Surf's Special Situation Journal

Status
Not open for further replies.
Quote from marketsurfer:

Thank you for being cordial, mr. Brass. You can not use terms like probabilities and low risk without being able to measure and quantify. If I am correct, as you state, what value does TA have, aside from illustration and rhetoric? surf
More...
I used the term "balance of probability." See the above post in my response to Xspurt. As for the rest, you and I have run in circles time and again over the years. I have answered similar questions from you very plainly in the past, and I have little inclination to do so again, since my previous attempts obviously didn't take.
 
Quote from Brass:

The term "balance of probability" does not imply numeric specificity:

http://www.answers.com/topic/balance-of-probabilities

It is more of a "go or no go" type of thing. You can assign all manner of probability to your setups and such, and you can go build castles in the sky. But that doesn't make it real. If you could legitimately assign a proper probability distribution to future outcomes in the market price, then you could employ the Optimal F or Kelly Criterion to the letter and have a high chance of maximizing your returns. HOWEVER, anyone who tries to follow these sizing methods to the letter in the markets is destined to become a smudge on the trading landscape sooner rather than later. You need to ask yourself why that is. Directional trading is much more about uncertainty than it is about probability. That's why Optimal F enthusiasts warn people to use small fractions of the calculated value. Because your probability distribution is, for all intents and purposes, illusory. Uncertainty requires larger margins for error than does probability. However, that doesn't make TA unusable. Far from it.

I don't know anything about your trading. You may or may not be a good trader. And if you are, then that's great. But you are kidding yourself about numeric specificity.
More...

Thanks for the answer - I kinda know where you are coming from. I just don't have a mathematical approach because I'm soon out of my depth there so I rely on what I am good at and that is discovering visual relationships that work. Two trading friends (a quant prof and a NASA rocket scientist) find that the math behind what I do is perfectly structured. Perhaps there is more than one way to skin this cat ;)

I certainly am not smart enough to think my way is the way or the only way, that everyone else is wrong or everything that can be discovered had been discovered: it's just my way and it sure is different.
 
Quote from Brass:

I used the term "balance of probability." See the above post in my response to Xspurt. As for the rest, you and I have run in circles time and again over the years. I have answered similar questions from you very plainly in the past, and I have little inclination to do so again, since my previous attempts obviously didn't take.
More...

You are misusing the term. The slightest tip implies above 50/50 therein, when dealing with financial instruments, could be measured, quantified and exploited. However, we all know that these things can't be. surf
 
Quote from Xspurt:

...Two trading friends (a quant prof and a NASA rocket scientist) find that the math behind what I do is perfectly structured...
More...
Were they referring to the math behind the derivation of your setups, or the probability of the outcomes of those setups?
 
Quote from marketsurfer:

You are misusing the term. The slightest tip implies above 50/50 therein, when dealing with financial instruments, could be measured, quantified and exploited. However, we all know that these things can't be. surf
More...
I am using the term because, without special knowledge of an outcome, it is as close as you can hope to get. It lends itself better to the market environment than any implication of numeric specificity. Your issue is that you are all or nothing, whereas most of life happens somewhere in between.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top