trend following delusion shattered

Status
Not open for further replies.
A thought just occurred to me regarding the belief in trends and trend trading, implicit or otherwise. If anyone has ever added to an existing profitable position (either in pyramid form or in any other configuration), then it seems to me that such persons not only believe in trends, but also act on those beliefs.

Therefore, the question is: do any of you folks who think that trend trading is bogus ever add to existing profitable positions? :D
 
Quote from NickelScalper:

There could be something there.

It's not immediately clear why an existing tendency in price would be more likely to persist after an interim of high volatility, but that's just me.
More...

I'm thinking in terms of intraday data -- volatility has been described as being coincidental with price excursions. If your frame of reference is longer than intraday then we could be talking past each other.
 
Quote from ProfLogic:

I saw you mention in another thread that you had written a book/books. May I ask what it/they were regarding?
More...

No, that is an expression --- "yada, yada, yada, in my book". However, I've written some articles for Futures the preponderance of which are already in my journal. As regards the Nobel Prize in Economics...work on a lottery edge isn't what you consider for a Nobel Prize. What I did doesn't break with standard statistical treatments of probability and is an application of set theory to the lottery problem. Notice I limited my work to the 3 and 4-ball lotteries. For the 5-ball and beyond the combinatorial possibilities of winning numbers simply explodes. As I said twice before, even filling out lottery tickets for the three and four ball lotteries is time intensive. You can win using the strategy, but you must realize the lottery isn't a fair game to begin with: there are 1,000 combinations in the 3-ball and the payoff is only half that; so, basically, you are starting at a disadvantage and try to improve your chances.
 
Quote from bdixon619:

I'm thinking in terms of intraday data -- volatility has been described as being coincidental with price excursions. If your frame of reference is longer than intraday then we could be talking past each other.
More...
So far, I haven't made any distinction here between daytrading and interday.

Are you saying that the respective price trends within two nearly adjacent intervals of time are more likely to be positively correlated if there is an interim of high volatility between them?
 
Quote from NickelScalper:

So far, I haven't made any distinction here between daytrading and interday.

Are you saying that the respective price trends within two nearly adjacent intervals of time are more likely to be positively correlated if there is an interim of high volatility between them?
More...

This is becoming confusing -- all I'm saying is that if you are considering trading (intraday), it would be easier to trade if you waited for a volatility spike because (intraday) volatility and price excursion tend to occur together. I'm saying nothing about trend direction or two-trend direction. I'm saying if you identify the trend then wait for a volatility increase to make your play.
 
Quote from bdixon619:

This is becoming confusing -- all I'm saying is that if you are considering trading (intraday), it would be easier to trade if you waited for a volatility spike because (intraday) volatility and price excursion tend to occur together. I'm saying nothing about trend direction or two-trend direction. I'm saying if you identify the trend then wait for a volatility increase to make your play.
More...
Okay, I finally got it. Seems like something worth looking into.
 
Quote from bdixon619:

No, that is an expression --- "yada, yada, yada, in my book". However, I've written some articles for Futures the preponderance of which are already in my journal. As regards the Nobel Prize in Economics...work on a lottery edge isn't what you consider for a Nobel Prize. What I did doesn't break with standard statistical treatments of probability and is an application of set theory to the lottery problem . . . "yada, yada, yada
More...

Woooo . . . slow down. I just wanted to understand your background a little better to then understand where your assupmtions arose. I don't favor statistical models used in trading for rational reasons but that is a objective reasoning thing.
 
Quote from ProfLogic:

Woooo . . . slow down. I just wanted to understand your background a little better to then understand where your assupmtions arose. I don't favor statistical models used in trading for rational reasons but that is a objective reasoning thing.
More...

That's fine. Whatever floats your boat.
 
Quote from bdixon619:

. As I said twice before, even filling out lottery tickets for the three and four ball lotteries is time intensive. You can win using the strategy, but you must realize the lottery isn't a fair game to begin with: there are 1,000 combinations in the 3-ball and the payoff is only half that; so, basically, you are starting at a disadvantage and try to improve your chances.
More...

Are you trying to say you have a winning strategy for cash3? Starting at a disadvantage is putting it mildly. It blows my mind that so many people are willing to go against 2 to 1 odds.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top