Rich and Taleb agree.....

[Thunderdog]

Quote from marketsurfer:

...your anger and scorn of people based on little snippets of quasi fact and inuendo is bizzare--- you only know one side of the story-- you can email LW or even call him up to get his side--- will you do this NO, in fact, you will not even provide your source-- HOW BOGUS! I know your side inside and out, however, i took the time to talk to LW to find out his side---what he says makes sense, call him and see for yourself.

You know the facts inside out? Bullshit. You have repeatedly denied the existence of the NFA findings regarding LW as recounted by Gallacher. You challenged me to produce the evidence. I then got it for myself and detailed in full how you could do the very same thing. Still you do not accept the existence of the documented findings. Rather, you accept LW's version of events. Not unlike:

Marketsurfer: Mr. Capone, are you a mobster?

Al Capone: No, sonny, I'm not. There's no such thing. It's all hearsay. Now run along.

Marketsurfer: Gee, thanks, Mr. Capone! (Wow! Al Capone just talked to me. Like I was important, or something. What a great guy!) Oh, before I go, can I feel your gun?

_______________________________________________


Shallow? You're the one on the wading side of this pool.

And I repeat: You have still not aswered my question after you dismissed me because I learned absolutely nothing of any value from either of VN's books. Specifically, on page 16 of this thread, you wrote:

Quote from marketsurfer:

now, it's abundantly clear why you had trouble extracting wisdom (hahahaha) from VN's books.

surf

I then immediately responded:

Quote from Thunderdog:

And what wisdom have you extracted that can be tangibly manifested, quite apart from your obvious arrogance and pomposity? No doubt there is a measurable justification for your having become something of a snot...right?

You defelcted my question, so I wrote:

Quote from Thunderdog:

That's all well and good, but you still didn't answer my question. What have you learned from VN, aside from the "test everything" generality, and how has it measurably manifested in your trading performance? So rather than resorting to your condescending, pat, subjective responses, as per usual, give us something objective.

This was all on page 16. You continued to deflect my question, so I asked AGAIN on page 18. You STILL have not responded. Who, then, is full of shit?

 

[infolode]

Trend is just a word I think and definitions of all words vary according to ones own perceptions and experience. I think words themselves have no power until we, as humans enable them as such due to our emotional bias. Being humans and unable to condition our atmospheres sufficiently to our liking we tend to attach labels to everything in our realm. What we cannot explain and thereby label, is often called random. That in part is how we maintain balance and our sanity, in an otherwise chaotic universe.

"...is the universe friendly?"

My interpretation of the word, "trend " in relation to the market, can't be determined with just one observation. Trend is a series of observations over time using charts/tape (whatever works for you) as a guide. It is a pattern that develops.

Gauging the exact beginning and end of a trend and the minimum requirements allotted to label this pattern as a trend is an entirely different matter and and is subjective to ones method of confirmation and trading style(s).

I almost wish I hadn't started thinking about this but it's either a thought provoking discussion that could help myself or simply be an exercise in futility.

Time will tell...it always does.

 

[Tracy McGreedy]

The difference is that Rogers considers price as entry/exit, tho not the primary reason. It is secondary to trend discovery. Rogers also buys into a new trend near or at decade lows. Rogers shorts into a new downtrend near or at decade highs. He is not a pure technician, but he is not a pure fundamental buy and hold.

For instance, Rogers explains that if HSI went parabolic, he'd be forced to sell, regardless of fundamentals.

Buy and hold has no real exit strategy, which is why most get killed after the cycle ends.

The grail is hybrid.

Quote from marketsurfer:

he is right to a point. when i speak of trends, although obvious, i am speaking of trend in price without outside reality--- TA trends discounting all but price/volume.

what's the difference between rogers and fundamental buy/sell and hold?

surf

 

[marketsurfer]

Quote from Thunderdog:

You know the facts inside out? Bullshit. You have repeatedly denied the existence of the NFA findings regarding LW as recounted by Gallacher. You challenged me to produce the evidence. I then got it for myself and detailed in full how you could do the very same thing. Still you do not accept the existence of the documented findings. Rather, you accept LW's version of events. Not unlike:

Marketsurfer: Mr. Capone, are you a mobster?

Al Capone: No, sonny, I'm not. There's no such thing. It's all hearsay. Now run along.

Marketsurfer: Gee, thanks, Mr. Capone! (Wow! Al Capone just talked to me. Like I was important, or something. What a great guy!) Oh, before I go, can I feel your gun?

_______________________________________________


Shallow? You're the one on the wading side of this pool.

And I repeat: You have still not aswered my question after you dismissed me because I learned absolutely nothing of any value from either of VN's books. Specifically, on page 16 of this thread, you wrote:



I then immediately responded:



You defelcted my question, so I wrote:



This was all on page 16. You continued to deflect my question, so I asked AGAIN on page 18. You STILL have not responded. Who, then, is full of shit?

are you insinuating a tie to organized crime? as you continue down the road of attacks from hiding.

im going to lay out what i have learned from VN or anyone--- are you insane??

your imaginary phone calls to "enforcement lawyers" who you forget the names, refusal to post the evidence then twisting things to make it seem that i am the one not providing information when in fact it is you guilty of this.

once again, does LW has unsavory things in his past in this business? probably. does he have a reasonable explanation of these things--- yes. so what's the issues here?

surf

 

[Thunderdog]

Quote from Tracy McGreedy:

A short term "trend" really isn't a trend. It's a ripple. This is where TA shines. Playing the seesaw game in open interest and short term oscillation of price.

One man's ripple may be another man's trend. You choose your horizon, and I'll choose mine. There's room for everyone.

Allow me clarify something. I am not very smart and I am not at all well connected. Therefore, I am not capable of assessing publicly known information better than most people, and I do not have access to such information before anyone else. As a result, I resort to price. Now, please follow me here.

If there were certain cyclical trends or fundamental changes that were taking place that I actually knew about but had not yet manifested themselves in price, then I would not act on such information, assuming I had a grasp of such changes. That's because fundamental analysis is a poor timing tool. Further, if I saw price action that told me I should be either long or short based on my predefined criteria, even though I was not aware of any cyclic or fundamental changes, then I would not wait for such information to present itself before I entered the market. Rather, I would enter on the basis of my predefined criteria. As a result, you will note that the fundamental or cyclical components, as you have defined them, are essentially superfluous for my own limited purposes.

You do it your way, and I'll do it mine.

 

[marketsurfer]

Quote from Tracy McGreedy:

The difference is that Rogers considers price as entry/exit, tho not the primary reason. It is secondary to trend discovery. Rogers also buys into a new trend near or at decade lows. Rogers shorts into a new downtrend near or at decade highs. He is not a pure technician, but he is not a pure fundamental buy and hold.

For instance, Rogers explains that if HSI went parabolic, he'd be forced to sell, regardless of fundamentals.

Buy and hold has no real exit strategy, which is why most get killed after the cycle ends.

The grail is hybrid.

smart, i concur.

makes sense to me.... trend followers would call rogers a top/bottom picker. much like i have been trying to do, on a shorter term albeit, although longer than most here.

surf

 

[marketsurfer]

a snippet from a chat i had with Rogers in 2005

Dave: Do you use technical analysis at all?


Jim: No, its pretty simple just figuring out what is going on in the world. I try to find things that are cheap and invest in them if I see some positive change coming. I don’t understand the charts. Don’t misunderstand me, I do look at the charts, but I only look at a simple long-term chart to see what has happened over the last 15 years or so, not to tell me what is going to happen in the future. For example, if I am looking at sugar, I want to know the high, the low, when, why, and things like that. I look at the charts to educate me, rather than a predicting tool.


http://www.tradingmarkets.com/.site/stocks/commentary/satinterview/01212005-42064.cfm

 

[marketsurfer]

Quote from Thunderdog:


You defelcted my question, so I wrote:



This was all on page 16. You continued to deflect my question, so I asked AGAIN on page 18. You STILL have not responded. Who, then, is full of shit?

unlike you Tdog, i talk to these people and have direct access to many of them. what's your knowledge based on?

so run along with your clever word play.

surf

 

[Thunderdog]

Quote from marketsurfer:

are you insinuating a tie to organized crime? as you continue down the road of attacks from hiding.

im going to lay out what i have learned from VN or anyone--- are you insane??

your imaginary phone calls to "enforcement lawyers" who you forget the names, refusal to post the evidence then twisting things to make it seem that i am the one not providing information when in fact it is you guilty of this.

once again, does LW has unsavory things in his past in this business? probably. does he have a reasonable explanation of these things--- yes. so what's the issues here?

surf

You are a pathetic fool. An insinuation to organized crime? Are you really that daft? Have Anna read it for context and let her spoon feed you.

Imaginary phone call? You accuse me of lying? Well, then you are an asshole. I explained myself to you. And even if I had been lying, which I did not, then you could easily expose me by confirming that the evidence does not exist where I told you to get it. But that's just one step farther than you seem to be willing to go. Hmm. Sit back in your armchair and pontificate instead. I did the legwork. All I ask is that you confirm it for yourself. If you cannot find the information where I said I found it or where I was advised that it can be found at a library, then I will leave ET forever and finally be out of your hair. How's that for incentive? You may show this promise to Baron for banning purposes. I stand by my word about my willingness to be banned if I am lying here. Do you stand behind your word about anything?

Your last paragraph is utterly bizarre. You are suggesting that LW has a "reasonable" explanation for the "unsavory" things he did in his past? Did you actually read what you wrote before you posted it?!

 

[Thunderdog]

Quote from marketsurfer:

unlike you Tdog, i talk to these people and have direct access to many of them. what's your knowledge based on?

so run along with your clever word play.

surf

Unlike you, marketsurfer, I don't kiss their ass just because they take a moment to talk to me. Run along with your breath mints.