trend following delusion shattered

[winter]

Quote from spike500:

In each move there is noise. You apparently think that in a short trend every tick we get is lower than the previous one.

Your assumption is incorrect. For the price at the end of the hour to equal the price at the start that means that there were as many ticks up as there were down. To see a "short trend" in such a period requires a bias.

Quote from spike500:
To argue the way you do it: in the first hour you couldn’t make as much money going long as going short. The low was 1192, which gives 1195-1192= 3 points. The high was 1197.5, which gives 1197.5-1195= 2.5 points. In fact the close of the minute I posted was 1195.25 instead of 1195 which gives 2.25 and 3.25 points.

Interesting, so you are claiming because it was *possible* to get an exit at 1192 and make 3.25 pts that makes the one hour period a short trend? You do realize that by the same token, someone could have timed their entry at 1192 and thereby make 3.25 pts on the long-side just as easily. You see once you get away from the raw prediction (short trend, one hour) its very easy to play the what-if game to make the prediction true after the fact.

Quote from spike500:
So from this point of view the trend was short.

I go by the much simplier definition of dp/dt which in this case is zero. YMMV.

Quote from spike500:
If you say that it depends on the entry and exit than you can prove anything; if there is a move up of 150 points you can say that the trend was short because you took a 0.5 point profit short and you missed the long.

Lol, if anyone is playing the "what-if" game with entries and exists its you. If you someone took your prediction at face value and went short at 11:17 and held for one hour they would be flat at 12:17 - period. If they followed your two hour prediction they would be in the hole 1pt. Any speculation about what else could have happened with timed entries and exits is just that - speculation.

 

[PitchBlack]

Enough is enough, i took my profit.

And BSAM you're right. I leave the forum to the "experts".

 

[ProfLogic]

Quote from spike500:

PS: Proflogic, trends do work; the only problem is to find a trend that works.

I was joking, look at the chart I posted. I know they work . . . perfectly.

 

[PitchBlack]

Quote from ProfLogic:

I was joking, look at the chart I posted. I know they work . . . perfectly.

Sorry, my english.... not to mention my intelligence....

Winter surely got your message right.

 

[ProfLogic]

Quote from winter:

Lol, if anyone is playing the "what-if" game with entries and exists its you. If you someone took your prediction at face value and went short at 11:17 and held for one hour they would be flat at 12:17 - period. If they followed your two hour prediction they would be in the hole 1pt. Any speculation about what else could have happened with timed entries and exits is just that - speculation.

Winter or Martini or whatever your name is,

Why haven't you commented on my chart that substantiates Spikes trend statement? I'd say the 2 charts I posted were a lot clearer for you to read. I would be interested in how you would slam such clarity.

 

[Lefty62151]

I just want to say "thank you" and "come again" to those who could not find or stay with the trend today

Today was more of a challenge, because some buying came in towards the end of the day.

Again if you will look at charts using 15 and 5 min time frames, you will either see trend, or perhaps you will decide to find a job bagging groceries. Trading is not for everyone.

While I enjoy the company of other traders, I can see that we will be saying "goodbye" to several of you soon (depending on how long your accounts hold up).

For the few who may have the guts and interest to figure it out, everything you need to know has been posted earlier in the thread.

Good luck to you all
Lefty.

 

[winter]

Quote from ProfLogic:

Winter or Martini or whatever your name is,

Why haven't you commented on my chart that substantiates Spikes trend statement? I'd say the 2 charts I posted were a lot clearer for you to read. I would be interested in how you would slam such clarity.

ProfLogic or Whiskey or whatever your name is, I do not require anything other than a price chart of ES between 11:17 and 12:17 to validate spike's prediction.

Please do not misunderstand me. I am not a trend naysayer, I believe that trends do exists and can be exploited for profit.
However I do not believe anyone who says they can predict them with 90% accuracy (by any reasonable definition of "accurate")

 

[hanseng1]

Quote from ProfLogic:

Winter or Martini or whatever your name is,

Why haven't you commented on my chart that substantiates Spikes trend statement? I'd say the 2 charts I posted were a lot clearer for you to read. I would be interested in how you would slam such clarity.

This thread has gotten a bit off topic. The original post was referring to trend following being dead. A subsequent post started referring to making "predictions", not following trends. A prediction is not trend following.

I think Winter and a couple others are referencing the "prediction"statement. Trend following on whatever level chosen is not dead as proven daily by the many profitable traders who use this method. It has passed the test of time as a trading technique. Almost every pure mathematical model I've seen in the past (that makes directional trades, not spreads/arbs) has failed soon after inception. Perhaps its mathematical ignorance on my part, but mathematical/econometric models are basically curve-fitted systems which don't inspire much of my confidence in foward trading.

Just my opinion, of course......

 

[PitchBlack]

Quote from winter:

ProfLogic or Whiskey or whatever your name is, I do not require anything other than a price chart of ES between 11:17 and 12:17 to validate spike's prediction.

Please do not misunderstand me. I am not a trend naysayer, I believe that trends do exists and can be exploited for profit.
However I do not believe anyone who says they can predict them with 90% accuracy (by any reasonable definition of "accurate")

To judge a statement one needs are serie of ojective observations that are statistically valid. The math of Winter is superior to all other forms of math. He takes ONE observation, unterpretes it subjectivly and concludes out of that ONE statement.
Congratulations, it only proves that the only objective was to break down what is said, no matter how no matter with what means. You started even before the first hour was over, so even before you could have any idea what the outcome would be. Very objective and honest!

I posted that the trend was short; the trend was short until i posted that i got out of my short just after the low of the day and approx 30 minutes before the close.
But you only use what fits in your story and you even have to manipulate that part to make it suitable for you.

I proposed to do something, but it was not appreciated, so the experiment is over.

 

[winter]

Quote from spike500:

To judge a statement one needs are serie of ojective observations that are statistically valid. The math of Winter is superior to all other forms of math. He takes ONE observation, unterpretes it subjectivly and concludes out of that ONE statement.

First your statement above is just incorrect but regardless I never concluded anything based on your one prediction. I did not believe your 90% accuracy claim when you made it. Its not a "conclusion", its my belief.

The fact is anyone can make vague "predictions" and then make most of them fit what really happened after the fact. If you say the market is going to be in a short trend for a given period I do not think it is unreasonable to expect the price at the end to be lower than the price at the beginning of said period. At best, your prediction was a draw, it certainly was not right on the money as you seem to believe so strongly.

Quote from spike500:

You started even before the first hour was over, so even before you could have any idea what the outcome would be. Very objective and honest!.

Interesting. You posted at 11:17am EST, I posted after 1:17pm EST - over two hours after your "prediction" and yet you claim that it was less than an hour.

BTW If you are referring to the timestamp in my post (1:15) then I understand your confusion - there does seem to be a problem with the timestamps on ET but I assure you that my post was made after 1:17pm, either that or I need to thank eSignal for providing me with quotes several minutes in the future...

(I posted this at 18:40 - look at the timestamp according to ET)

Quote from spike500:

I proposed to do something, but it was not appreciated, so the experiment is over.

So one person gives you feedback you don't like and you call it quits huh? Certainly looks like someone looking for an excuse to back away from something they know they can't deliver.