Trend Following Research

Mikey, the difference between the two of us is that in 1996 when you were starting to market the turtle method, (information you did not develop nor validate on your own) I was already 2 years & knee deep into actual 16 hour days of price action, volume and strength research on thousands of real time charts.

My research has progressed over the last 16 years as technology has progressed. Analysis that I could not do in 1996 because of computer limitations, I can do today with current multi-processor, 64bit and high volume RAM environments. The same way HFT (high frequency trading) was science fiction 15 years ago. To say that my current market analysis is meaningless because nothing new could ever be determined simply from studying the charts using newer technology is delusional and close-minded. You are constantly referencing data that is 20 years old or older as "fact". The stuff I discovered in Chart/market structure 15 years ago is light years past the information you are referencing to as cutting edge in your material today.

Look, I'm not saying that the turtle stuff wasn't good information 20 years ago or is good basic information today. What I'm saying is that no one drives around in a 1991 Cadillac spouting off that it's the greatest thing on the road in regards to current technology. They would be openly laughed at. Your view point of "Trend Following" hasn't changed in 15 years and you think that is OK, that is the problem.
 
Quote from Trend Following:



1. Not out yet?

2. Who?

3. It is relevant if someone is trying to validate your claim of being nominated for a Nobel Prize.
More...

1. Is out but not necessary to purchase. All the information is available on this site for free.

2. RCG for one.

3. It isn't relevant to whether my method works or not, it is only relevant to you for reasons not associated with trading.
 
Quote from Trend Following:

Outstanding follow-up questions:

1. Your book? Where is that available? There doesn't appear to be a book associated with your name.
2. Please name the Swiss group.
3. Is there anything except your claim that backs you were nominated for a Nobel Prize?

Lastly, why can't these questions just be answered? Why all the indirection and obfuscation? This behavior feels Madoff like. Is that your intent? Why can't this all just be disclosed?
More...

1. No one else seems to have a problem finding my book. I'm not a vendor on this site so I have no reason to promote it here. Most people would rather search this site for the free info though. It's the same. That is why I put it here was for the members here to USE IT, TEST IT and VALIDATE IT for THEMSELVES!

2. It isn't relevant to whether my method works. I had to dig to find out who they were myself and I didn't figure it out until over a year after I got back from Zürich. If it's that important to you, find them. It isn't important to anyone else. Even my 88 year old mother knew it was a worthless event when it happened.

3. Nope, unless you have the patience to wait until the information is released in about 40 years at which time I highly doubt no one will care . . . which is the exact reason why the information isn't released to the public when individuals are nominated in the first place. If it weren't for the guy driving me back to my hotel, I doubt I would have ever known myself why those guys wanted to ask me questions on what constant volume bars were.

I'm answering your questions. You are simply too lazy to search my posts like others have done for the information. I even emailed you at one time offering you a first hand opportunity to test my stuff and you emailed me back calling me an idiot. Makes me want to jump through 20 hoops to help you now, huh? I don't trade other people's money Mikey. You do realize Madoff did that right? I don't stoop to calling people names just because I'm not intelligent enough to validate someone's method on my own like you either. Everything I do is fully disclosed on this site and I even give of my time to help people for free.

How was the Academy Awards last night . . . oh, that's right, you weren't nominated. Doesn't matter does it? You are still proud of your movie even though it didn't get nominated and you have every right to be. I'm proud of my accomplishments because they stand up for themselves, unlike you your only accomplishments are selling stuff you had no personal part in researching or developing.
 
Quote from ProfLogic:

1. Is out but not necessary to purchase. All the information is available on this site for free.

2. RCG for one.

3. It isn't relevant to whether my method works or not, it is only relevant to you for reasons not associated with trading.
More...

There is nothing online that references your name and a book. If I am wrong -- send the link with a reference to your book. Can you prove that you have a book? You are talking about a legitimate book with a publisher?

Who is RCG? RCG is the Swiss group that nominated you for a Nobel Prize?

How can it be confirmed that you are not just making the Nobel Prize claim up? Is there any evidence that you were nominated for a Nobel Prize?
 
Quote from ProfLogic:

Mikey, the difference between the two of us is that in 1996 when you were starting to market the turtle method, (information you did not develop nor validate on your own) I was already 2 years & knee deep into actual 16 hour days of price action, volume and strength research on thousands of real time charts.

My research has progressed over the last 16 years as technology has progressed. Analysis that I could not do in 1996 because of computer limitations, I can do today with current multi-processor, 64bit and high volume RAM environments. The same way HFT (high frequency trading) was science fiction 15 years ago. To say that my current market analysis is meaningless because nothing new could ever be determined simply from studying the charts using newer technology is delusional and close-minded. You are constantly referencing data that is 20 years old or older as "fact". The stuff I discovered in Chart/market structure 15 years ago is light years past the information you are referencing to as cutting edge in your material today.

Look, I'm not saying that the turtle stuff wasn't good information 20 years ago or is good basic information today. What I'm saying is that no one drives around in a 1991 Cadillac spouting off that it's the greatest thing on the road in regards to current technology. They would be openly laughed at. Your view point of "Trend Following" hasn't changed in 15 years and you think that is OK, that is the problem.
More...

New RAM environments (and other tech advances) have allowed you to do new research that you could not do in 1996?

What year did the technology change that allowed you to do the new research?

1998? 2000? 2004? 2010? When?

What exactly changed about your research relative to hardware advances?
 
No one is going to bar you for linking to your book. Where is the proof you authored a book?

There is no evidence that you were nominated for a Nobel Prize except your word?


Quote from ProfLogic:

1. No one else seems to have a problem finding my book. I'm not a vendor on this site so I have no reason to promote it here. Most people would rather search this site for the free info though. It's the same. That is why I put it here was for the members here to USE IT, TEST IT and VALIDATE IT for THEMSELVES!

2. It isn't relevant to whether my method works. I had to dig to find out who they were myself and I didn't figure it out until over a year after I got back from Zürich. If it's that important to you, find them. It isn't important to anyone else. Even my 88 year old mother knew it was a worthless event when it happened.

3. Nope, unless you have the patience to wait until the information is released in about 40 years at which time I highly doubt no one will care . . . which is the exact reason why the information isn't released to the public when individuals are nominated in the first place. If it weren't for the guy driving me back to my hotel, I doubt I would have ever known myself why those guys wanted to ask me questions on what constant volume bars were.

I'm answering your questions. You are simply too lazy to search my posts like others have done for the information. I even emailed you at one time offering you a first hand opportunity to test my stuff and you emailed me back calling me an idiot. Makes me want to jump through 20 hoops to help you now, huh? I don't trade other people's money Mikey. You do realize Madoff did that right? I don't stoop to calling people names just because I'm not intelligent enough to validate someone's method on my own like you either. Everything I do is fully disclosed on this site and I even give of my time to help people for free.

How was the Academy Awards last night . . . oh, that's right, you weren't nominated. Doesn't matter does it? You are still proud of your movie even though it didn't get nominated and you have every right to be. I'm proud of my accomplishments because they stand up for themselves, unlike you your only accomplishments are selling stuff you had no personal part in researching or developing.
More...
 
Quote from Trend Following:

There is nothing online that references your name and a book. If I am wrong -- send the link with a reference to your book. Can you prove that you have a book? You are talking about a legitimate book with a publisher?

Who is RCG? RCG is the Swiss group that nominated you for a Nobel Prize?

How can it be confirmed that you are not just making the Nobel Prize claim up? Is there any evidence that you were nominated for a Nobel Prize?
More...

Self published books are as legitimate as any produced by a known publisher. I forgot . . . you're arrogant.

The person you've been responding to in this thread.

How can we confirm you are human? You act like an ass.

Having a battle of wits with unarmed people is fruitless and cruel.
 
Quote from Trend Following:

New RAM environments (and other tech advances) have allowed you to do new research that you could not do in 1996?
What year did the technology change that allowed you to do the new research?
1998? 2000? 2004? 2010? When?
What exactly changed about your research relative to hardware advances?
More...

It's called efficiency and multitasking.

How has your "trend Following" evolved to progress with technology in the last 15 years?
 
Quote from ProfLogic:

Self published books are as legitimate as any produced by a known publisher. I forgot . . . you're arrogant.

The person you've been responding to in this thread.

How can we confirm you are human? You act like an ass.

Having a battle of wits with unarmed people is fruitless and cruel.
More...

RCG is a screen name. How does anyone know it is not your buddy in Ohio or you?

Where is your self-published book available?
 
Quote from ProfLogic:

It's called efficiency and multitasking.

How has your "trend Following" evolved to progress with technology in the last 15 years?
More...

What year did it change? 98, 00, 04, 10? When?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top