a...

yes it would -- it's a simple mathematical fact. effectively, after applying the random short/long decision, each trade that would have been a winner has a 50% probability of ending up a loser, and each trade that would have been a loser has a 50% probability of ending up as a winner. hence, all...

cesko, yes, good point. randomizing the initial short/long decision will cancel out the market trend real nicely, so the trades will be perfectly 50%-50% symmetrical (if we ignore the commissions that is). it's really easy to prove that. - jaan

...because of general market trend. well, ok, i can agree with this. however, i don't necessarily agree with your assessment of the magnitude of the market trend influence: i'd say 55% would be more realistic number in her case, but i'm too lazy to run a simulation to verify this. actually, as...

hehe, i know it's always difficult to argue with you :) in general i would agree with you (well, not entirely, but i don't want to argue over details). however, as voltrader pointed out, this lady's case is special. her exit point is at 10%, either up or down. assuming a random entry (and...

well, i don't think you need the exact 50%-50% distribution to justify the comparison of trade outcomes to coin flipping. if we forget commissions and general market trend for a moment, each trade by the lady mentioned at the top of this thread has a 50% probablility of ending up as a winner...

yes, you are. you only tried a few systems, and arrived at the conclusion that all possible systems don't work. from logical point of view this is incorrect: you cannot prove a general hypothesis ("all systems are flawed") by listing a limited number of examples ("system A, B, and C did not...

not that i would necessarily subscribe to it, there are some really thought provoking theories re this: http://tuxedo.org/~esr/writings/promiscuity.html (in essence, what it says is that the sexual behaviour of human beings has roots in what have been successful mating strategies for our...

FWIW, our T&S logs show 30 prints (83900 shares) at 35.50, and only one print (300 shares) at 35.51. - jaan

def, thanks a lot! - jaan

i second that. the current API implies that whenever one of the system components crashes or encounters an error, you're basically screwed. in other words, the TWS API is not robust. my wishlist for the API is: * ability to get a list of open positions * ability to get a list of open...