|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Steve,
I guess if I'm a cynic, it is because it is what I have experienced and seen
in the past. As I said on my email, I am open minded enough to realize
anything is possible. So I accept your challenge.
I will check with a dozen users if you provide me their email addresses. I
sincerely hope you and your users prove me wrong. If I am wrong, then I
will be more than glad to apologize. I probably will even trade your system
and become your strongest supporter. And I will have learned a valuable
lesson too!
Of course we must all realize you have the advantage of picking the dozen
names. No doubt you can easily pick and choose among your list to give
yourself an advantage.
I have been looking over your website and have a several questions:
1) Are the free stock picks chosen by using the free momentum oscillators
listed on your website? Or do you use a proprietary system?
2) I see your charts showing buy and sell signals go back one year. For
how long have you actually traded these systems using real money?
3) I notice many of your buy signals show large drawdowns before they
recover and exit at a profit. Can you post the system statistics on each
stock chart so we can see the maximum drawdowns?
4) How often do you re-optimize the momentum oscillators if at all?
Thanks for taking the time to help me understand your methods.
Thanks,
Rick
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Steve Karnish
Sent: Saturday, June 09, 2001 2:32 PM
To: metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: QQQ System Test Optimizations
Rick,
I seldom waste my time with cynics...but, which would you prefer: audited
statements or a list of a dozen clients to contact?
The problem is not developing something that works...the problem is dealing
with people, like yourself, who are so prejudiced and frustrated by their
own inability to appreciate equity (they "transfer" these inadequacies to
all traders, brokers, and vendors).
You got it all wrong Rick: Optimized systems are the "holy grails" we all
dreamed about. They just happen to be lethal weapons in the hands of the
pompous, unskilled and skeptical.
I dare you to call my clients. I will give you all the numbers if you
report your findings and then apologize and admit that you are dead wrong.
Blantant indictments are stupid and obtuse. Maybe if you could actually
develop something that worked and then had the character to follow the
rules, you'd feel differently about the subject. In the future, watch what
you say: the "thought police" WILL pull you over when you drive down that
"dark road" you've chosen to cruise on.
I've found that the largest critics of investment strategies often are the
folks who fall into the traps that they criticize publicly. Moral: "Qui non
intellegit, aut taceat aut discat".
Take care,
Steve Karnish, CTA
Cedar Creek Trading
http://www.cedarcreektrading.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Rick Parsons" <RickParsons@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, June 09, 2001 8:54 AM
Subject: RE: QQQ System Test Optimizations
> Rudoff,
> Let me ask you this: Have you or anyone ever found an optimized system
that
> has worked in every market over the course of years? (The Holy Grail) How
> many really manage to follow an optimized system over a long period of
time
> and ended up with a return that beats the market averages?
>
> I am sure there may be a few but I bet over 90% of all who have tried have
> given up their system at some point due to excessive drawdown, losses or
> emotional second guessing.
>
> I often see advertisements in magazines or on the net for "optimized" or
> "curve fitted" systems that supposedly give wonderful returns. Then I
look
> at the testimonials. Almost all testimonials are people who tried the
> system and were one of the few lucky ones to make money in their first few
> trades. They then rave about the system. But I have never seen a
> testimonial where a user says "I have been trading this system for 12
months
> (or more) and have consistently made money every single month for year or
> more.
>
> Often I will email the owners of the "system" and ask them if I can
contact
> some of their customers or if they have any chat rooms where the system
is
> discussed. Almost every time they will say "We cannot give out customer
> names due to privacy concerns" and "We do not have a chat room". If they
> say this it is because they don't want you to know that there are a lot of
> unhappy customers out there. If the system was really that good, the best
> way a company can get more customers is to let current customers rave
about
> the product in a chat room. But you don't see that. At least I haven't.
>
> Perhaps someday someone will develop a system that does give consistent
> market average beating returns year after year. Perhaps one exists right
> now. I am open minded enough to know that anything is possible but I will
> need to be able to verify the system by contacting customers who have
proven
> it works over a long period of time.
>
> Rick
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of rudolf stricker
> Sent: Friday, June 08, 2001 7:31 AM
> To: metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: QQQ System Test Optimizations
>
>
> On Fri, 8 Jun 2001 13:03:28 -0500, you wrote:
>
> >Optimization is a variant of curve fitting.
>
> This looks confusing to me...
>
> Optimization is a process to select systematically a "best" set of
> values for a given parametric model to meet some given goals. So its
> not a bad thing at all, and I cannot understand this "optimization
> bashing" going on here.
> Moreover, _any_ TA work uses optimization, e.g. selecting an indicator
> from several available _is_ optimization.
>
> Most things criticized here in context with optimization do not deal
> with optimization itself but rather with a "bad" parametric model
> (e.g. robustness) or with an insufficient goal function (e.g. max
> drawdown, number of loosing trades, etc).
>
> >Curve fitting has been used for
> >a very long time to analyze data. One of the caveats of curve fitting is
> >that you don't use the fitted curve for conditions that are beyond the
> range
> >of data.
>
> Curve fitting is a fully accepted application area of general system
> modeling (i.e. a combination of a parametric model, a goal function,
> and an optimization procedure). And of coarse extrapolation can be a
> dangerous thing, if the _parametric model_ does not cover e.g.
> changes of the system behavior over time.
>
> So, we should not blame system optimization for everything done badly
> during parametric model and/or goal function setup.
>
> mfg rudolf stricker
> | Disclaimer: The views of this user are strictly his own.
>
|