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.
Regreassion to the Meme
- Thread starter Joe Doaks
- Start date
Quote from CT10Gov:
Bloomberg has a screen that shows exactly that: the price weighted volume.
You should perhaps examine the fact that your own ignorance makes the world around you appear luddite only because you do not even know what you do not know.
Are you really a community college professor?
If you are referring to Market Picture and/or Volume Bar Distribution, not the same thing as PWAV. If you had the slightest inkling of what I am doing with PWAV you would know that.
Of course I am a community college professor! Have you ever been to college?
As an aside, I trust that everyone reading is enjawing these discutations. You meet such interesting people here! And there is no finer mudwrestling anywhere on the web.
Quote from Joe Doaks:
If you are referring to Market Picture and/or Volume Bar Distribution, not the same thing as PWAV. If you had the slightest inkling of what I am doing with PWAV you would know that.
I have no inkling of what PWAV is because you don't appear to talk about beyond using your own made up jargon. Weighting volume by price isn't new. I was thinking of IPGV <GO>, but of course - until you give us the actual formula you are using, "there's no true scotsman", right?
Quote from Joe Doaks:
Of course I am a community college professor! Have you ever been?
I have no idea who you are before today. A quick google search for "Joe Doaks community college" (no quotes) turned up nothing of value on the first page.
You might not want to presume the level of education of other people (though, it's usually safe on ET, since the majority of people on ET appear to not have gone to college).
Might do you good to see where your friend fits on this list: http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?threadid=250699
It never surprises to find cranks on ET... it does, however, when they find followers.
It never surprises to find cranks on ET... it does, however, when they find followers.
Quote from Samsara:
Yes indeed, unbeknownst to your interlocutor. I do believe he believes he is onto you!
Quote from CT10Gov:
I have no inkling of what PWAV is because you don't appear to talk about beyond using your own made up jargon. Weighting volume by price isn't new. I was thinking of IPGV <GO>, but of course - until you give us the actual formula you are using, "there's no true scotsman", right?
I have no idea who you are before today. A quick google search for "Joe Doaks community college" (no quotes) turned up nothing of value on the first page.
You might not want to presume the level of education of other people (though, it's usually safe on ET, since the majority of people on ET appear to not have gone to college).
Know your Bloomie, huh? It's IGPV. And no, it isn't IGPV. I explained to you that PWAV is the volume twin of VWAP. So I shouldn't have to explain to a learned person such as yourself how to calculate it.
Quote from CT10Gov:
Might do you good to see where your friend fits on this list: http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?threadid=250699
It never surprises to find cranks on ET... it does, however, when they find followers.
(1) Cranks tend to invent their own terminology TRUE OF ME
(2) Cranks tend to consider themselves geniuses. TRUE
(3) Cranks tend to work in isolation from their colleagues. TRUE
(4) Cranks tend to regard their colleagues and critics as stupid. TRUE
(5) Cranks tend to believe there is a conspiracy against them. TRUE
(6) "Cranks tend to criticize the work of big names in science. TRUE if you substitute "trading" for "science"
(7) Cranks tend to be paranoid. TOO TRUE
But this analyses ignores the scores of great people who were scorned by the mainstram for their "outlandish" ideas. The histories of science and medicine are replete with such examples. Fortunately, in trading, there is only one test of crank versus genius. And it ain't ET's opinion.
So it's sum(P[t] * V[t])/sum(P[t]) ?
Before I say anything else, let's first have you agree on that, least you then slip away and say that it's something else.
(and yes, you are right, I meant to write IGPV. I have no issue owing up to my own mistakes, of which I make many all the time)
Before I say anything else, let's first have you agree on that, least you then slip away and say that it's something else.
(and yes, you are right, I meant to write IGPV. I have no issue owing up to my own mistakes, of which I make many all the time)
Quote from Joe Doaks:
Know your Bloomie, huh? It's IGPV. And no, it isn't IGPV. I explained to you that PWAV is the volume twin of VWAP. So I shouldn't have to explain to a learned person such as yourself how to calculate it.