I also have enjoyed your thread very much. However don't understand why you would be sitting out the market when the CzarChart is "urging" to be long? I re-read your initial statement that you are 100% mechanical and that discretionary combined with mechanical is the worst of both worlds...therefore are you not now chosing to be discretionary? Thanks
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.
Odds Czar: Simple Biases in the Futures Markets 2006
- Thread starter Art Collins
- Start date
I also have enjoyed your thread very much. However don't understand why you would be sitting out the market when the CzarChart is "urging" to be long? I re-read your initial statement that you are 100% mechanical and that discretionary combined with mechanical is the worst of both worlds...therefore are you not now chosing to be discretionary? Thanks
nzbryant wrote
Great thread - very helpful to see the way you analyse/think. What kind of returns has all this given you?
aardvark wrote
I also have enjoyed your thread very much. However don't understand why you would be sitting out the market when the CzarChart is "urging" to be long? I re-read your initial statement that you are 100% mechanical and that discretionary combined with mechanical is the worst of both worlds...therefore are you not now chosing to be discretionary? Thanks
_______________________________________________
hopefully, i'll answer both questions here.
the CzarCharts show biases that have historically played out a certain way given certain setups. the setups, the results of following the signals, etc. over the last x number of years, have been disclosed on this and other sites. therefore, i regard them as valid tools and they do play a part in my own trading.
i am 100 percent mechanical, but just showing the biases does not imply a total approach. ideally, that would take some work from the reader--something else i strongly advocate. mechanical traders should do their own work or at least understand every building block they are using from the ground up. otherwise, how does one get beyond the inevitable second guessing that occurs during bad performance stratches? (is the advisor a charlatan, merely inept, etc?)
you can get good results following exclusively the first either-or boxes, which is apparently the bias aardvark is keying off. but the calendar box negates that. i've posted results of the individual boxes, combos, etc. it doesn't matter if you're following one pathway and are doing the opposite of someone following another--the key is to consistently follow it--not jump in and out, not cherry pick the trades, etc. it's the totality of trades that is going to matter--not whether aardvard is right this time and nzbryant wrong or vice versa. but again, as a mechanical trader, i'd personally want something more than merely what the biases are telling me. for one thing, it would be pretty tough to weather some of these open-to-close trades without stops. (as in yesterday's action). some people might choose to follow their own signals and push them when they're tandem with the calander tendencies, pull them back when they're at odds. etc.
i think i've hinted at the answer to nzbryan's qustion, but maybe this is a more emphatic answer. i use various incarnations of what i post combined with other techniques. i don't have a track record for the pure signals, but then again, you can see what they've done historically in previous posts. hope i've helped
Great thread - very helpful to see the way you analyse/think. What kind of returns has all this given you?
aardvark wrote
I also have enjoyed your thread very much. However don't understand why you would be sitting out the market when the CzarChart is "urging" to be long? I re-read your initial statement that you are 100% mechanical and that discretionary combined with mechanical is the worst of both worlds...therefore are you not now chosing to be discretionary? Thanks
_______________________________________________
hopefully, i'll answer both questions here.
the CzarCharts show biases that have historically played out a certain way given certain setups. the setups, the results of following the signals, etc. over the last x number of years, have been disclosed on this and other sites. therefore, i regard them as valid tools and they do play a part in my own trading.
i am 100 percent mechanical, but just showing the biases does not imply a total approach. ideally, that would take some work from the reader--something else i strongly advocate. mechanical traders should do their own work or at least understand every building block they are using from the ground up. otherwise, how does one get beyond the inevitable second guessing that occurs during bad performance stratches? (is the advisor a charlatan, merely inept, etc?)
you can get good results following exclusively the first either-or boxes, which is apparently the bias aardvark is keying off. but the calendar box negates that. i've posted results of the individual boxes, combos, etc. it doesn't matter if you're following one pathway and are doing the opposite of someone following another--the key is to consistently follow it--not jump in and out, not cherry pick the trades, etc. it's the totality of trades that is going to matter--not whether aardvard is right this time and nzbryant wrong or vice versa. but again, as a mechanical trader, i'd personally want something more than merely what the biases are telling me. for one thing, it would be pretty tough to weather some of these open-to-close trades without stops. (as in yesterday's action). some people might choose to follow their own signals and push them when they're tandem with the calander tendencies, pull them back when they're at odds. etc.
i think i've hinted at the answer to nzbryan's qustion, but maybe this is a more emphatic answer. i use various incarnations of what i post combined with other techniques. i don't have a track record for the pure signals, but then again, you can see what they've done historically in previous posts. hope i've helped
It amazes me that teaching traders all proport "simple" systems yet seem to complicate their own ideas. Mark Fisher is guilty of this with his book the Logical Trader. Simple to me means 3 or 4 calculations tops.
For all the trading Einsteins out there, memorizing the first 200 digits of pi must seem simple compared to figuring the complexities of the universe, or the markets.
Art, why not publish the ideas and methods that worked for you in the past?? The markets are dynamic but I'm sure they haven't changed that much.
Does referring to youself as a trader mean you have placed one or two trades in your lifetime? But you tend to teach (Jake Bernstein) more than trade. Those who can, do. Those who can't...
For all the trading Einsteins out there, memorizing the first 200 digits of pi must seem simple compared to figuring the complexities of the universe, or the markets.
Art, why not publish the ideas and methods that worked for you in the past?? The markets are dynamic but I'm sure they haven't changed that much.
Does referring to youself as a trader mean you have placed one or two trades in your lifetime? But you tend to teach (Jake Bernstein) more than trade. Those who can, do. Those who can't...
floortrader542
It amazes me that teaching traders all proport "simple" systems yet seem to complicate their own ideas. Mark Fisher is guilty of this with his book the Logical Trader. Simple to me means 3 or 4 calculations tops.
For all the trading Einsteins out there, memorizing the first 200 digits of pi must seem simple compared to figuring the complexities of the universe, or the markets.
Art, why not publish the ideas and methods that worked for you in the past?? The markets are dynamic but I'm sure they haven't changed that much.
Does referring to youself as a trader mean you have placed one or two trades in your lifetime? But you tend to teach (Jake Bernstein) more than trade. Those who can, do. Those who can't...
________________________________________________
dear floortrader452
i have traded full time since 1989. I began developing mechanical systems and trading them since three years before that. i only started doing public-oriented market activities since my first book was published in 2000.
I may eventually get into some sort of signals-for-money endeavor or money management or whatever at some future date. At that point, I will have something to sell and some of the issues you raise about my personal performance will have more relevance. for now, i see no reason to spend extra time i do not have tracking future performances of my contentions. maybe someone else would like to do that--if so, godspeed. I see no reason to disclose full blown systems I am using or accounts that track them. There are a myriad of reasons for that. I have a partnership for one thing and we have signed contracts regarding disclosure. For another, there is some truth regarding keeping a proprietary lid on something youâre getting personal mileage out of, although in the big overview, I donât see people diluting systems by running out and trading them perfectly. Nobody does that. They make implied demands, such as you're doing, that I owe them complete stand-alone systems they can use (without effort, without enduring inevitable pain, without having your faith tested, personal fortitude, bla bla blah), but even if I did, guaranteed--they wouldnât follow them. Itâs all but impossible to follow systems perfectly without violation when they are completely your babies and you have faith in them from the ground up. My partner and I have violated, and weâre damned good. Nobody who ever just says âwow, I think Iâll just follow this guyâs programâ will ever do so. Most people bail by the third loss in a row. This is all coming out in a book in the fall, the title of which I will not mention. Again, I am selling nothing at this point in time.
What is it Iâm doing you find so offensive? I have gone back into history and isolated basic building blocks. I have posted the historical results of each individual component. I have also demonstrated how various combinations of the indicators have historically fared. Look to the early links on this site. Go to tiger shark. Youâll see that I back every contention.
I am offering you nothing beyond a âby-the way-, you might want to consider this bias and that bias if youâre considering taking a position in this market.â For that, I should submit to an X-ray from you? Maybe you would just be better off to continue doing your own work and ignore what I have to say.
Best of luck to you.
It amazes me that teaching traders all proport "simple" systems yet seem to complicate their own ideas. Mark Fisher is guilty of this with his book the Logical Trader. Simple to me means 3 or 4 calculations tops.
For all the trading Einsteins out there, memorizing the first 200 digits of pi must seem simple compared to figuring the complexities of the universe, or the markets.
Art, why not publish the ideas and methods that worked for you in the past?? The markets are dynamic but I'm sure they haven't changed that much.
Does referring to youself as a trader mean you have placed one or two trades in your lifetime? But you tend to teach (Jake Bernstein) more than trade. Those who can, do. Those who can't...
________________________________________________
dear floortrader452
i have traded full time since 1989. I began developing mechanical systems and trading them since three years before that. i only started doing public-oriented market activities since my first book was published in 2000.
I may eventually get into some sort of signals-for-money endeavor or money management or whatever at some future date. At that point, I will have something to sell and some of the issues you raise about my personal performance will have more relevance. for now, i see no reason to spend extra time i do not have tracking future performances of my contentions. maybe someone else would like to do that--if so, godspeed. I see no reason to disclose full blown systems I am using or accounts that track them. There are a myriad of reasons for that. I have a partnership for one thing and we have signed contracts regarding disclosure. For another, there is some truth regarding keeping a proprietary lid on something youâre getting personal mileage out of, although in the big overview, I donât see people diluting systems by running out and trading them perfectly. Nobody does that. They make implied demands, such as you're doing, that I owe them complete stand-alone systems they can use (without effort, without enduring inevitable pain, without having your faith tested, personal fortitude, bla bla blah), but even if I did, guaranteed--they wouldnât follow them. Itâs all but impossible to follow systems perfectly without violation when they are completely your babies and you have faith in them from the ground up. My partner and I have violated, and weâre damned good. Nobody who ever just says âwow, I think Iâll just follow this guyâs programâ will ever do so. Most people bail by the third loss in a row. This is all coming out in a book in the fall, the title of which I will not mention. Again, I am selling nothing at this point in time.
What is it Iâm doing you find so offensive? I have gone back into history and isolated basic building blocks. I have posted the historical results of each individual component. I have also demonstrated how various combinations of the indicators have historically fared. Look to the early links on this site. Go to tiger shark. Youâll see that I back every contention.
I am offering you nothing beyond a âby-the way-, you might want to consider this bias and that bias if youâre considering taking a position in this market.â For that, I should submit to an X-ray from you? Maybe you would just be better off to continue doing your own work and ignore what I have to say.
Best of luck to you.
Art,
I have a journal and my own methodology. I use lots of simple analogies in my posting analysis of my (eRussell) market and my points are to the point. While working on my ET journal today I hit 'next thread' and your posting came up.
I enjoy discussing trading ideas, but I have nothing to ultimately sell
I agree with not revealing proprietery information. i certainly do not, not after 36 months of 20 hour days. I do reveal broad strategies, but not specifics, as to what does work (for me)
You admit you have a book due out. Your postings reek of a hidden agenda. What's the point of toying with ideas yet not reveal what you've found truly works? It's like saying I've found the treasure, but let's look over there instead. What are you really doing, teaching or promoting??
(Let me share with the public some trading ideas to establish credibility for my upcomming book)
I have a journal and my own methodology. I use lots of simple analogies in my posting analysis of my (eRussell) market and my points are to the point. While working on my ET journal today I hit 'next thread' and your posting came up.
I enjoy discussing trading ideas, but I have nothing to ultimately sell
I agree with not revealing proprietery information. i certainly do not, not after 36 months of 20 hour days. I do reveal broad strategies, but not specifics, as to what does work (for me)
You admit you have a book due out. Your postings reek of a hidden agenda. What's the point of toying with ideas yet not reveal what you've found truly works? It's like saying I've found the treasure, but let's look over there instead. What are you really doing, teaching or promoting??
(Let me share with the public some trading ideas to establish credibility for my upcomming book)