pardon my lack of experience; what are bicycle exits?
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
A question regarding the theoretical validity of TRIN
- Thread starter Thunderdog
- Start date
pardon my lack of experience; what are bicycle exits?
Quote from scriabinop23:
pardon my lack of experience; what are bicycle exits?
If you are using TRIN with YM it is common for intraday trading to take the signal (TRIN rising through your trigger value for a long entry) and go "all in". Then as the YM moves (long) you do three consecutive partial exits in a trade of 1/2; 1/4; and 1/4.
Just so you see the way money is bieing made here and how fast, use the YM set on 2 min bars and do the bicycle exit at 5 point intervals. 5, 10 and 15 points from your entry. Stops are tight on this if they are formal. Most of the time the person's skill level is such that the TRIN signal and play timing is precludes going formal.
About the trigger. Here is an interesting component. It can be viewed as a "the heat is off" re: pressure. And as you see the volume aspect gives meaning to the circumstances.
As well, a lot of people give creadance to using TICK along with TRIN.
From the inital quote that was posted, you can already see that I am really beginning to screw up the thread by my TA oriented comments in the Technical analysis forum.
There is a very practical value of doing compare and contrasts with a lot of the sectors of interest in TA. A lot of them are rather indepenant looking at first glance. But maybe they do have some relationships that are of value.
By looking at very skiiled prectioners and how they cluster around specific concepts, you get to enrich your skills at learning and how to learn. TRIN is a killer for learning when it comes to more than one underlying theme being present.
It also happens that there are a pair of people who are both very skilled and who use TRIN in the ways I mentioned. They also have manyy other bases covered.
For any TA application, it either looks like it works or not depending upon the characteristics of the trader's method of monitoring the market and how it turns out to be applied in that application.
These considerations flow in waves as the financial industry ages in to the electronic and global world. For me, being aged, I was able to have a front row seat for almost half a century. And I have redone all the indicators to account for changing times and technology. Actually when these indicators first appeared I got to be part of their intial usage, often. So for some of them, today, i am listed as a reference in terms of when and how changes were made, notibly because of the advent of the use of the PC to process data from various data sources as they came on line.
I am just a cog in the wheel as they used to say when mechanical comparisons were in vogue. The point is that every person who maintains a standard of excellence, he always keep his ear to the ground. People who are taking their first lap through the vast resources of TA must always be seeing the links among the resourses.
those who know and watch me trade, Probably could verify that I am a very "clean operator" in the sense that I depend on little on much of anything besides volume and price. But I do have the stuff to be able to relate mostly anything to making money at any moment. What it all comes down to is that the market does not impart any surprises and the market is speaking ALL the time.
This is an invitation by the market to participate. It is very clear to me, at this point, that nobody so far has fooled the market.
since the markets have no surprises, it is a good idea to share responsibilites with the market in a correct and beneficial way.
There is no fighting the market or being "right" and the market being "wrong".
Knowing the market's sentiment and pace is something that validly and theoretically TRIN deals with. In particular TRIN is an essential indicator of market "pressure". You get knowledge, skills and experience sitting in the rooms with the better practitioners. ET's policy for me at this point is that I am not alowed to recite their names and web locations and that they will send you stuff free by email in the form of videos that are daily commentaries (theirs, not mine) where TRIN is always on the topic list.
My aim is to be a provider of what is what for making money. TRIN makes money in two principle ways. The second one I mentioned require a knowledgable and skilled framwork for making it work when the time is right. It does not use the bicycle stategy but it does use a strategy that is part of the family of strategies that the bicycle falls into. It is one of the rare overnight considerations for trading leveraged entities successfully.
It is not the policy of the Technical Analysis Forum moderation to allow me to answer questions in these forums. Please give me a hand in this matter. I am not a person who feels setting up thread after thread on parallel topics has any value either.
I'm not sure I agree with you. Simply restating an equation in a different form, as I have done to better illustrate my point, does not corrupt it. The formula still uses the same inputs (four in the case of TRIN) and provides the same output. It is the relationship between input and output that I was addressing to begin with. That doesn't change, so my argument doesn't change.Quote from jack hershey:
...Let me agree with you that what you have manipulated TRIN into the form you have determined, has no chance of giving you results that are going to make you money have any theoretical value nor be valid in any way since there is no theoretical value left.
I, too, use TA in my trading. It is just that I do not use TRIN. I will be looking at it from time to time in the future and possibly testing it as time permits, more out of curiosity than any other reason at this point. However, before I undertake to spend any time testing an idea, I want to be sure I understand its premise and any potential underlying weaknesses. In this way, I am better able to put the results of any testing I do in better perspective.
I know full well from personal experience that no TA tool is flawless in operation. It is just that I saw what I perceived to be a flaw in this particular tool's construct. A ratio of a ratio can be a wobbly thing. Not necessarily useless, but wobbly nonetheless. I was just pointing that out and asking for comments and clarification. I'd like to thank those people who have taken the time to post to this thread.
Hi Thunderdog, I too am interested in Trin and how effective it is. There was an article in SFO about trin which I found actually confusing that stated if trin is over 1 its bullish and under 1 bearish but gave examples that actually seemed to be reversed...and that Trin is based on the Arms index which (IMO) has been marginal at best. I listen to Peter at TOS "shadowtrader" and he mentions Trin as an indicator but possibly flawed....ie. needs confirmation...sooooo how important/reliable is TRIN???????
I ,and some others,have found its utility to be distorted by the plethora of "new " instruments(ETFs,etc) that are now prevelant. Just like an earlier poster said,it was rising Fri aft. during the big upmove. Which really doesn't make any sense to me.
Now the TICK is something else-trend,trendlines,divergences,tick hooks,extremes,etc.
Now the TICK is something else-trend,trendlines,divergences,tick hooks,extremes,etc.
Quote from Thunderdog:
I'm not sure I agree with you. Simply restating an equation in a different form, as I have done to better illustrate my point, does not corrupt it. The formula still uses the same inputs (four in the case of TRIN) and provides the same output. It is the relationship between input and output that I was addressing to begin with. That doesn't change, so my argument doesn't change.
*****People reading the thread see you doing what you do to make points. Everyone also knows that nothing has changed as the TRIN representation is displayed.
Others and myself were trying to be responsive to your_______ fill in the blank. We were not and you admonished us.
I, too, use TA in my trading. It is just that I do not use TRIN. I will be looking at it from time to time in the future and possibly testing it as time permits, more out of curiosity than any other reason at this point. However, before I undertake to spend any time testing an idea, I want to be sure I understand its premise and any potential underlying weaknesses. In this way, I am better able to put the results of any testing I do in better perspective.
***** The use of time is very important. I tried to hook you up with two experts who send out daily videos on their application of TRIN as expert traders and probably the best known trainers of professionals in the Chicago area. The two ratios each have values and, in combination, they have a unique enhanced value.
It is not going to be possible for this comment and the concept embedded in it to mean anything powerful to you. I understand that you understand that. For me as a different person who views things from a specific perspective, I get to have a great benefit from the way I go about things that is very different than you go about things.
So I automatically look at tools from the viewpoint of those who invent and use them in an expertmanner. I want to work with people who are getting the job done and know how to get it done and who are offering to continually keep me informed of their progress in dealing with all kinds of market situations. They are people who spend time and take time as experts to help others get on board.
So at this point you are knowledgable that TRIN has been invented, so experts use it very capably in several applications and money is being made in using it.
You point out clearly that it has a major weakness. further, you make it clear that it is not something a person with given characteristics can "get his arms around" nor except any input on , nor check out experts who are using it. the point you make is well made. TRIN is not for everyone and you are one of them you tell us.
I know full well from personal experience that no TA tool is flawless in operation. It is just that I saw what I perceived to be a flaw in this particular tool's construct.
*****you may change you mind if something else changes that will allow yourself to reorient. Knowing how to know is a tough subject
A ratio of a ratio can be a wobbly thing.
****This is, of course a key virtue of TRIN. And THE key virtue of TRIN has not appeared on your radar as yet. No one is going to get that message to you at this point as you tell us
Not necessarily useless, but wobbly nonetheless. I was just pointing that out and asking for comments and clarification.
*****reread the comments from others; my comments to you are not going to affect you and, long ago, I gave up on that. For observers, however, this is an important turn of events. A pragmatic successful user of TRIN commented to you to help fulfill you request and your game plan (you frame a situation and you ask for clarification) and you can't receive "clarification". "Clarification" coming to you is fruitlesss, as you say, because the provider(s) didn't get it staight on the rules you provided for creating "clarification" properly supplied to you. Your filter is so strong nothing can get through it.
If you did get something to pass your filter, that is only the beginning. Processing and stuff and fairly treating the content productively is also a very tough proposition.
The market offer a huge huge supply of capital for the taking. Taking it is what is important. Learning how people take it and getting a glimmer (any spark of input) on how people want to to help you take it by using their successful experience, is as you say out of the question at this point. That may change for you at some point.
There are many doors that open and they open in many ways. Mostly they take receptivity and lots of work. You do work the way you want to. Keep it up. People who tried to be helpful to you failed as you say. They were trying to be helpful and they failed to get through your filters and they failed to suggest successfully (they said the words of how to succeeed only) where fruitful work, that they have done, worked for them and could work for you.
I'd like to thank those people who have taken the time to post to this thread.
how about a more pragmatic and less theoretical discussion of trin -- how about some examples of when you would've used it, perhaps charted, with tick or without, or with other indicators ...
understanding what it is isn't the point. I get and agree thunderdog's assertion that this indicator sends mixed signals, but mainly because volume does not always correlate well with price movement. that is the fundamental basis of devaluing the indicator.
If an indicator by itself is less than 50% correct (which it is), then it is no more valid than a coin toss. But if an indicator in combination with other factors (price, fundamentals, etc) can be used as an aid to get you to 51%+ success, it is worthwhile.
understanding what it is isn't the point. I get and agree thunderdog's assertion that this indicator sends mixed signals, but mainly because volume does not always correlate well with price movement. that is the fundamental basis of devaluing the indicator.
If an indicator by itself is less than 50% correct (which it is), then it is no more valid than a coin toss. But if an indicator in combination with other factors (price, fundamentals, etc) can be used as an aid to get you to 51%+ success, it is worthwhile.
"If an indicator by itself is less than 50% correct (which it is), then it is no more valid than a coin toss. But if an indicator in combination with other factors (price, fundamentals, etc) can be used as an aid to get you to 51%+ success, it is worthwhile."
here we go with the reification again...
sigh...
TRIN gives 100% of the time an indication of WHAT IT IS SUPPOSED TO GIVE - namely the above formula mentioned.
it's merely a RATIO. and the ratio is what it is. the problem is when people want to attribute MORE to the MEANING/PREDICTIVE qualities of the indicator. That is always problematic. with any indicator.
it is just as EXACT as price, or any derivative of price. TRIN can only have one value at any given moment in time. it is COMPLETELY objective.
but TRIN is not a "trading system". it is a formula that compares several things (advancers, advancing volume, etc.) in a specific way
to what extent that has UTILITY is another question entirely.
here we go with the reification again...
sigh...
TRIN gives 100% of the time an indication of WHAT IT IS SUPPOSED TO GIVE - namely the above formula mentioned.
it's merely a RATIO. and the ratio is what it is. the problem is when people want to attribute MORE to the MEANING/PREDICTIVE qualities of the indicator. That is always problematic. with any indicator.
it is just as EXACT as price, or any derivative of price. TRIN can only have one value at any given moment in time. it is COMPLETELY objective.
but TRIN is not a "trading system". it is a formula that compares several things (advancers, advancing volume, etc.) in a specific way
to what extent that has UTILITY is another question entirely.