Predicting is ***Unavoidable***

Here's my original quote:
I tested the "0 to 7 turn" on many portfolios... randomly selected, S&P stocks, etc.

And here's what it means:
I tested the "0 to 7 turn" on many portfolios... randomly selected (portfolios), S&P stocks, etc.(meaning other portfolios too)

Had I meant "randomly selected S&P stocks" I would have written it without the comma. The "random" portfolios were baskets of stocks randomly selected from the set of all listed U.S. stocks and the S&P stocks were the S&P 400, 500, and 600 stocks and combinations thereof.

Thanks for the link. I see it contains MANY ADDITIONAL conditions that were NOT in Jack's original document, Catch Up with Tomorrow's Paper Today, which I've posted again here, for the nth time. Clearly, my backtests are a much more accurate evaluation of Jack's original concept.
Quote from makosgu:

Mon ami, the above is what you said. You took the doc, tested it using the wealthlab code, introduced an additional condition of a randomly selected S&P portfolio, and got a negative result. How does a comma change any of these steps??? To this I responded that a different type of portfolio which is not random does not produce the results that you got? The conditions for a non ramdomly selected portfolio that gets a positive EQ curve is here...
More...
 

Attachments

Quote from Trader666:

Anyone claiming it's possible to KNOW what comes next in the markets is either ignorant, delusional or a fraud.
More...

No need to get your knickers in a bunch.

What comes next is always going to be one of the three end effects discussed in the previous post. Why must you always choose to say things that were never said? I clearly pointed out that one cannot know which of the Three End Effects comes next, but one can (and I do ) know one of the three always, and 100% of the time follow Event A.

This is clearly not the same as knowing the future. Can you not understand the difference? Or, have you intentionally chosen to misrepresent what I said here (in this very thread)? Either way, as I have said previously, your post has caused people to think - even if you show very little evidence of applying the same skill, and that is a fantastic thing.

- Spydertrader
 
When I see rain drops on my windshield, I'll turn my wipers on.
When I don't see rain drops anymore, I'll turn my wipers off.

Do I predict that it'll rain? Do I predict that the rain'll stop?

I'm listening to the meteorologist saying that it's raining. Do I turn my wipers on without looking for rain drops on my windshield?

<img src=http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/attachment.php?s=&postid=1401017>
 

Attachments

Quote from kiwi_trader:

But, going back to the original post, we are both still relying on a prediction that the real time sequence results will generate a similar profit to that the past has shown.
More...

The 'real-time price sequence' to which you refer will always generate one of three possible profit levels based on which of the three End Effects materializes. Not part of the time, not some of the time, not most of the time, but always, and 100% of the time. It has always work this way, it will continue to work this way for one very important reason. Event A marks the change in Market Sentiment. So long as Sentiment (fear, greed) influence the markets, this 'real-time price sequence' will not change. The sequence does not need to generate similar profits to the past. Each trading day provides different amounts for a trader to profit (most often based on the daily range) becuase it always, and 100% of the time generates some profit. How much depends on which of the three End Effects materialize. As a result, one does not need to know the future. One simply needs to recognize when the End Effect (Change) arrives - signalling the end of the trend.

- Spydertrader
 
Quote from jem:

But when the markets chop they can chop trendlines to pieces.
More...

Where you see 'chop' I see the Event A - End 2 process repeating over and over again throughout the day. In terms of the Futures Journal, we refer to this as FTT to FBO. On days such as these, the profit potential of the market skyrockets. The sufficient data set required to trade on such a day requires one additional tool (one which we will discuss in April). However, the 'chop' to which you refer doesn't break the trendlines. Rather, it oscillates over and over between them creating multiple reverse signals throughout the day. For an example of such a day, please review the three market days before Thanksgiving 2007 (specifically the afternoon period).

- Spydertrader
 
Quote from Spydertrader:

. For an example of such a day, please review the three market days before Thanksgiving 2007 (specifically the afternoon period).

- Spydertrader
More...


:D

2006?

you do quite eloquently present your position, however, it still does not make practical sense.

surf
 
Quote from cnms2:

When I see rain drops on my windshield, I'll turn my wipers on.
When I don't see rain drops anymore, I'll turn my wipers off.

Do I predict that it'll rain? Do I predict that the rain'll stop?

I'm listening to the meteorologist saying that it's raining. Do I turn my wipers on without looking for rain drops on my windshield?

<img src=http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/attachment.php?s=&postid=1401017>
More...

Sweet stuff

It is obvious to YOU&I that this is what Spyder is saying, and interestingly enough, as Spyder mentioned, it was Trader666's Matrix which was able to break Spyder's/jack's Model (or any other) down to its core decision making process.

So to follow your thought cnms2, not only is Predicting Unavoidable, it is Unnecessary, and Undesirable as well to all good trading. :)

Good trading,

JJ
 
Quote from marketsurfer:

:D

2006?

you do quite eloquently present your position, however, it still does not make practical sense.

surf
More...
no , it doesn't, it makes perfect sense. :D
 
I'm saying things that were never said? LOL!!!! Here are your own words and here's the link to them:

For those having difficulty with Anticipation vs Prediction, please review this post. Continuation vs change are not tied to 'odds of success' in the future. Reaching the correct conclusion by monitoring sufficient (and correct) data sets one 'permits one to know what comes next.

NOTE: there are no qualifiers in that post, see for yourself:

http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=1400887#post1400887

But wait!!! You were talking about the "Three End Effects?" OK, let's explore that. Here are two of the things you said about them, along with the link:

we do know with 100% certainty that one of the three will occur

and

Each End Effect provides the trader with a different level of profit.

http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=1400974#post1400974

It logically follows from those two statements that there is a 100% certainty of some level of profit which is also pure BS.
Quote from Spydertrader:

No need to get your knickers in a bunch.

What comes next is always going to be one of the three end effects discussed in the previous post. Why must you always choose to say things that were never said? I clearly pointed out that one cannot know which of the Three End Effects comes next, but one can (and I do ) know one of the three always, and 100% of the time follow Event A.

This is clearly not the same as knowing the future. Can you not understand the difference? Or, have you intentionally chosen to misrepresent what I said here (in this very thread)? Either way, as I have said previously, your post has caused people to think - even if you show very little evidence of applying the same skill, and that is a fantastic thing.

- Spydertrader
More...
 
Its ok to not understand T666. If you want some help, I will walk you through it all step by step. Just let me know.


Quote from Trader666:


It logically follows from those two statements that there is a 100% certainty of some level of profit which is also pure BS.
More...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top