Poll: Is it humanly possible to capture 3x ATR everday?

Is it humanly possible to capture 3x ATR everday?

  • Yes

    Votes: 64 22.5%

  • No

    Votes: 221 77.5%
  • Total voters
    285
Quote from jack hershey:

I'll continue to post here every once in a while.
More...

Check the time stamps of Jack's posts for the last 2 weeks.. every major move that took place in the market saw Jack drafting and posting a page long rant as it was taking place

He doesn't trade!
 
Quote from bluebolt:

Check the time stamps of Jack's posts for the last 2 weeks.. every major move that took place in the market saw Jack drafting and posting a page long rant as it was taking place

He doesn't trade!
More...

Just for conversations sake, how many trades a day do you think I don't do.

If I'm an advocate of being in the market all of the time, how much of the day (as a % of RTH) do you think I am dealing with my execution platform?

If the market is really moving am I doing a lot of trades?

If the market is moving very slowly am I doing a lot of trades.

If the market pace is below medium am I doing a lot of trades?

When would I be doing the most frequent trades (clue: when did you screw up SPM the most)?
 
Jack, let's take these one at a time...

1) You claim: "I do reach my goal of 3x H-L in ES as a practice."

http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=912447&highlight=reach+goal+3x#post912447

Yet your documented performance in a trading contest is -24%. Why don't you just put this to rest once and for all and show us, instead of ignoring this or replying with a long winded obfuscation? Answer: you would if you could but you won't because you can't. This is so obvious.

2) My backtesting was correct, given what I tested which is what you provided (attached at the link below). However, you and your followers have continuously tried to smear my work by adding conditions after-the-fact which weren't in the original document. Give it a rest. ANYONE who checks what I did can easily replicate the results. I've addressed this MANY times. Here it is yet again:

http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=1940441&highlight=turn+relation#post1940441

3) Merrill Lynch "coattail" traded you on a national basis? ROTFLMAO!!! Just who do you think you're fooling?

Quote from jack hershey:

Some people actually feel that 3x the daily range (H-L) is not possible.

Just like Trader666 screws up backtesting, ML screwed up coattail trading me on a national basis and imparted bogus information ML made up for their purposes.
More...
 
HEY!

Maybe you guys should leave the Jack Hershey crowd alone ... there are a lot more fucktards over on the ES Journal thread than the Hershey crowd ever had..

I put my foot in their ass all day today, and man was it fun! :p :D :D

Not that I'm trying to stick up for Jack or anything (even though I do trade channels ... and support/resistance don't really mean crap to me ... and I do like their discipline). :)

It's just fresh meat, that's all I'msay'in, it's just fresh meat (they lie through the fuck'in teeth over there too, you know). :eek: :p
 
Quote from Trader666:

Why don't you just put this to rest once and for all and show us, instead of ignoring this or replying with a long winded obfuscation?
More...
Jack just popped out to buy Spyder a pair of shoes
 
my proggie took 844 points off the dow scalping in a 150 pt range, with the dow finishing flat for the day...crazy day for sure and doubt I could have done it manually.

best, HPT.
 
Quote from Trader666:

Jack, let's take these one at a time...

1) You claim: "I do reach my goal of 3x H-L in ES as a practice."

http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=912447&highlight=reach+goal+3x#post912447

Yet your documented performance in a trading contest is -24%. Why don't you just put this to rest once and for all and show us, instead of ignoring this or replying with a long winded obfuscation? Answer: you would if you could but you won't because you can't. This is so obvious.

What is important to you (and many people like you) is putting to rest my track record. I did that in various locations a while back as part of running the gauntlet. mostly everyone goes through this initiation process.

You have made up your answer for your benefit. Good work. Be happy

2) My backtesting was correct, given what I tested which is what you provided (attached at the link below). However, you and your followers have continuously tried to smear my work by adding conditions after-the-fact which weren't in the original document. Give it a rest. ANYONE who checks what I did can easily replicate the results. I've addressed this MANY times. Here it is yet again:

http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=1940441&highlight=turn+relation#post1940441

I am sure what you did may be replicated. But why would they do what you did for any reason? to make money a person needs to look at the market's potential and how to use tools to extract capital.

One of your backtests look at scoring partially. It is explicit in scoring to make use of three market variables. It is also explicit to use those same variables to enter and to exit. Somehow in some way you did not get the drift that scoring involves three variables. Nor did you get the drift of how, over time those variables change to give signals of an entry or an exit.

For long trades: Here is the entry change: 0 goes to 7. Here is the exit change: 4 goes to 3. If a person did this back test, he would find out how holding from 7 to 4 inclusively makes money in a long trade.

By symmetry a short trade is the opposite: here is the short entry: 4 goes to 3. Here is the short exit: 0 goes to 7. again hewould find out how holding short from 4 to 0 inclusively makes money in a short trade.

I have noticed that you report out that you used a back test code to prove this. How much capital you used I do not know as yet; no one but you know. I notice that on a per trade basis there is no loss on average that is significant for what you did, though. I conclude your work is insignificant.

Let's say you did this back testing and refined it over and over to be sure to do a better job. Take the Harvard example and what you feel was their difficulty. You did not have any difficulties as they did. Why? Of course, it was because you took care of what was causing them difficulties. naturally you did notstraighten them out nor tell me or others who were getting forward testing results which did not have any difficulties. Fortunately, Harvard, could examine the track record and add staff statisticians to convert the forward results to a mechanism for dealing with their original concerns.

As time passed, runs were done to verify the hold period on the PVT system. with 400,000 runs it was possible to verify the hold period to be what was previously announced by using forward trading results. This still may be considered inductive if it were not forsome tweaks that you have, so far, not explained nor taken into consideration. So far you have not posted any results that are according to or related to what actual scientific testing yields.

We know that ET does not deal in monitoring the science of trading or any QA on posts by anyone. They can't because of capability constraints when dealing with volumteers.

Of course, I keep hoping you will do your thing persistently and carefully. You prove to a lot of readers that garbage in yields garbage out.

If a person has a three variable system to work with, he may not take a short cut like not using three variables. If a person is dealing with entries and exits, he may not skip the exits to determine whether a hold period to make a profit has or has not happened. It looks like to me you did some trades. It looks like, to me you did not do any more than take the difference of prices and accumulate them on a graph of price versus # of trades and call it an equity curve over a period of time. Pragmatically speaking it would be neat to see when in time the trades occurred and how much capital would have been required during land mark periods as the land mark periods successively occurred.

Sometimes people do back testing to simmulate a trader doing trades. Have you ever heard of that? From now on you can say yes.

Look at the attached. Imagine it as an application of the P, V relationship. Naturally it can be automatic on an execution platform by relating the trading plan and a business plan to using an electronic account.

Over about 80 pages, there is a narrative of a trader using it for real while taking 100,000 dollars to 1,000,000 million dollars over a period of time. There are four, roughly equal streams of capital involved. On a Sunday, over a couple of hours, a Universe is examined to determine a Hot list that will have stocks on it to trade the four streams of capital by trading the successive cycles of stocks on the Hot list.

It is automated to the extent that the hot list and the universe sort continually the long and short trading opportunities. The non price sorting is done by using an automated volume sort that is normalized with 65 day average volume, the only measure available on the platform.

The trading rules are one liners for entry and one liners for exits all color coded for convenience of the reader (you, perehaps).

You either have or do not have back testing results for this. 10's of thousands of people besides you do, however. Your tests what ever they may be will either fit in with those of others or they will not. So far none of your tests fit in with anything in any literature anywhere. Too bad.

as you have seen by reading the illustrated version of this day of tradingafter the prior preparation, it was very very successful by tyhe reporting standards of all testers of trading. It is an outlier on the distribution as they say in the tseting circles.

Since it is progressive and compounded in a non stationary window operating in real time with real money what it respresents is a continuous forward testing of the PVT. It is paralleled by hundreds of other accounts that do the same thing with the same lists. This has been going on in ET for about four years and it has been going on in the world since about 1957 in a form according to the advancement of technological support of those periods.

You screwed up one effort on your part and you have posted an equity curve of some sort that can easily be duplicated by making the same mistakes you have been making for quite a while. You are the standard of failure to back test against which others can measure screw ups.

Many of us who look at you see your example and how it offers me a chance to periodically offer a chart to others that will get them rolling on learning to do PVT using an existing platform that offers real time sorting of Hot lists that dictate good timing for making PVT trades.

In effect the chart, when used is a forward test of the writungs you have been misinterpreting for quite some time.

3) Merrill Lynch "coattail" traded you on a national basis? ROTFLMAO!!! Just who do you think you're fooling?

Its healthy for everyone to get exercise and the choice is yours. For those that are interested in not being fooled and not getting their clothes wrinkled or dusty, you can go to various records to read the SEC and the IBM and Tang Indutries announcements that were televised and recorded in the financial news publications of the day. T J watson was the CEO of IBM and Tang was the CEO of Tang industries. the ML office that started the rumors was in Poghkeepsie, NY and the NYC office of ML was the office that spread the word nationally. The price run up went to 20 or so and after the joint announcement by the CEO's, within days the price came to rest in the 4's. Since coattailing was involved our trades (meaning those who traded with me personally) were those trades that were coattailed all over the place by ML clients who were in the ML loop.

You are a funny little person. Obviously, a lot of enjoy the humor you provide continually on ET. chuckle chuckle
More...
 

Attachments

ET will leave a legacy of cognitive biases and faulty judgments, exemplified by hostile or trivializing attitude towards different ideas.

In science, the acceptance of new ideas follows a predictable, four-stage sequence. In Stage 1, skeptics confidently proclaim that the idea is impossible because it violates the Laws of Science. This stage can last from years to centuries, depending on how much the idea challenges conventional wisdom. In Stage 2, skeptics reluctantly concede that the idea is possible, but it is not very interesting and the claimed effects are extremely weak. Stage 3 begins when the mainstream realizes that the idea is not only important, but its effects are much stronger and more pervasive than previously imagined. Stage 4 is achieved when the same critics who used to disavow any interest in the idea begin to proclaim that they thought of it first.

In SCT-like anticipatory manner what must come next for T666 and the likes is the claim that they’ve been plagiarized even before they were born.
 
Quote from romanus:



In SCT-like anticipatory manner what must come next for T666 and the likes is the claim that they’ve been plagiarized even before they were born.
More...

Only absolute children like yourself are sucked into claims of 3 times the daily range without ever having a loss and always in.. your wallet will be the ultimate teacher of trading reality
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top