L
Liquid validity
Good to hear, enjoy the rest of your holiday 
- Status
Yamato
Legendary member
- Messages
- 9,840
- Likes
- 246
Yes, thanks. I just made another one of my swimming videos. I don't care if it's pathetic. I have nothing better to do than swimming all day long.
20110917 - YouTube
20110917 - YouTube
Yamato
Legendary member
- Messages
- 9,840
- Likes
- 246
Still alive, still trading. This is our trading up to last Friday:
Uncle point is on the bottom of that chart, at -5000. If we stay above that, then we're still in the game.
This Monday will be decisive. Last Monday we lost 10k. It's unlikely that it will be a break-even Monday, just as it is unlikely that it will be a break-even week. It will either be very positive or very negative. In one case we get away from danger, and in the other case it will be all over.
By Friday we will know for sure.
I am hoping for the best, but I would be very surprised if the best will happen and we will survive this week.
I can't blame it on any single choice, but, besides having chosen a few systems that didn't deliver (which is not my fault yet, because they're not supposed to deliver immediately, but in the long run), in the last 5 weeks, I have idenfied the real problem as many of our big money makers failing at the same time (highlighted in yellow):
If this had not happened, the drawdown would be within our expectations, because we would be 25k higher. So, the problem was the simultaneous losses by a bunch of excellent systems, which had been allocated more contracts.
Hopefully some happiness will come from trading soon, because today I was really depressed. I don't know what it is, but I ended up talking for an hour to my friends and saying how depressed I feel about my life and how I feel like a failure for not having succeeded at anything in life. No family, no work success, no serenity, nothing. No money either.
Uncle point is on the bottom of that chart, at -5000. If we stay above that, then we're still in the game.
This Monday will be decisive. Last Monday we lost 10k. It's unlikely that it will be a break-even Monday, just as it is unlikely that it will be a break-even week. It will either be very positive or very negative. In one case we get away from danger, and in the other case it will be all over.
By Friday we will know for sure.
I am hoping for the best, but I would be very surprised if the best will happen and we will survive this week.
I can't blame it on any single choice, but, besides having chosen a few systems that didn't deliver (which is not my fault yet, because they're not supposed to deliver immediately, but in the long run), in the last 5 weeks, I have idenfied the real problem as many of our big money makers failing at the same time (highlighted in yellow):
If this had not happened, the drawdown would be within our expectations, because we would be 25k higher. So, the problem was the simultaneous losses by a bunch of excellent systems, which had been allocated more contracts.
Hopefully some happiness will come from trading soon, because today I was really depressed. I don't know what it is, but I ended up talking for an hour to my friends and saying how depressed I feel about my life and how I feel like a failure for not having succeeded at anything in life. No family, no work success, no serenity, nothing. No money either.
Last edited:
bbmac
Veteren member
- Messages
- 3,584
- Likes
- 789
Are you a Spartan now ?
'...Beware a greek bearing gifts as the old saying goes'..'...The Spartans found this to their cost as the walls of Troy were breached and the fortress city over-run...
To some extent you may be in the same position: Ie that to a greater or lesser extent the current systems enabled combo is clearly directly correlated to the fate of the Eur. If the Greeks default, the consensus is that the Eur will probably fall at least in the short run and if this happens your uncle point will probably be reached....Convesely if the Germans agree to Eurobonds and other such robust measures that convince the market that Greece and the rest of the 'PIGS' are definately backed by the rest of the Euro zone and will stay in it ??
Whatever the case, Hope you are enjoying your holiday notwithstanding the thoughts expressed in your post above.
G/L
'...Beware a greek bearing gifts as the old saying goes'..'...The Spartans found this to their cost as the walls of Troy were breached and the fortress city over-run...
To some extent you may be in the same position: Ie that to a greater or lesser extent the current systems enabled combo is clearly directly correlated to the fate of the Eur. If the Greeks default, the consensus is that the Eur will probably fall at least in the short run and if this happens your uncle point will probably be reached....Convesely if the Germans agree to Eurobonds and other such robust measures that convince the market that Greece and the rest of the 'PIGS' are definately backed by the rest of the Euro zone and will stay in it ??
Whatever the case, Hope you are enjoying your holiday notwithstanding the thoughts expressed in your post above.
G/L
L
Liquid validity
BB agreed.
Travis what strikes me most is the 13k loss on crude - guessing that was sep 5 weekend sharp gap down, you were obviously long.
With more large gap downs on 6E and CL today, I don't see ES being much different.
If you are still in the game, in your shoes I would still pull the plug.
The above quote suggests you think the same.
I can see the reasons for not wanting to to introduce discretionary elements.
These markets are exposing the weakness in this basket, of correlation breaks
and sharp weekend gaps due to more EU indesicion.
I'm not suggesting going flat at the close each day permanently, but in markets like these...
Travis what strikes me most is the 13k loss on crude - guessing that was sep 5 weekend sharp gap down, you were obviously long.
With more large gap downs on 6E and CL today, I don't see ES being much different.
If you are still in the game, in your shoes I would still pull the plug.
The above quote suggests you think the same.
I can see the reasons for not wanting to to introduce discretionary elements.
These markets are exposing the weakness in this basket, of correlation breaks
and sharp weekend gaps due to more EU indesicion.
I'm not suggesting going flat at the close each day permanently, but in markets like these...
Last edited:
Yamato
Legendary member
- Messages
- 9,840
- Likes
- 246
Yes, as I said, I cannot apply that method. We cannot enable and disable systems. The only way to go that we know is automated, and we'll stay automated until we'll recover or reach uncle point.
We're now at only 2700 dollars from uncle point, given that so far today we're down several thousands.
Another video:
We're now at only 2700 dollars from uncle point, given that so far today we're down several thousands.
Another video:
Last edited:
Yamato
Legendary member
- Messages
- 9,840
- Likes
- 246
Still in the game. Right now 4500 from uncle point. We will probably survive yet another day of trading. Hopefully we will last long enough to see the markets (ES, EUR and correlated markets) turn around, or rather: change their behavior in a way that will benefit my systems. And of course I don't exactly know which way that is. All I know is that if everything is rising, my systems are more likely to make money than if everything is falling, which has been the case lately. But they should be making money in both cases. Yet they're not as likely to make money in both cases.
I am hoping for something which is quite unlikely to happen: that we have hit the bottom and we're coming back up. How likely is it that we will not go any lower than we already have? Hopefully I will get one very profitable trade, which will allow this to happen. Hopefully silver will deliver some of the profit it owes us.
GC_ON_01 is about to deliver some more profit. If it weren't for this GC system, we would have reached uncle point and stopped trading a few days ago. It's the one system that saved me during these last 5 weeks, delivering about 6000 dollars of profit. But the other systems still aren't making any money, so what will happen when this system will stop doing so well? How long more do I have to withstand a simultaneous drawdown by so many of my systems?
I am hoping for something which is quite unlikely to happen: that we have hit the bottom and we're coming back up. How likely is it that we will not go any lower than we already have? Hopefully I will get one very profitable trade, which will allow this to happen. Hopefully silver will deliver some of the profit it owes us.
GC_ON_01 is about to deliver some more profit. If it weren't for this GC system, we would have reached uncle point and stopped trading a few days ago. It's the one system that saved me during these last 5 weeks, delivering about 6000 dollars of profit. But the other systems still aren't making any money, so what will happen when this system will stop doing so well? How long more do I have to withstand a simultaneous drawdown by so many of my systems?
Last edited:
bbmac
Veteren member
- Messages
- 3,584
- Likes
- 789
You're not gonna like this Lol !
You say in post above: '....Hopefully we will last long enough to see the markets (ES, EUR and correlated markets) turn around, or rather: change their behavior in a way that will benefit my systems...' and it is almostlike saying that the markets so far have been wrong and that you will wait for them to come to their senses! As we know markets are never wrong.
Your last post sounds like as good a justification to change the current enabled systems combo as I have read from any other poster to your thread,! (as well as looking at the correlations again as I have discussed before.)
I understand the pathalogical dislike you have of any discretionary intervention, but it remains the fact that although the systemns are fully automated the choice of which to trade and when was not, therefore another discretionary decision (to whatever extent) is not out of the norm. Would it not be better now to change the current enabled systems combo now rather than wait for what is the most likely inevitable outcome of not changing ? At least this way you may give yourself a better chance.
I think I know the answer to my question so I will say no more Lol.
G/L
You say in post above: '....Hopefully we will last long enough to see the markets (ES, EUR and correlated markets) turn around, or rather: change their behavior in a way that will benefit my systems...' and it is almostlike saying that the markets so far have been wrong and that you will wait for them to come to their senses! As we know markets are never wrong.
Your last post sounds like as good a justification to change the current enabled systems combo as I have read from any other poster to your thread,! (as well as looking at the correlations again as I have discussed before.)
I understand the pathalogical dislike you have of any discretionary intervention, but it remains the fact that although the systemns are fully automated the choice of which to trade and when was not, therefore another discretionary decision (to whatever extent) is not out of the norm. Would it not be better now to change the current enabled systems combo now rather than wait for what is the most likely inevitable outcome of not changing ? At least this way you may give yourself a better chance.
I think I know the answer to my question so I will say no more Lol.
G/L
Last edited:
Yamato
Legendary member
- Messages
- 9,840
- Likes
- 246
Well, I will give you some feedback immediately, since it can be done quickly, even though I have postponed my feedback to your previus posts and other people's (six) posts from a few days ago (I will do that when I come back from my vacation).
I disagree with how you interpret my thoughts and how you make them say that I think the markets are wrong and similar. I have not said that. It's the usual slight misrepresentation of what I say, but it is coherent with what you said in the past and it is clearly explained so thanks for the feedback.
You know what I think, so I will say it for the other readers. I do not think the markets are wrong. My systems work better in some situations than in others. Of course I don't know precisely how to identify these situations, or else I would have improved the systems' combination. Any interference now would only make things worse, and would hamper our principle and track record of non-intervention.
Of all people, you, bbmac, should appreciate this, given that you have highlighted the fact that there is a contradiction in our discretionary/manual selecting systems to trade. As I said before, our discretionary intervention is very limited, precisely due to the fact that we do not enable and disable systems relentlessly (which is what you're suggesting we do), on and off, and at will, but we enable them only after careful screening and our choices are final, or at the most they're reviewed/modified every 2 months.
I disagree with how you interpret my thoughts and how you make them say that I think the markets are wrong and similar. I have not said that. It's the usual slight misrepresentation of what I say, but it is coherent with what you said in the past and it is clearly explained so thanks for the feedback.
You know what I think, so I will say it for the other readers. I do not think the markets are wrong. My systems work better in some situations than in others. Of course I don't know precisely how to identify these situations, or else I would have improved the systems' combination. Any interference now would only make things worse, and would hamper our principle and track record of non-intervention.
Of all people, you, bbmac, should appreciate this, given that you have highlighted the fact that there is a contradiction in our discretionary/manual selecting systems to trade. As I said before, our discretionary intervention is very limited, precisely due to the fact that we do not enable and disable systems relentlessly (which is what you're suggesting we do), on and off, and at will, but we enable them only after careful screening and our choices are final, or at the most they're reviewed/modified every 2 months.
Last edited:
bbmac
Veteren member
- Messages
- 3,584
- Likes
- 789
Thanks for the reply, it is as I thought it would be and that is fair enough, I understand your reasoning although I disagree with it.
As for 'misrepesentation' - there is always going to be an element of interpretation of the written word which is really what you you are describing as misrepresentation - ie there is no pre-meditated attempt to do so - it's just interpretation.
As for your last point, '...we do not enable and disable systems relentlessly (which is what you're suggesting we do),...'
I have never suggested that your manual intervention is random or ill-considered (ie the changing of the prevailinng systems enabled sombo - as you have explained - mainly by adding contracts to existing enabled systems and/or enabling more systems.) What I have suggested is that this manual intervention, howsoever well considered is something that you have under-estimated the significance of...Put it another way - in a previous post you suggested that such 'discretion' (and I use the word advisedly given our history on this - Lol !) is 1% but the effect is surely much greater ?
Anyways, you have again answered the point and I will leave it there.
Thanks,
G/L
As for 'misrepesentation' - there is always going to be an element of interpretation of the written word which is really what you you are describing as misrepresentation - ie there is no pre-meditated attempt to do so - it's just interpretation.
As for your last point, '...we do not enable and disable systems relentlessly (which is what you're suggesting we do),...'
I have never suggested that your manual intervention is random or ill-considered (ie the changing of the prevailinng systems enabled sombo - as you have explained - mainly by adding contracts to existing enabled systems and/or enabling more systems.) What I have suggested is that this manual intervention, howsoever well considered is something that you have under-estimated the significance of...Put it another way - in a previous post you suggested that such 'discretion' (and I use the word advisedly given our history on this - Lol !) is 1% but the effect is surely much greater ?
Anyways, you have again answered the point and I will leave it there.
Thanks,
G/L
Last edited:
Yamato
Legendary member
- Messages
- 9,840
- Likes
- 246
My mistake. I should have written
Because, as explained, I feel that you are encouraging me to increase the frequency of what you called a discretionary interference, and rightly so. If every time we get scared by a loss, we disable a system, things will be much worse. Instead, what we do is we appraise which systems are good, we enable them, and then we keep them. But stop saying that we're doing something wrong. I know it. I told you we should automate it, but we can't do it efficiently yet.
I mean, sure: do remind me that there's something to be fixed in the selection process of systems, but let's not have the same debate all over again. I have already agreed that it needs to be automated. The problem now is only how.
Regarding the use of "misrepresentation", I will say "misinterpretation" from now on.
Last edited:
Yamato
Legendary member
- Messages
- 9,840
- Likes
- 246
8k from uncle point.
Still not safe, but further away from giving up.
We still could lose it all in one day, but I am starting to think the drawdown may be over.
We have already exceeded the previous drawdown by several thousands and by several days. Whether the combination chosen was a good one or not, this is a fact that counts. The previous drawdown has long been exceeded. It's time for things to turn around.
Still not safe, but further away from giving up.
We still could lose it all in one day, but I am starting to think the drawdown may be over.
We have already exceeded the previous drawdown by several thousands and by several days. Whether the combination chosen was a good one or not, this is a fact that counts. The previous drawdown has long been exceeded. It's time for things to turn around.
L
Liquid validity
Could be right, it looks like your EC is bouncing along on the bottom now.
14:15 EST - Bernanke, that will be the test today...
I'll give you that, you held on without changing course, I'll be honest,
not something I could have done
Yamato
Legendary member
- Messages
- 9,840
- Likes
- 246
Yes, thank you. But this is not my merit. It is one of the advantages of doing this with other people. Personally, had it been my own account, I would have tampered not just with the combination of systems traded but with the trades themselves (disabling exits, anticipating entries, etc.). But in this case, the investors are much more disciplined than me, and, despite the fact that the capital is theirs, they have displayed great calm and consistency, throughout the past year and a half. I am learning from them, but I still don't know what I would be doing now if the account was mine. In the past, when the account was mine, I heavily tampered with the systems several times per week, until I managed to blow out my account, which happened regularly, every 2 or 3 months, from early 2008 until we started doing this thing in June 2010, given that I had run out of money to invest.
bbmac
Veteren member
- Messages
- 3,584
- Likes
- 789
Travis, you say in your post above;
'.....I feel that you are encouraging me to increase the frequency of what you called a discretionary interference, and rightly so. If every time we get scared by a loss, we disable a system, things will be much worse....'
Again, this probably down to your interpretation of what I actually mean, and your interpretation comes your stanpoint of your understandable reticence to any discertionary element given your history with it (as expressed again in your post above.)
So to be clear - What I am actually saying is not that I think you should intervene/change things at every twist and turn - that would indeed be folly... but rather that I think you would benefit from having a lower tolerance for when you consider a prevailing systems enabled combo to have failed and yes, whether a resulting change is via an automated rule or a manual intervention in these circumstances - to change the systems enabled combo at this point.
You have already said that both the max historical drawdown of the prevailing systems enabled combo and the max historical duration of such drawdown has been well exceeded, and now to some extent you are involved in a 'hope trade.' When the greater probability [given the above and the size of the drawdown] is that at best this systems enabled combo will keep your equity curve somewhere between the uncle point and the last a/c hi for what is most likely to be a considerable time - and at worst-and still the greater probability - will reach the uncle point - It is difficult for me to understand (even withstanding your understandable dislike of arbritray discertionary intervention) why you do not intervene given these circumstances - when the greater probability is that to any useful degree and over any useful timescale - this prevailing systems enabled combo has 'stopped working.'
We have probably exhasusted this subject Lol - but as much as you wish to be clear and free from 'misinterpretation' - so do I !
G/L
'.....I feel that you are encouraging me to increase the frequency of what you called a discretionary interference, and rightly so. If every time we get scared by a loss, we disable a system, things will be much worse....'
Again, this probably down to your interpretation of what I actually mean, and your interpretation comes your stanpoint of your understandable reticence to any discertionary element given your history with it (as expressed again in your post above.)
So to be clear - What I am actually saying is not that I think you should intervene/change things at every twist and turn - that would indeed be folly... but rather that I think you would benefit from having a lower tolerance for when you consider a prevailing systems enabled combo to have failed and yes, whether a resulting change is via an automated rule or a manual intervention in these circumstances - to change the systems enabled combo at this point.
You have already said that both the max historical drawdown of the prevailing systems enabled combo and the max historical duration of such drawdown has been well exceeded, and now to some extent you are involved in a 'hope trade.' When the greater probability [given the above and the size of the drawdown] is that at best this systems enabled combo will keep your equity curve somewhere between the uncle point and the last a/c hi for what is most likely to be a considerable time - and at worst-and still the greater probability - will reach the uncle point - It is difficult for me to understand (even withstanding your understandable dislike of arbritray discertionary intervention) why you do not intervene given these circumstances - when the greater probability is that to any useful degree and over any useful timescale - this prevailing systems enabled combo has 'stopped working.'
We have probably exhasusted this subject Lol - but as much as you wish to be clear and free from 'misinterpretation' - so do I !
G/L
Last edited:
L
Liquid validity
Travis, quick question if you have time.
I know you run a residential server with redundancy.
Obviously you prefer it to a commercial VPS.
Is that mainly due to commercial VPS reliability and downtime or
more to do with easier access and maintenance?
If its reliability, would you use a commercial VPS from a dedicated
financial provider that was aware of the importance of reliability and downtime,
and actually delivered the claimed performance?
I gather its also best to choose a Microsoft Hyper-V VPS fpr connection quality & stabitliy.
No need for a detailed answer, just curious as I will more than likely be looking at
a commercial VPS from a financial provider if things work out.
Thanks
I know you run a residential server with redundancy.
Obviously you prefer it to a commercial VPS.
Is that mainly due to commercial VPS reliability and downtime or
more to do with easier access and maintenance?
If its reliability, would you use a commercial VPS from a dedicated
financial provider that was aware of the importance of reliability and downtime,
and actually delivered the claimed performance?
I gather its also best to choose a Microsoft Hyper-V VPS fpr connection quality & stabitliy.
No need for a detailed answer, just curious as I will more than likely be looking at
a commercial VPS from a financial provider if things work out.
Thanks
Last edited:
Yamato
Legendary member
- Messages
- 9,840
- Likes
- 246
Replying as I read.
Correct. Reticence from me and even more so since the investors totally agree with me on the concept of non-intervention, despite the fact that their discretionary trading (on another account) is profitable.
I cannot have a lower tolerance because, as i said before, the systems always perform worse in the future (cfr. world cup example and limited accuracy in predicting the future based on the past), so that worse performance doesn't mean we've made a mistake. If anything, we should increase the tolerance, and accordingly the capital to sacrifice.
Yes, it has been well exceeded, and now to some extent I am involved in a 'hope trade'. I can hope all I want provided that I act in a disciplined way. It's disciplined trading, and then praying to god that things go right. There are no hope trades. Usual misinterpretation, and exaggeration.
No, I disagree. The probability is that we will exceed the previous 37k peak, in less than three months. Then when we'll scale up again, we will remember to compensate the silver systems with smaller futures. As i said before, enabling the big silver systems was a mistake at this point. Too much leverage. We will be able to compensate in the future.
Nothing has stopped working. The combo cannot stop working. The mistake can only be that we enabled a few unprofitable system, but this is not the case either. None of them has exceeded its previous drawdown. What happened is just that a whole bunch of systems lost money at the same time. That is why we're not even thinking about disabling anything.
You cannot have a situation where a whole combination is wrong. You can only have a situation where in a combo there's a great number of systems that should not have been selected, but even then, it will be a minority of the systems. This combo was not that great, but the majority of the systems are still very good, and none of them has failed yet. Yes, we could have chosen a more selective combo. Yes, we exceeded with silver.
Bring it on. As long as you have the patience, I will, too.
Yamato
Legendary member
- Messages
- 9,840
- Likes
- 246
Travis, quick question if you have time.
I know you run a residential server with redundancy.
Obviously you prefer it to a commercial VPS.
Is that mainly due to commercial VPS reliability and downtime or
more to do with easier access and maintenance?
If its reliability, would you use a commercial VPS from a dedicated
financial provider that was aware of the importance of reliability and downtime,
and actually delivered the claimed performance?
I gather its also best to choose a Microsoft Hyper-V VPS fpr connection quality & stabitliy.
No need for a detailed answer, just curious as I will more than likely be looking at
a commercial VPS from a financial provider if things work out.
Thanks
Replying as I read.
"I know you run a residential server with redundancy". What is that? I run a server at a friend's house, and, as a job, he runs an ISP company, so it is totally reliable from all points of view. I am not doing high-frequency trading anyway.
"Obviously you prefer it to a commercial VPS". What is that? Probably I answered this next question in the paragraph above.
You're using a lot of terms I ignore, but once again I can confirm to you that my friend, who runs an ISP company, and has my server at his house, is totally reliable. In fact we're now using a laptop, so to avoid any power outage problems, and we have a secondary connection, too.
Let me know if you have more questions, and please phrase things more simply.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
