zdo

'addressed' to ... not meant for only I rarely speak PM... open conversations... and if other peeps 'listen'... ain't dat a bitch? I'm in the same dam bind with you too ya'll have a great weekend.

re: where are the bears? and Twiz, Just curious, is this the kind of conversation you were really seeking when you opened a Dow Jones = 100,000 Target thread based on a LINK from Glenn Neely? If so, all my macro posts (and anyone else's), are off topic. It is just a thread to discuss local SR etc etc... and with a name like Dow Jones = 100,000 Target it sorta smells like No Bears Allowed Please let us know. Thx. zdo

MM, Even though I prefer your precious time is never wasted - if you walked into it, I can offer no apologies… …(albeit public), that post was a note clearly addressed to Mits and it was clearly about the situation Twiz is in and Mits’ treatment of Twiz. Considering that most of my posts are intended for a very small audience rather than ‘the large one’, one option is to consider putting me on ignore. I’m rarely attempting to add broad value to the site... beyond occasionally sincerely trying to keep a topic on topic... …add to that that my constructs of economics, etc are at considerable variance from the dominant mainstream economic, etc. paradigms …add to that that my communication skills suck… and that trading offers me an easy perennial dodge to developing them to the levels of quality that most work requires... speaking of value… members (and owners) need to acknowledge that the ‘good stuff’ is never going to be laid up in posts. The vendors provide only so much before requiring payment. And non vendors, like myself, for the most part wouldn’t ‘provide’ even if you did pay … Basically, trading forums never provide answers to the ‘great’ trading questions. The quality of the replies is in inverse relationship to the quality of the queries… yada yada…. To be anti – anti ‘vendor’, or anti ‘non-sharers’, or anti ‘stupid’ , or anti…etc. - is for the most part a waste of personal energy… to complain or even wish that a broadly applied collegial attitude by all members would make for ‘answers’ or worthwhile reading is also, for the most part, a waste of personal energy… It's a worthy thought experiment to ask if a digital currency could also act as a reserve currency. Hoping you didn’t bother to read this, Taylor be rolln over in his grave... zdo

Dang mits, you are being awful hard on Twiz. He is in a thankless position. This link (unless he edits it out :rofl: ) sums up his plight I like Monkeys. A little too much perhaps

That’s right, peeps, I am definitely not a vendor. I endorse no products up here on TL – except occasionally I do give TS a plug as an adequate automation ‘prototyping’ environment. When I post a link, it’s not to promote the authors’ services. When I post a link it is either as a citation / reference or it is to share a point of view --- usually an alternative to the ‘current DOMINATING paradigm’ point of view …and he or she has said it better than I could quickly compose into a post (or ,according to Suntrust, say at all ). Even if it’s ten freakin links stacked up, it’s is not in disrespect of the site. … Dear moderators - you need to be careful you don’t squash what little ‘neurodiversity’ that still arises on TL… god knows us users do a good enuf job at that… Underlying this civil disobedience is another point - in each era, yes you can ‘just trade an edge’ – but to really excel you must also find a key ‘leading ‘ component to the times at hand… Look at Livermore in the context of the era he performed… if he were he performing from say 2007 to now he would not be able to thrive as a ‘great bear’ (or whatever his nickname was). Richard Dennis tuned to a certain time in the ags… his methods do not thrive outside that time. The investing methods of the wizard of omaha will not thrive going forward… he tuned to and lead only in a certain ‘money’ environment that will not persist. Many other examples abound --- most of them are 'pimco' bland... still... Most traders today are caught in a great nominal trap… and, unfortunately, Elliott Wavers suffer to a greater extent than many other ways of ‘analysis’ in this nominal trap … [References REMOVED] ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Last pre-crime-d by tradingwizzard; 11-06-2013 at 03:18PM.

Mits, to be honest, after the first incident Twiz has deleted no links... he just told me not to post anymore. Only the first -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Last edited by tradingwizzard; 11-whenever 2013 at sometimePM. is genuine. All those following are 'civil disobedience' to policy... not him personally... at least I hope I'm dealing with policy... and not him and his apparent inability to distinguish btwn references and spammy trash links zdo

I was asked by PM why I suspended the ~4.5 day ‘book’. Don’t have time to post a good solid explanation, but here are some references and links in case you are interested. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Last edited by tradingwizzard; 11-06-2013 at 10:38AM.

Preface: almost slipped up and put this note in the more current Beyond Taylor thread but there is really nothing ‘beyond’ about it… FWIW, I am closing / (temporarily?) suspending trading on a 9 (mostly with some + 1 bar variance) bar ‘book’ on a day session 195 minute chart that has been bangin it for years now… Have been ‘off this book’ since 10/25 and project I’ll be ‘off book’ for about six weeks… forgot to mention it then… it will be interesting to see what ‘book’ develops next. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Last edited by tradingwizzard; 11-04-2013 at 03:54PM. :missy:

twiz, ... pls make up your mind... first you squelch any talk about underlying conditions - "in the end, technical analysis prevails" etc etc. ... then you spew "Fed signals", "end of QE?" "Tapering? " None these 'technicals' or (what you are calling) 'fundamentals' are on topic to your original neely LINK... you're blowing up your own thread... None of the timeframes you're using - even including the weeklies - are on topic to your original neely LINK... more blowing up your own thread... and no amount of censoring zdo will fix that... Maybe someone should remind you that EW is not going to attract much participation anyways... not real smart to drive the already limited support for EW topics away... If you're really all that good with (e)Wave trading you should go private, proprietary - Dominick style - instead of looking all wishy washy up in here in your bully pulpit.... zdo -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Last edited by tradingwizzard; 11-04-2013 at 03:18PM.

...lagging response... you might not need it now...but degree = absvalue(arctangent(Avg- Avg[1])); Then you can 'categorize' flatness by using stddev of degree... using dynamic / fuzzy or fixed brackets a few unsolicited comments and questions... isn't it going to take an inordinate long time for a 100 ma to go 'flat'?... ie by the time it measures flat, it's about time for mkt to not be flat anymore ?

Somebody pls help us out… what does whether this little congestion on the weekly breaks north or south have to do with dow making it to 100000 or not? have a great weekend all.

good lord twiz first … I thought it was just me then… I thought it was just him either way…now I’m starting to ‘understand’ Mits comments to / about you over in the Fractal thread… ...still bumpn the question, twiz ...

he definitely knew about 'qe' and eventual 'QE'... still it's my impression that... ... btw, now you're putting words in my mouth it's not about "reason(s)" it's more about 'relative to('s)' ...still bumpn the question, twiz ...

Twiz, bump It is my impression that Neely thought ‘growth’ would be a much more significant factor than ‘hyperinflation’ to get us to 100000 dow. Is that your impression?

someone should say something. ... Back on (an ET thread in TL) topic… It is my impression that Neely thought ‘growth’ would be a much more significant factor than ‘hyperinflation’ to get us to 100000 dow. Is that your impression? ie …are we @ ‘2007 America’ or @ ‘2006 Zimbabwe’ or @ … ? A Tale of Two Charts: Are We 2007 America or 2006 Zimbabwe? | John Rubino | Safehaven.com “To inform people is hard slugging.” Paul Craig Roberts ....observing those inner figures... when an inner bear has had enough and 'finally decides' to capitulate to the long side ... is generally a good time to be one....

In addition to my attempts above to comment that such an advance denominated in USD may really not be that much of an accomplishment… someone should also note that (and ...understandably, you’ll deny inferring such … but) an underlying tone of your posts is that it’s going to go there straightly, directly and that all one needs to do is ‘long bias’. So - some ‘voice of experience’ to all our overleveraged ‘long bias’ buddies out there ---- I did very well overleveraged and ‘long bias’ in the indexes through the 90’s, but there were at least a dozen times I was ‘right’ in the long term but had I stayed long stubbornly, I would have gone bust… “To inform people is hard slugging.” Paul Craig Roberts

... maybe more 'sales' coming... yet ... charles hugh smith-The Gathering Storm ps does china,inc have enough margin money to drive paper pm's down ?

( btw he mentions gov’t “shutdown” , debt ceilings, etc some thoughts re that Was the Debt Ceiling Crisis a Lie? | Gains Pains & Capital It should also be noted – in the form of a multiple choice question The debt ceiling has now been suspended completely for a) 90 days b) Forever c) None of the above. I know , I know , it’s unfathomable how I can be so dam cynical. :missy: )

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wkURz6H0I0I]Lenny Kravitz, :"It Ain't Over Till It's Over" - YouTube[/ame]

Mits, Thanks for the excellent ‘pre going beyond’ due diligence on the history. Seems like a lot of those times where he didn't 'keep it' , he had continued to act, etc. as if the 'environment' hadn't changed, even though it had... Things are rarely just blue and pink – most times we have to deal in shades of green… A lot of my interest in this ‘thread’ stems from a dilemma I was experiencing near when I started the thread. Several years ago I crossed into the zone where one of my new ‘rules’ became, in essence, never touch the principle * . … and then recently I started seeing possible MAJOR (and, yes, RISK filled) opportunities that provided me temptations to question that ‘rule’ :haha: just one more time (… which on a long enough time horizon always = famous last words :helloooo: ). and, yes, the "swing a big line" bizzness you discussed above was involved... ...speaking of that... did you know that while the 'heavy bats' of baseball history form the top ten list of the of runs scored, except for number one at crossing home plate was Ricky Henderson who did it with his legs and wits not his bat ??... anyways... Independent of the thread, I was blessed to wake up the next morning with my conflict resolved - but still have a general interest in questioning the ‘pinker’ legends like JL– as opposed to the ‘bluer’ , or ‘hybrid’ ones like found in the trading wizards books etc. Have a great weekend all. zdo * which is rooted an eventual shift in perspective for all of us who live past a certain ‘age’, btw

Are we going circular? Could impatience be just another way of describing not following rules ? And could not following rules be just another way of saying literally can’t follow rules ? (rules as defined by self not others btw … and mits I don’t think they are as susceptible to misinterpretation as often as you allude … nor are they in ambivalence producing ‘conflict’ often if properly ‘designed’ and the trader has done the work to make the odds explicit… but those things are beside the point… point is) If a trader as good as Livermore gets to points where he couldn’t follow his ‘rules’ all the time – then can anyone? Impatience… Stubbornness… Mental state words... mental states somewhat tainted by something emotional? Impatience… what about the present could he not accept? Does anyone know the story of his first blowup?

Yep I had ‘trouble’ reading Reminiscences... too… not getting much further myself with http://www.traderslaboratory.com/forums/books/131-jesse-livermore-worlds-greatest-stock-trader.html preview,etc at Jesse Livermore: World's Greatest Stock Trader - Richard Smitten - Google Books but others may get something from it. .....A story is a story is a story… He blew up and came back how many times? That, to me, is the core of his usefulness as a 'model' … and not because he came back (almost*) every time! With that many blowups, the usefulness is in the possible clues of why he blew up… and in maybe discovering whether in those blowups he had any ‘control’ of it at all ??? Did he have his trademark precise ‘control’ - then suddenly not have that ‘control’? Were factors at play that were beyond whether or not mrblue or mrpink or mr_____ or mr_____ were right or wrong that time / those times or whether he simply allowed mrblue or mrpink or mr_____ or mr_____ to have excessive influence when he shouldn’t have? *Got to keep our fkn suicide obsessed posters fed…

not ignoring suicide at all… check the early posts in the thread… it’s all connected. However, the only Beyond that is salient to us is NOT bluing up… for one, most of us herein do not have the seeds of suicide sprouting. for two, we may be folding “suicide” this and “suicide” that in here in every other dam post… meanwhilebackthen, his trading may have actually intervened in 'suiciding' for many many years or just as likely (and unknown (at least to me)) he may have run into life issues that triggered the previously dormant ‘suicidals’ only ‘shortly’ before he did it. How the hel is anyone going to really focus on his early blowups – where some important lessons are - if we keep elevating the suicide later in life up to the dominant thang… and fuss everytime someone suggests let’s step away from suicide for now… ? Yes. All true. And you're here to discourage us from even discussing it... ?? I don't want to stifle where the color misters might go esp in relation to "his [JL's] mindset/voices" ... mits is the real deal... but I would like to get into the big picture stuff at some point.. like how Dr. Lewis Lipsitz explains in his article of the same name that “Aging is a Process of Complexity Loss” (Complex Systems Science in Biomedicine; Topics in Biomedical Engineering, 2006, Part III, Section 7, 641-654). Lipsitz continues that, our nervous system craves complexity, and therefore, lacking complex challenges, aging accelerates. The corollary is also true, that complexity slows, halts and reverses the accelerated aging process, for our brains evolved to thrive by developing and refining complex and adapted movement. etc etc 'aging' being just one label... that's not exactly spot on for NOT blowing up and thriving in trading... still... to everything turn turn turn ... but sht, we can't get into that cause we're immersed in his eventual suicide. and can't allow that dam suicide to drop down even a single notch in importance.. The other day I was chiding my programmer and I quipped “this is the kind of sht that makes me want to put a gun to my head” … he came back “this is the kind of sht that makes me want to put a gun to your head too”

Some more random and hurried thoughts… "From Mr Livermores point of view.....Mr Pink sounds like he ran roughshod over Mr Blue in the final decision of his life..." Suiya, I continue to think we would get more traction giving less emphasis to the suicide part of the story… and more to his early blowups… From The Inner Voice of Trading Michael Martin Mits, these ‘colored voices’ are a hit with about 1 in 5… Cover Story: Maira Kalman's 'Blue Dog' : The New Yorker the rest of us will have some trouble relating… and I’m wondering if Suiya’s simplification "Maybe Mr Pink is simply impulsive and acts purely on the latest thought. Mr Blue is able to stop and think beyond a few steps." is it … or enough… or how it related to Jesse’s tape reading acumen, etc. ???? (note i'm not discounting the 'voices' - just trying to relate them to beyond jesse...) more from The Inner Voice of Trading Michael Martin

mits, in the 'we're not discussing drawdowns' post the intention was to keep us on topic. Beyond Livermore is not about drawdowns. Beyond Livermore is about blowups - even if they are 'slow' ones. Drawdowns are normal system bound series of losses that have little to do with the mistakes of the misters. Livermore took huge returns then blew them up instead of 'keeping' them. Simply being a good consisten trader, even taking large returns is not beyond livermore. Beyond Livermore is about taking large returns and then keeping them. ...and 'how mrblue and mrpink are involved in blowups' was a sincere question about your insights how these two 'voices' would be involved in blowups... more Beyond Livermore professionals tend to require a certain level of deferment, obsequiousness ... fat chance of them getting their requisite levels of that in here...:rofl: