Reality based coin-tosser method that beats 95% of traders in the world.
- Thread starter Whisky
- Start date
Trend Following
Sponsor
I admit to being naive to some of the players in here, but do people actually believe the gibberish this guy Jack espouses?
He has contributed, at least, one self-evident truth. Most of what he says, I can't understand, but there is at least one translator that is trying.
Do you have any truths to contribute?.
Remember that:
"You will have to prove to yourself and others that your suggestions bring in at least 1 tic per day on average extra profit over the original method rules. "
First, despite the naysayers, this is an excellent thread.
Now for my take on this âsystemâ. I do not trade the ES so I don't know its idiosyncrasies if any. I trade options. I can't improve on your "system" because my entries are not "random". The action of the market may be random but my entries are not. In addition, my exits are equally not random because my exits are dependent upon my entries.
What this means to me is that I cannot expect to "beat" the market with random entries because I don't know how to improve your "system" without changing it to a point where it would look nothing like your original "system". This doesn't necessarily mean that no one could devise a possible profitable exit strategy for random entries, it just means that I don't know how to do it.
My earlier suggestion was the following: "To keep this mechanical, only flip sides if your side has a loss of value from the previous session. Cuts losses and lets winners run.
Now whether there will be enough "trends" to overcome the extra tic can only be proven going forward."
I know as a long-term strategy this will eventually revert back to the mean however if used in favorable market conditions, it has limited-time possibilities for profitability. Even modified martingales could work in limited-time frames by increasing the % chance of success for the limited period even thought the long-term expectation is negative.
Joe.
Now for my take on this âsystemâ. I do not trade the ES so I don't know its idiosyncrasies if any. I trade options. I can't improve on your "system" because my entries are not "random". The action of the market may be random but my entries are not. In addition, my exits are equally not random because my exits are dependent upon my entries.
What this means to me is that I cannot expect to "beat" the market with random entries because I don't know how to improve your "system" without changing it to a point where it would look nothing like your original "system". This doesn't necessarily mean that no one could devise a possible profitable exit strategy for random entries, it just means that I don't know how to do it.
My earlier suggestion was the following: "To keep this mechanical, only flip sides if your side has a loss of value from the previous session. Cuts losses and lets winners run.
Now whether there will be enough "trends" to overcome the extra tic can only be proven going forward."
I know as a long-term strategy this will eventually revert back to the mean however if used in favorable market conditions, it has limited-time possibilities for profitability. Even modified martingales could work in limited-time frames by increasing the % chance of success for the limited period even thought the long-term expectation is negative.
Joe.
Trend Following
Sponsor
I know they are not "free" (no apologies there), but both of my books and film have been contributions to the truth. For this particular thread I have not added any truths other than to point out this guy Jack speaks gibberish.
Well, in his defense he contributed a self-evident truth that is not gibberish. Namely he said that exponentially compounding an edge over an increased frequency of trades is the main contributor to ultimate performance. He said it in his dialect however.
And he did it for free. So, at the risk of irritating you, you are, at least partially, not telling the truth for free.