[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [RT] Regarding a top



PureBytes Links

Trading Reference Links



Wait a minute Jim Ross,
I preference my comments as what I believe - it certainly was not a "rant" You and others may believe differently and I am willing to learn if there is sufficient evidence to support the hypothesis.
I appreciated your post and documentation of how you reached your conclusions and I am sure we will all follow the events surrounding your dates. I have not revisited Carolyn's work in quite a few years and was glad you brought it up.
I think there was a hypothesis in your posts concerning differences between you and Carolyn. All I am saying to you and anyone else offering forecasting methodology is to state it specifically, then test it with enough data to make the results relevant. That is the scientific way  and will establish credibility.
 
 
Humbly,
Jim White
 
 
 
----- Original Message -----
From: Jim Ross
Sent: Sunday, October 18, 2009 10:40 AM
Subject: RE: [RT] Regarding a top

 

I take that rant as a disapproval of my posting a fully documented technical speculation.

** they are not predictable with a high degree of accuracy, more than 3 or 4 days in the future**

Then I should burn my Gann, EWP, Spiral Calendar, Mandelbrot ?The Misbehavior of Markets?, Taleb ?The Black Swan?, Edwards and Magee ?Technical Analysis of Stock Trends??? I?ve wasted my life.

Epistemic arrogance, look it up in The Black Swan.  And while at it look up undue reliance on Gaussian methods, the major point of the book.

Jim

From: realtraders@yahoogroups.com [mailto:realtraders@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Jim White
Sent: Sunday, October 18, 2009 1:04 PM
To: realtraders@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [RT] Regarding a top

 

I believe freely traded markets are like chaotic systems and , just like the weather, they are not predictable with a high degree of accuracy, more than 3 or 4 days in the future.

Obviously there are economic cycles with generally fixed periods that influence market direction however the relevant periods are best measured in weeks or months with error distributions that make them poor trade decision tools, at least from my perspective.

When I offer an opinion on this forum it is based on tools with reliability ratings based on hundreds if not thousands of cases over extended periods of time. Forecasts based on small sample sets are , in my mind, just guesses and not advised for trading decisions. Calculations showing correlation of events are meaningless unless backed up by a statically significant sample size. Fibonacci calculations, for example, have been shown to be unreliable when considering  large sample sets.

Also, there should be a stated methodology behind the calculations that explains why they are relevant.

All that being said, I offer the following about the coming week.

After three days of trend change warnings and a Near Impulse Date of 10/14 for all, the stock indexes reversed on Friday although only the NASDAQ and Russell closed below Thursday lows, confirming the reversal. Generally we can expect a three - four day persistence in trend following the reversal.  For Monday I generated 36 sell signals for the NAZ 100 and only 6 buy signals supporting expectations of a lower low.My next Near Impulse date shared by all indexes is 10/27 so we may expect a downward continuation until then. We shall see.

Jim White
Pivot Research & Trading Co.
PivotTrader.com



__._,_.___


Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___