Twenty-twelve [P&L]
- Thread starter masterm1ne
- Start date
Not so. Excel spreadsheets and VBA are incomprehensible. Wealth Lab code sums them up concisely, so that his theories really are one liners. They are public information, and I expect nkhoi may respond with the link to his wealth script code, but that doesn't matter, because I've already looked at them and know they are too simple to ever be profitable.
When you have the chance, you can post your backtest here as nkhoi refuses to do, but since I know you don't have one, don't even bother. It would just be a lot of fraud with no additively accurate formulation.
If you don't have a backtest with a sharpe of 60, you also do not have his method, but since there is no one who does anybody who posts Jack Hershey's method is a fraud as pure and simple as that is to say because it doesn't exist and if it did it would have been published in an excel file already but since the fraud is perpetuated by Jack and his ilk it isn't any wonder that this serves as evidence that the method is nowhere near as profitable as anyone claims it is because this backtest <b>DOESN'T EXIST AND IF IT DOES THEN POST IT HERE! <i>Otherwise,</i> you are as deluded as the lunatics who think they have something when they do not or this backtest would exist somewhere else besides Jack's lunatic mind!</b>
Ãà òû ÿ âèæó õîëîï ÃÃ¥ óéìåøüñÿ!!!
Nkhoi refuses to post backtest as there is NONE!Even though it could be backtested it would require a lot of sample you then should have put together,but there is no need,no sense for that, as the whole principal basis, is to anticipate the dataset,coming from the future to the present - the only place available to any alive traders!
I did convert the future data set into the present blotter and have posted it.They said it was a BS sim nonesense.So fine by me.Who cares!
Whatever you posted, I'd be interested in seeing it, but know that it wouldn't equate to a 60+ sharpe ratio as Jack Hershey fraudulently claims.
I don't consider simulated trading any reason to discredit backtests, but certainly it is as much as a one liner as any backtest that cannot possibly produce a 60+ sharpe ratio.
nkhoi is an inept programmer, hiding behind a facade of lackadaisical faith absent the evidence you might be able to present, because everything is possible to backtest if there is a method to define quantitatively. nkhoi's claim that there is no way to backtest it is evidence of fraud and, more importantly, that there is no method attributable to Jack Hershey.
If you have his method backtested certainly post it here or a link to it, and we'll see if it adds up to a 60+ sharpe ratio.
"Several studies have been done on the psychological effects of random rewards on monkeys. For example, if you teach a monkey to do a task and consistently reward it every time the task is done, the monkey quickly learns to associate a specific outcome with the efforts. If you stop rewarding it for doing the task, within a very short period of time the monkey will simply stop doing the task. It won't waste its energy doing something that it has now learned it won't be rewarded for. However, the monkey's response to being cut off from the reward is very different if you start out on a purely random schedule, instead of a consistent one. When you stop offering the reward, there's no way the monkey
can know that it will never be rewarded again for doing that task. Every time it was rewarded in the past, the reward came as a surprise. As a result, from the monkey's perspective, there's no reason to quit doing the task. The monkey keeps on doing the task, even without being rewarded for doing it. Some
will continue indefinitely."
I need to post this here so I don't lose track of it. I need to develop my brain a little more as I'm pretty sure that I could have been the monkey that was used in this experiment.
can know that it will never be rewarded again for doing that task. Every time it was rewarded in the past, the reward came as a surprise. As a result, from the monkey's perspective, there's no reason to quit doing the task. The monkey keeps on doing the task, even without being rewarded for doing it. Some
will continue indefinitely."
I need to post this here so I don't lose track of it. I need to develop my brain a little more as I'm pretty sure that I could have been the monkey that was used in this experiment.
Ok, took me a few attempts to read what you wrote nkhoi. Thanks for the input.
I just finished Trading in the Zone by M. Douglas. I don't think I have ever read anything that I felt so in tune with.
I'm a RN, so psychology is no stranger to me. We have to learn it partially at least as part of our cirriculum. However, the depth in which Douglas dives and his description of the inner workings of our psychology is so on point I wonder how someone could ever describe something so thuroughly and make it crystal clear. It is definitely one of the better books on trading that exists.
There are many excellent points in the book, but what it boils down to for me is a comparison: The main difference between a profitable trader and one that is not is their beliefs/perceptions about the market. The opportunity the market offers to us is limitless. However, because we trade our beliefs, and because we are so conditioned to behave consiously & subconsiously in certain ways, one must be willing and able to shift the energy from one belief to another in order to succeed (possibly more than once). Then and only then can you be the casino.
I'm still going to sit on the sidelines for a while, maybe do some trades here and there.
Still got 11k. Plenty enough to work with when I'm ready. Going to sit back and watch for a while.
And the capital will still be there, ready to move down to $5,000.
If you're not building backtests and strategies you are wasting your time, and you won't learn anything just sitting there, either.
You might read some more books, and I seriously doubt you got anything out of nkhoi's hershits posts, but until you build strategies that aren't curve fitted you'll be turning your wheels until you're ready to lose the rest.
I'm gonna give you a heads up that Douglas is full of crap. In no way that the way I trade is similar to what he writes in his books. I tried to read it after hearing some good recommendation, but I couldn't keep myself from thinking wtf!? is this and start laughing. This is coming from being well read on a lot of subject on psychology over the years. I'm not saying it isn't important, just not Douglas's version of psychology. He's just ego stroking the noobs just like some cheerleader who keep chanting generic lines like "you can do it!" as if that's gonna help. It's just New Age jumbo mumbo psychology repackage for people who want to be traders but hasn't found the holy grail system yet.
Ok, so I don't think you quite understand his main ideas. Obviously there is more to trading than having an "I can do it" attitude. He emphasizes the need for an edge just as much as he emphasizes the need for a winning attitude. That's what professional gambling/trading is all about. It's about becoming the casino - defining an edge 100% and capitalizing on it. He also mentioned the one trade I believe most traders make their money trading (selling rallies and buying declines - in the proper context).
Anyway, I'm going to start posting SIM TRADES for MY OWN REFERENCE. I am still experimenting and attempting to define my edge.
I recently studied a thread by 'saliva.' His system has two subdivisions, TRAP and PMT. I have personalized the system a little, but adhere to the core concepts: retro, macro, micro, and price, time and momentum.
I've decided to focus on ES for now. I would have taken long @ 1372.75 and exit @ 1374. The 1370 level as been key S/R for months. We were trading above it, gaped down on the open, formed a double bottom, and reversed.
Most likely wouldn't have taken the short @ 1374. Possible exit 1372.
SIM net P&L +1.25 pts