MurreyMath

[ArchAngel]

Quote from oddiduro:


My analysis of the S&P is telling me that the index is severely overbought short term. I would be thinking about shorting this at 908.80. My exit target is 898.44 and then 890.63

OK, setting aside all the irrelevant BS about inertial mass, Galileo, Einstein, and whether Murrey's just a hypster trying to ride on Gann's ideas (although that seems like a very good probability). I'll ask some more directly applicable questions.

It sounds like your plan is to short at the waist of Friday's candle (which is only 1 1/4 below the close - easily hit just from morning volatility) and target the 6/8ths and 4/8ths for exit (all predicated on a 16 daily bar frame)?

Given that 1 1/4 points is easily within the morning volatility froth, why risk planning to jump in so quickly before any directional confirmation?

And why do you consider a 16 frame the best representation to use?

On a 32 frame (daily) it's got about 25-30 points before being overbought. Daily prices have oscillated between the 875 (0/8th) and 937.50 (4/8ths) on a 32 bar frame for almost three months. Seems that might present the nature of the price activity better than the 16 frame.

Of course, we could find out that an almost immediate short on Monday turns out to be right, but with preliminary intraday support at 905.5-905.7, why risk rushing into a short at 908.80 when you appear to not be planning for a possible turn of events should that support area survive (you don't appear to even be aware that such potential support areas exist)?

 

[Sarasota]

Quote from WDGann:



Mind of oddiduro and other Gann-ese, "Gann said this, Gann said that... Guru said this, Guru said that..."

No offense...but this sounds like you.

 

[Sarasota]

Quote from oddiduro:

It is truly AMAZING to me how some people will criticize MM, but they lack the courage to put the system to a real time test in a public forum!

It is like saying that they hate Fords, but they drive Chevys only, and cannot produce ANY dissatified Ford owners.

To you hecklers:

Have the guts to put your methods to the test in REAL TIME. Let MM, or my application of MM fall on it's face in REAL TIME.

A few of you can sure talk the talk, now come out the shadows and WALK THE WALK.

What is amazing to me is that people criticize ANYTHING without trying it first. "Gann doesn't work.....Murrey Math doesn't work..., etc. You guys are wearing me out!

Does MM work? Who knows, but there are way too many people that do to ignore it. Furthermore, I have no desire to bash it because I have no idea what the Square of Ten is, and haven't investigated MM.

 

[Sarasota]

Quote from oddiduro:



Hey, I posted websites that verified what I said, can you spell out in detail the "bullshit" that I posted?

And I am more than willing to do this on a daily basis for as long as they deem necessary.

Odd....these guys are ignorant and aren't open to learning new things or investigating new methods. All they care about is bashing anything and everything. If you look at the authors of the posts you are fighting with, you will quickly learn that their posts in the past have mainly been negative in nature. I am assuming this is their attempt to make themselves feel better because they really can't trade.

I think its time to ignore them.

 

[OPTIONAL777]

Quote from Sarasota:



Odd....these guys are ignorant and aren't open to learning new things or investigating new methods. All they care about is bashing anything and everything. If you look at the authors of the posts you are fighting with, you will quickly learn that their posts in the past have mainly been negative in nature. I am assuming this is their attempt to make themselves feel better because they really can't trade.

I think its time to ignore them.

Let him make his posts in a journal, day in and day out over time, demonstrating his paper trading skills that he claims to have.

It is not about learning new things or being open to new things, it is about the same old schtick from people who have not proven anything, yet come off from the very beginning as if they were something special and had the best system for everyone.

When someone is able to document their performance over time with a system, in real time with MONEY, not paper, they will draw people to them.

Traders are attracted to real success, not the bull that a paper oddiot is pushing.

 

[WDGann]

Oddman...

So can you explain to me the relationship of Sq.ing the Circle Master chart, Galileo, and composite cycle?

I'm following your claims of Gann being scientific and rational, which I do agree with. But I don't agree with how you interpret and reason science with Gann. That's the reason why I'm sticking to Scientific Reasoning.

C'mon bro.... I don't care what you talk between others like 777 (it's funny though), I'm here for a intellectual debate.

Let's see you be intellectual too.

My reason to call you a paper trader was, you would talk but you aren't being reasonable with what you say. You're here to prove that MM or Gann works but you aren't. That's why I called you a paper trader. I remember you saying you trade EOD.

So... let's see you prove a viable point. There are a few Gann-ese in here. Let's see you prove the relationship of Master Charts and Galileo.

As for trading results, I've been in ET Chat occassionally and I think a few knows I can trade... or at least make calls....

 

[oddiduro]

Quote from OPTIONAL777:

How can you tell a paper trader from a real trader?

A paper trader thinks that paper trading is a worthwhile endeavor, and reflective of how someone will do as a real trader.

Anyone remember how many posts Aphie devoted last year to trading (you don't see him post much on trading any more) and when the rubber met the road with real money he pussed out.

Anyone remember that dude, forget his handle, something like 40 year old trader? He started a journal that went on and on, then when it was time for real trading....oops, the dude vanished.

Here is the evidence that the Oddman is not for real, a theory based paper trader, like a math man who lives in ivory castles but knows nothing about the emotions that come when you have real money in the markets. A quote from him follows

"At the end of the day, whether they were paper losses and gains, or real losses and gains, it would still prove the point of the efficacy of the system, if the trades are posted AHEAD of time, which I am more than willing to do. That is why they tell folks with limited resources to paper trade in the first place isn't it?"

Paper trading proves the efficacy of a system? Bullshit. Paper trading proves nothing. It doesn't test the emotions of a system. Yes, the emotions of a system.

If the systems is so damn good, just program a black box to trade the system, retire and spend your days on the beaches in the South of France.

Real traders know it doesn't work that way.

A system doesn't become real until it is put into practice by a trader. Shit, you can look at Don with his system making money daily, and his rookies who cannot reproduce the results. Why? Because of the emotional baggage a trader brings to the table.

There is theory, then there is proof.

Unless Oddboy is selling something, why would someone who has a system that is making him money, a golden goose, waste their time in this forum trying to prove something? Because he can't prove it to himself with real money, either because he doesn't have any money, or he doesn't have the stomach for trading with real money, so he is left to try and play paper trading games and challenges. What a pussy.

Oddfuck, start a journal in the journal section. Post your trades each and every day. Gain a following there. Paper trade the toilet paper that is stuck to your ass and following you around like a tail.

In the end, who gives a shit, real traders know you are a fake, and nothing but a paper boy.

I don't need a following, and if you could read a little better, you would have noticed that I have NEVER paper traded, for the reason mentioned in my post. I happen to be more efficient with words than you, so I can say what you said in much less space.

Face it optional, you are a classic case of projection. You are the one who is broke, so you go around flaming those who aren't. But I have gotten enough private email to know for certain who is looking stupid, and it is YOU my friend, it is you.

 

[OPTIONAL777]

Quote from oddiduro:



I don't need a following, and if you could read a little better, you would have noticed that I have NEVER paper traded, for the reason mentioned in my post. I happen to be more efficient with words than you, so I can say what you said in much less space.

Face it optional, you are a classic case of projection. You are the one who is broke, so you go around flaming those who aren't. But I have gotten enough private email to know for certain who is looking stupid, and it is YOU my friend, it is you.

Go ahead and post the private email, we are all one community, right?

Why is it that when someone brings up reasonable points about you, the response is always an argument ad hominem?

 

[oddiduro]

Quote from WDGann:

Oddman...

So can you explain to me the relationship of Sq.ing the Circle Master chart, Galileo, and composite cycle?

I'm following your claims of Gann being scientific and rational, which I do agree with. But I don't agree with how you interpret and reason science with Gann. That's the reason why I'm sticking to Scientific Reasoning.

C'mon bro.... I don't care what you talk between others like 777 (it's funny though), I'm here for a intellectual debate.

Let's see you be intellectual too.

My reason to call you a paper trader was, you would talk but you aren't being reasonable with what you say. You're here to prove that MM or Gann works but you aren't. That's why I called you a paper trader. I remember you saying you trade EOD.

So... let's see you prove a viable point. There are a few Gann-ese in here. Let's see you prove the relationship of Master Charts and Galileo.

As for trading results, I've been in ET Chat occassionally and I think a few knows I can trade... or at least make calls....

Fair enough, it is quite possible that I my be miscommunicating with you. You want me to prove the relationship between Master charts and Gallileo.

Which master chart would you be referring to? It is my understanding that Gann used more than one. I am only familiar with the SQ of 9, 10, and 12.

Also, in what way precisely would you like the relationship to be spelled out?

I cannot guarantee that I be correct, but I will be more than happy to exchange rational discourse with you on the subject.

 

[WDGann]

Sq. the Circle Chart... I posted it in previous posts...

19x19 Master Charts.

It's the one which the first box ends at 361. (19x19 = 361)

I think it was mentioned in Gann original material after the 6 sq. of 9 in the Master Chart section.

Personally, it's the chart that connected Sq. of 9, 12, and Extreme Low Master Charts together. I still haven't figured the link for Hexagon chart but it's important.

As for the explanation, no numerological stuff.