If this was futures trading, does it look like I have a (+) expectancy?

CT10Gov · Nov 2, 2012

You don't understand... and you are unable to understand the math? Is that what you are staying? Just to be sure?

FInally, if you notice, I too am talking about a freaking rigged coin toss.... you are the one keep pulling the conversation away. A rigged coin toss is still freaking independent between tosses.... <- yes or no?

Why is ET full of crank-worthy old man like Jack Hershey, Joe Doeks, and you....

Quote from oldtime:

first of all, if you had ever learned to read, you would know I never said I don't believe them (why do I even waste my time on you) I said I don't understand it.

and secondly, for the last time, if you haven't kept up because it is too hard to read simple ET internet posts, we are not talking about a fair coin toss like in the Superbowl, we are talking about a rigged coin which flips heads about 60% of the time.

Might I suggest the Sylvan Learniing Centers, since it seems public education has failed you when it comes to reading comprehension.

asap · Nov 2, 2012

Quote from CT10Gov:

Um.... hence, I said multiple horizons. Shorter time-frame == tick level - go ahead and run the autocorrelation between last traded price for IBM in the last 3 days... tell me what it is, because I see around ~70%.

And, as you say, on the longer time frame as well.

And no, survivorship bias doesn't induce autocorrelation in the time series of price.....

You don't appear to know what you are talking about.

market occurrences are fully independent. what IBM stock price has done in the last three days is irrelevant. i am not going to discuss statistical irrelevant samples. just come back with a sample of +5000 price points and let me know how you uncovered price dependency there? then we'll use you mathematical formulation to predict prices in the next 5000 price points and if there's positive expectancy, i will mention you for nobel in economics.

CT10Gov · Nov 2, 2012

Dude... having autocorrelation or serial dependence doesn't imply predictability - see ar(1) processes for example.

Also, IBM stock prices at very short horizons (or any stock prices at tick level) IS indeed autocorrelated in the long run. Bid/offer effect at play.

Again, you don't appear to know what you are talking about. Please stop.

Finally, you keep using this odd term 'market occurrences'. I get it: you use it so that when you get catch out, you can always claim 'price' or 'ticks' or whatever is not what you mean by 'market occurences' like you've already excluded volatility. Want to define it for us here?

(I didn't forget: did I catch you out using words you don't understand? You didn't respond to the fact that I pointed out, contrary to your claim, survivorship bias doesn't create autocorrelation in prices).

Quote from asap:

market occurrences are fully independent. what IBM stock price has done in the last three days is irrelevant. i am not going to discuss statistical irrelevant samples. just come back with a sample of +5000 price points and let me know how you uncovered price dependency there? then we'll use you mathematical formulation to predict prices in the next 5000 price points and if there's positive expectancy, i will mention you for nobel in economics.

oldtime · Nov 2, 2012

Quote from CT10Gov:

You don't understand... and you are unable to understand the math? Is that what you are staying? Just to be sure?

FInally, if you notice, I too am talking about a freaking rigged coin toss.... you are the one keep pulling the conversation away. A rigged coin toss is still freaking independent between tosses.... <- yes or no?

Why is ET full of crank-worthy old man like Jack Hershey, Joe Doeks, and you....

yes, and the question remains, if it trends more than expected for you should you reduce size? or if it it trends more than expected against you should you increase size?

of course this is of no concern to you youngsters, because you always bet optimum size. After all, it's not like you are betting your life savings. If you're wrong you can always make it up later.

CT10Gov · Nov 2, 2012

Hold on... we are talking about independent tosses right?... what does it matter if it 'trends' or not???

Or are you guy who bets large at the roulette wheel when a number becomes 'hot'? Am I to understand that you do?

Quote from oldtime:

yes, and the question remains, if it trends more than expected for you should you reduce size? or if it it trends more than expected against you should you increase size?

of course this is of no concern to you youngsters, because you always bet optimum size. After all, it's not like you are betting your life savings. If you're wrong you can always make it up later.

asap · Nov 2, 2012

Quote from CT10Gov:

Dude... having autocorrelation or serial dependence doesn't imply predictability - see ar(1) processes for example.

Also, IBM stock prices at very short horizons (or any stock prices at tick level) IS indeed autocorrelated in the long run. Bid/offer effect at play.

Again, you don't appear to know what you are talking about. Please stop.

Finally, you keep using this odd term 'market occurrences'. I get it: you use it so that when you get catch out, you can always claim 'price' or 'ticks' or whatever is not what you mean by 'market occurences' like you've already excluded volatility. Want to define it for us here?

(I didn't forget: did I catch you out using words you don't understand? You didn't respond to the fact that I pointed out, contrary to your claim, survivorship bias doesn't create autocorrelation in prices).

i now realize you're the typical multi alias ET troll that don't have anything else to do other than hijacking threads and disinform the readers.

keep on with the good work.

CT10Gov · Nov 2, 2012

What are you talking about? Who am I?

I think you are just really mad that it's clear you have no idea what you are talking about when it comes to technical subjects. So you resort to ad hominem attacks.

Why don't you point out why I'm wrong? My statements are factual and emperical. Yours are baseless.

Are AR(1)s forecastable because they are serially dependant? Show me why I'm wrong - rather just throwing around accusations?

Typically ET trash.

Quote from asap:

i now realize you're the typical multi alias ET troll that don't have anything else to do other than hijacking threads and disinform the readers.

keep on with the good work.

oldtime · Nov 2, 2012

Quote from CT10Gov:

Hold on... we are talking about independent tosses right?... what does it matter if it 'trends' or not???

Or are you guy who bets large at the roulette wheel when a number becomes 'hot'? Am I to understand that you do?

I'm the guy that bets at the roulette wheel or black jack or craps a constant bet with a limit and either has a lucky night or loses my limit and enjoys an evening of entertainment.

when it comes to trading I know when I am winning more than I should, and that is when I reduce size. I don't want to be George Soros, I'm happy just being profitable. I already risked it all. It was fun and I'm glad that I won, but I don't want to bet I can do it again.

And when it is going much worse than any reasonable man could expect, I increase size. If not size then time.

oldtime · Nov 2, 2012

Quote from oldtime:

I'm the guy that bets at the roulette wheel or black jack or craps a constant bet with a limit and either has a lucky night or loses my limit and enjoys an evening of entertainment.

when it comes to trading I know when I am winning more than I should, and that is when I reduce size. I don't want to be George Soros, I'm happy just being profitable. I already risked it all. It was fun and I'm glad that I won, but I don't want to bet I can do it again.

And when it is going much worse than any reasonable man could expect, I increase size. If not size then time.

the difference is, at the casino I am betting against math. In trading I am betting against you.

CT10Gov · Nov 2, 2012

Christ... we are talking about a biased coin toss (that you proposed)... again, you change the subject like a slippery flish.

Your views are right if we are talking about trading. It's wrong if we are talking about a biased coin toss.

Is this fair?

Quote from oldtime:

I'm the guy that bets at the roulette wheel or black jack or craps a constant bet with a limit and either has a lucky night or loses my limit and enjoys an evening of entertainment.

when it comes to trading I know when I am winning more than I should, and that is when I reduce size. I don't want to be George Soros, I'm happy just being profitable. I already risked it all. It was fun and I'm glad that I won, but I don't want to bet I can do it again.

And when it is going much worse than any reasonable man could expect, I increase size. If not size then time.