|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Equis sells a book by Gilbert raff on the Raff Regression Channels. Since
its listed in books in Print, a bookstore should be able to order it, or
get it from Equis.
At best, I found that Andrews Pitchfork gives similar results as the RRC,
however, it is a bit subjective, while the only subjective factors with RRC
are the selection of the start and end points.
Lionel Issen
At 10:53 PM 7/19/97 GMT, Guy Gordon wrote:
>I'm using a different approach to the problem of Raff Regression
>Channels. First, I require the channel to be parallel to a similar
>length moving average. If I can't make it come out parallel to an MA
>by moving the start and end points I just don't consider it valid.
>Second, I try to keep the start and end points inside a days trading
>range. In other words, I never start or end on a high or a low. I
>always put the endpoint on a price bar that crosses the middle of the
>channel.
>
>Still, it's too subjective. Mostly I just use it to verify the slope
>of my "hand-drawn" channels.
>
>Also, MetaStock messes up Linear Regression lines (including the Raff)
>when you use a semi-log Y axis and you try to stretch the line too
>far. And I *always* use semi-log charts!
>
>I reported this to Equis support, and did not receive a satisfactory
>reply. The problem is simply that a straight line in the linear
>coordinate system is not a straight line in the semi-log one. But
>they have no interest in fixing it. Maybe I'll try talking to them
>about it again.
>
>On Wed, 11 Jun 97 16:21:59 UT, you wrote:
>
>>Alan,
>> I still prefer to draw my intermediate and long term trend lines the
>>Trader Vic way and then make my channels with a parallel line at the
opposite
>>extreme since there is no ambiguity in drawing such channels. For short
term
>>channels, I have been using Raff Regression Channels because they usually
>>result in fewer false breakouts. As you indicated, the problem with Raff
>>Regression Channels is to decide where to start and end them. For up
>>channels, I start them at the lowest low in the period I'm looking at
which is
>>usually the low just before a down trend break out. I end them at a high
and
>>then extend them to the right. If the current close is not a new high, I
>>don't change anything. If the current close is a new high, I stretch the
end
>>of the channel to the new high. However, for the channel to be valid, I
>>require at least one higher low from the first low followed by a new high.
>>The problem is to subjectively decide if there was enough of a pull back
for a
>>good higher low <G>. Downtrend channels are just the mirror image.
>>
>>Jim
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Animal Mother
>>Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 1997 12:21 AM
>>To: metastock-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>Subject: Raff Regression Channels/Andrews Pitchfork
>>
>>I've been using--and continuing to experiment with--the RRC, without having
>>ever read anything in any books about it. I've been using it pretty much
as I
>>would a typical (which for me is drawn Trader Vic style) trend channel.
For an
>>up trend, I begin the channel at a reaction low at some point in the past
>>(often at a major reversal point) and end it at the most recent reaction
low.
>>I reverse this for down trends. I've experimented with starting at the
low,
>>and ending at a recent high, with sort of blechy results. . . .
>>
>>I'd like to know how others draw these channels.
>>
>>Also, anyone use Andrews Pitchforks? All I know I read in a very
superficial
>>TASC article a few months back. The only time I seem to get decent
signals is
>>when prices make tidy minor reactions. Any experiences/hints here?
>>
>>I like using trendlines to trade. In fact, I haven't found any of the
>>esoteric indicators (R-Squared, Slope) to give better signals (worse, in
fact,
>>since I never got them to work for me) than a combination of MA's (I use 5,
>>13, 21, 55), trendlines, and a momentum indicator, either MFI, ROC, or RSI,
>>whichever has been giving the best signals most recently for any given
stock.
>>I sometimes check one momentum indicator against the other--they aren't all
>>the same, regardless what the books say, especially when volume is in the
>>formula.
>>
>>I look forward to reading some of your responses.
>>
>>
>>Alan M.
>>___________
>>
>>"Better you than me."
>
>
>
|