Something very simplistic

Quah · Sep 22, 2002

Originally posted by FasterPussycat

Why did you choose fib #'s for your entries? How did you decide that this is how you wanted to enter the trades? Why fib #'s??

No specific reason why, just thought I'd try them.

FasterPussycat · Sep 22, 2002

Originally posted by dbphoenix

Though it may have been unintentional, the impression you've given is that Quah's system has no value because he can't explain exactly why it works, and that, at bottom, is your problem and not Quah's.

I, for one, don't think it's Quah's responsibility to determine why his system works (at least for the time being), much less explain it to somebody else. If somebody else wants to do so in order to apply features of it to his own trading, then report the results of that application, great. But having read all these posts from the beginning, it seems to me that quite a few people are upset by this system - if not downright enraged by it - because it's so simple. This implies that all their efforts to analyze to the nth degree have, in effect, been a waste of time.

At this point, it's difficult to believe that people have been playing with this system for only a few days, not weeks or months. Therefore, the almost visceral responses that the thread has evoked most likely have been motivated by something that has nothing to do with the system or with Quah, who, I might add, has been a model of tolerance, patience and courtesy.

Those of us who are interested are all playing with this system and adapting it to our own trading styles, but there's nothing to report yet as the system has been in use for so little time. It cannot be backtested but must rather be tested in realtime and forward, and that takes a while. So those who are irritated by the whole discussion and who also have no patience are presented with a problem.

--Db

i don't think illiquid has given that impression at all, at least not to me. he is simply trying to break this system down to see what makes it tick, if it indeed ticks at all (that has yet to be established) and yes there is no requirement that a valid system be understood to work, but it is nice when you know how it relates to the market forces, and until it proves its worth over time it remains highly suspect for the very reason that we can make no sense of it. if quah had a weeks worth of similar results but trading a system based on astrology would you be so quick to embrace it? and wouldn't such a system's validity be suspect because no reasonable relationship between market forces and the planets can be established? the answer of course is yes.

FasterPussycat · Sep 22, 2002

Originally posted by Quah

No specific reason why, just thought I'd try them.

Ok and how did you come up with stoch settings of 17,1,17 on a two minute chart? Why those odd settings and why a two minute chart?

Quah · Sep 22, 2002

Originally posted by FasterPussycat

Ok and how did you come up with stoch settings of 17,1,17 on a two minute chart? Why those odd settings and why a two minute chart?

Well, I've always liked X,1,X settings on stochastics. I liked using settings like 34,1,34 on one minute charts in the past. I also like using fib number multiples of 8 on parms for stochs, ma's and such. 34,1,34 was a bit too slow on a 2 minute chart, so I halved it - to 17. Like what I saw, so I figured I'd try it.

Does it make any sense to halve it like that? Logically, no, probably not. But the again I can't really explain why I end up using any certain parms on any other indicator either - other than they seem to work.

I've always perfered to use indicators in a non-standard way. For example using the open instead of the close in the calculations, using a moving average instead of the close as the input to a stochastic, etc.

I don't think anyone can claim to know for certain why anything works. If they could - that explanation would be or lead to the holy grail.

(edited to add: is the 2 minute chart some magic? I doubt it. I'm going to look at a 24,1,24 on a 64 tick chart tomorrow along with the 17,1,17 on the two and see how they compare. )

Quah · Sep 22, 2002

Originally posted by FasterPussycat

Ok and how did you come up with stoch settings of 17,1,17 on a two minute chart? Why those odd settings and why a two minute chart?

One question for you - why are 17,1,17 "odd" ? What should they be?

illiquid · Sep 22, 2002

Originally posted by dbphoenix

Why not? As long as each is specific about what he did and when he did it, as Quah has been, why is it necessary that he explain why he got the results he did? What difference does it make?

Personally, I'd like to see "a whole bunch" do just that, try out this idea with a variety of indicators in a variety of timeframes with a variety of stops and price targets, etc. Isn't that the point of a group effort, to try all this out and report the results?

I think you misread my last post -- my tone wasn't incredulous. That's exactly what would be most helpful if everyone gave their own insights on how applying certain elements of this system to their own trading turned out -- it would be lots more helpful than just saying "whatever works".

Originally posted by dbphoenix

And if someone can't explain exactly why he got the results he did, I don't much care. Nobody really knows why they get any of the results they get anyway. If they did, then two people doing exactly the same thing exactly the same way would get exactly the same results.

--Db

That was the point in my last post -- 2 people using the exact same system would get exactly the same results; however, they could come to completely different conclusions about how the elements of the system worked, relative to how they traded before. If those 2 traders instead shared their results and tried to figure exactly how their trading had changed, they might actually be able to arrive at a common conclusion which might lead to further adjustments beneficial to both traders. Why the fear about asking questions beyond "how much does that system make?" Why try to trade yourself at all then -- why not just buy some black box system that does all the thinking for you and let it go at that?

dbphoenix · Sep 22, 2002

Originally posted by FasterPussycat
i don't think illiquid has given that impression at all, at least not to me. he is simply trying to break this system down to see what makes it tick, if it indeed ticks at all (that has yet to be established)

Which is great, if that's what he wants to do. But why should Quah be required to do it if he's perfectly happy with what he's got?

Originally posted by FasterPussycat
if quah had a weeks worth of similar results but trading a system based on astrology would you be so quick to embrace it?

I never said I was quick to embrace it as it is. But neither am I quick to dismiss it simply because Quah can't or doesn't want to get mired in discussions of why.

--Db

dbphoenix · Sep 22, 2002

Originally posted by illiquid
That was the point in my last post -- 2 people using the exact same system would get exactly the same results

I went on to say, however, that two people will not get the same results, for all sorts of reasons.

Why the fear about asking questions beyond "how much does that system make?"

No fear. I just can't help wondering why those who are so intent on finding out if this system works, and, if so, why, can't use it themselves and come to their own conclusions. The most likely result of waiting for somebody else to do it would be even more questions about constructs and methodologies and controls etc etc etc If one is, for example, eager to find out the "best" stochastic settings, he is more likely to find something that satisfies his standards by conducting his own investigations than by pelting others with questions.

--Db

FasterPussycat · Sep 22, 2002

Originally posted by dbphoenix

I went on to say, however, that two people will not get the same results, for all sorts of reasons.

No fear. I just can't help wondering why those who are so intent on finding out if this system works, and, if so, why, can't use it themselves and come to their own conclusions. The most likely result of waiting for somebody else to do it would be even more questions about constructs and methodologies and controls etc etc etc If one is, for example, eager to find out the "best" stochastic settings, he is more likely to find something that satisfies his standards by conducting his own investigations than by pelting others with questions.

--Db

i agree that those who have no interest in examining this system or any other system or anything else related to trading for that matter has every right to refrain from doing so. however those of us who have this interest for whatever reason or simply enjoy tossing ideas about and discussing them also have every right to do so. that's what these boards are for...DISCUSSION. i don't characterize this as "pelting others with questions", i call it sharing ideas. now if your only interest is using this system then why are you posting here ...GO USE IT.

dbphoenix · Sep 22, 2002

Originally posted by FasterPussycat
i agree that those who have no interest in examining this system or any other system or anything else related to trading for that matter has every right to refrain from doing so. however those of us who have this interest for whatever reason or simply enjoy tossing ideas about and discussing them also have every right to do so. that's what these boards are for...DISCUSSION.

I agree completely. However, what looks like discussion to some looks like interrogation to others. I suggest again that those who are so interested in, for example, specific stochastic values try a variety of values themselves in order to find out for themselves which work best rather than waiting for somebody else to do it for them. They will then have something to contribute other than questions.

As for myself, yes I am playing with it, and if and when I learn anything useful, I'll be happy to mention it. I can't say whether my experiences will have any value or not.

--Db