S
schlap
That ticking is probably for you Jack, you are on the wrong side of the average lifespan for a male
And you do realise I'll be ruining any tributes to you on the web, sort of a going away present
Trader28 informational thread
- Thread starter steve46
- Start date
That ticking is probably for you Jack, you are on the wrong side of the average lifespan for a male
And you do realise I'll be ruining any tributes to you on the web, sort of a going away present
Quote from schlap:
That ticking is probably for you Jack, you are on the wrong side of the average lifespan for a male
okay gotta go its my bedtime.....
See if you can post before tomorrow morning....lol
S
schlap
Make sure it hasn't got a lid
So are the contradictions that you and your star pupil, Spydertrader, churn out for us
Two examples:
Example 1:
Here Spydertrader says stocks must be screened before testing the scoring cycle of your price, volume relationship model:
But here he says the opposite... that trading using the price, volume relationship does NOT require screening.
Please show me where in your paper (attached) you require screening or testing only a "universe" of stocks that meet fundamental parameters... please show me where in your paper you mention PVT... on the other hand, you talk about the price, volume relationship throughout the paper. Could it be that you just don't like this equity curve? http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/attachment.php?s=&postid=1115365
Once again, white is black and black is white
Example 2:
Here's another classic, where I address Spydertrader's red herring about the code I used for the test:
http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=1979868#post1979868
ssooo funny.
Two examples:
Example 1:
Here Spydertrader says stocks must be screened before testing the scoring cycle of your price, volume relationship model:
http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=1115411&#post1115411
But here he says the opposite... that trading using the price, volume relationship does NOT require screening.
http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=1978951#post1978951
Please show me where in your paper (attached) you require screening or testing only a "universe" of stocks that meet fundamental parameters... please show me where in your paper you mention PVT... on the other hand, you talk about the price, volume relationship throughout the paper. Could it be that you just don't like this equity curve? http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/attachment.php?s=&postid=1115365
Once again, white is black and black is white
Example 2:
Here's another classic, where I address Spydertrader's red herring about the code I used for the test:
http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=1979868#post1979868
ssooo funny.
Quote from Trader666:
So are the contradictions that you and your star pupil, Spydertrader, churn out for us
Two examples:
Example 1:
Here Spydertrader says stocks must be screened before testing the scoring cycle of your price, volume relationship model:
http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=1115411&#post1115411
But here he says the opposite... that trading using the price, volume relationship does NOT require screening.
http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=1978951#post1978951
Please show me where in your paper (attached) you require screening or testing only a "universe" of stocks that meet fundamental parameters... please show me where in your paper you mention PVT... on the other hand, you talk about the price, volume relationship throughout the paper. Could it be that you just don't like this equity curve? http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/attachment.php?s=&postid=1115365
Once again, white is black and black is white
Example 2:
Here's another classic, where I address Spydertrader's red herring about the code I used for the test:
http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=1979868#post1979868
ssooo funny.
There is some miswiring going on here.
If you wish I'll explain it to you. Just remember that if you give me permission, you and your buddy are going to become examples of what it is like to be like what the two of you have wound up becoming.
My recommendation to you is to think about it for a few days.
If you want it explained to you, I'll do it in spades and it is not going to be a very pleasant read for you, your buddy or anyone similarly aflicted.
The up side of the explanation is that many others will be able to profit from understanding the consequences of how decisions are made with regard to how a person can capitalize on the opportunity of building the mind and just what is going on at every fork in the road of deciding just how to go about building the mind.
Let me guess... you want to project your own inadequacies on me by making me the focus of a rant about how people can reach a point of no return through the incessant learning of repeated failure. Is that correct? If so, no thanks, you've falsely maligned me more than enough already.
Why don't we do something constructive instead like publicly debate each other on the price, volume relationship and have the ET community vote on the winner? I have a model that doesn't need training wheels (a pre-screened "universe") and I can present it simply and clearly enough for anyone to verify. In other words, I don't need to hide behind unnecessary complexity and nebulosity to prevent people from analyzing it.
Or maybe we could analyze "Catch Up With Tomorrow's Paper Today." As long as we don't pretend it contains things that aren't really in it...
Why don't we do something constructive instead like publicly debate each other on the price, volume relationship and have the ET community vote on the winner? I have a model that doesn't need training wheels (a pre-screened "universe") and I can present it simply and clearly enough for anyone to verify. In other words, I don't need to hide behind unnecessary complexity and nebulosity to prevent people from analyzing it.
Or maybe we could analyze "Catch Up With Tomorrow's Paper Today." As long as we don't pretend it contains things that aren't really in it...
Thanks for responding; I really appreciate it.
Declining was a good idea for you.
It is fairly clear that there is no debate on the P, V relationship. It is a very old concept and principle that is used very widely in a very broad range of applications.
I hope that the model you have found gets developed over time. Maybe as time passes you will be able to present some of its derivatives in ways that can be understood and used by others.
Good luck to you and your buddies here.