Search results

By "properly optimised" do you mean optimization to ensure that the parameters surrounding the ones you're trading are just about as profitable?

Do you mean SCT?

Does your doctor know you're posting to ET again?

Nope. Wouldn't overcome transaction costs.

My backtest used Spydertrader's chartscript code to quantify the "P,V boolean relation." If anyone has a more accurate way, I'm all ears. But it's really a very simple concept that I doubt Jack thought would be backtested. P.S. if you check the newsgroup archives, Jack strung along a guy from...

Buying the 0 to 7 turn of the "P,V Boolean relation" (which you have claimed is at the heart of TA) and exiting 5 days later* produced the attached equity curve when tested on 1000 S&P stocks over five years. So much for having tomorrow's paper today! * 5 days worked better than 1,2,3, or 4 days.

Your "P,V boolean relationship" is a bunch of crap. The attached document is from one of your websites where you actually claim it's like having tomorrow's paper today. LOL!!! http://sputnick5.www8.50megs.com/ On the last page, you show buying the 0 to 7 turn so I did it on 1000...

PTJ shoots for a 3:1 ratio so that'd be 10% to 17%.

% wins is meaningless without avg win & loss stats. This is a common beginner's misconception.

A while back I coded the ZLR pattern from a Woodie approved document that was very specific... can't find the document but here's how it backtests on 1500 stocks from 2000 to 2005. P.S. I recall the tone of the document being VERY cult-like... basically, don't do any thinking on your own...

Yes. If your system is short term, ignore it. Making sure your test data includes all market conditions is way more important.

I think he's gone (and probably so is his money)... all 3 of his posts on ET were over a month ago.

Buying the 0 to 7 turn of the "P,V Boolean relation" (which Jack claims is at the heart of TA) and exiting 5 days later* produced the attached equity curve when tested on 1000 stocks over five years. So much for having tomorrow's paper today! * 5 days worked better than 1,2,3, or 4 days.

I believe it's so difficult because Jack doesn't have anything that tests out to offer. So he claims backtesting doesn't work and uses obfuscation to keep his followers hanging on for more and from having enough clarity to test his "methods." But occasionally he slips up and gives enough...

I don't recommend trading something you don't understand. Here's a free tool that will help you get a handle on how options behave: http://www.cboe.com/LearnCenter/Software.aspx After this, you may want to use software or a website to model potential positions before putting them on...

They must have been trading the Jack Hershey method.

A while back I coded the ZLR pattern from a Woodie approved document that was very specific... can't find the document but here's how it backtests on 1500 stocks from 2000 to 2005. P.S. I recall the tone of the document being VERY cult-like... basically, don't do any thinking on your own...

Cynical? Do you really believe that Fletch has a PhD in math? LOL!!!! The stats you posted on your system don't add up. That's a FACT. Anyone who understands system testing knows that. And I know all about the relationship between PF and positionsizing... I definitely don't need anything...

How about people claiming they have PhDs in math when they don't? Shouldn't they get called out?

I'm better than you... I have a PhD in EVERYTHING... every academic field that ever was or ever will be!