BlowFish

If memory serves you need to sign up with gain capital for spot FX on Ninja. Ninja don't do brokerage themselves. Not sure what's up with Alpari, I have a demo account with them I think you select virtual funds when you create it and also whether it is mini or full lots. Maybe shoot them a line.

I should say I did not go so far as to construct a formal framework around the observation. It was pretty much just that...an observation. I guess you would start looking for continuation into a second bullish wavelet or a corrective bearish wavelet when AB=CD. I guess all the time C 'holds' (and if the context/trend/whatever supports it) you would anticipate another bullish wavelet. Of course the trouble with all this there are smaller magnitude 'wavelets' all over the place. I do think if one was to provide a bit of rigour and a few formal 'rules' you could come up with a decent framework. Clyde Lee (rip) did a lot of work with swings at theswingmachine. His approach was statistical in nature if you get this sequence of ABCD's what is the probability for the next one. It was interesting work. Sadly his site has gone to a golf company since his death. Way back machine archive is offline right now too.

I've expressed my opinion of TG and of the professional master ninja trader and god emperor of VSA before. As you say there are some reasonably sound ideas in Tom's original book however TG make there money through selling software and services. Fortunatly TG simplifies a handful of principles into 450+ indicators :rofl:. If you think things are bad now they where absolutely hilarious in the early days of TG.

Thats me being obtuse I noticed that Nial Fuller has 'content provider' under his name. I wondered if that is because he is a sponsor? I guess Nial may not be a ssponsor but has been invited to contribute articles? I also see that ninjatrader has a status of 'partner'. Presumably these are different types of sponsor? I just wondered what the significance of these various monickers are and also whether there are any others that I have not noticed. Just curious. Incidentally http://www.traderslaboratory.com/forums/members/list/ which is a link from a users profile page gives a page not found. Cheers

I wondered what a 'Content Provider' is? Some sort of sponsor? Are there any other categories that we might come across? Cheers.

You could grab an MT4 demo and sim account from any one of a hundred bookie/brokers. Alpari are a sponsor here so maybe go with them. I don't like them much for managing trades but if you are not scalping you can get the job done OK. Ninja is great for trade management but very limited choice of broker for spot FX. If you where to go with FX futures things open up much more. As Tams says loads of trials available, but if you are already profitable on sim maybe don't allow yourself to get too distracted. (hence the suggestion above).

So buy Yuan? The dollar might pop in the medium term and I would hesitate to go so far as to say its doomed but it's not something I would want a longer term punt on.

Great explanation of the CME changes, 12 mins in or so is the meat.

It depends heavily on win loss ration and it is not a nice linear function either. Higher % approaches (even if the risk reward is only 1:1 or even worse) have much much smoother equity curves than those that have greater RR but lower probability. The math is really easy so why not do it properly and have some confidence in the outcome? Probability of 10 loosing trades in a row: P(10) = P(1)*P(2)*P(3)....P(10) if the probability for each event is the same this becomes (prob)^n where n is the number of consecutive same outcomes So a 70% system would yield aprox .000006 chance of getting 10 losers in a row. (.3^10) or 6 in every million trades. A 50% system yields aprox .001 chance of 10 in a row (,5^10) or 1 in every hundred trades. I really don't understand why people 'wing it' and expect to have a good outcome, I find it staggering. It takes 10 minutes to do it properly so why not do so? People spend hundreds and thousands of hours on nonsense when it comes to trading but won't spend 10 minutes on the basics. Position sizing is one of the few things that you have absolute control over why guess at it? Anyway OP I hope that this at least demonstrates that one size does not fit all. Just look at RoR, and make an informed decision or don't and hope for the best.

What do you want from more 'grown up' software? If you are profitable on simulator I would try and find something that lets you carry on doing what you are already doing with the minimum of disruption. Many FX 'brokers' (actually they are not real brokers, they are more like spread betting companies) offer a platform called MT4 (Metatrader 4). It's not bad at all for charting and you can program your own stuff for it fairly simply) Personally I find it miserable for order entry and management but there are 'addons' that can help there. It's decent. Most of the UK spread betters have there own web based java order entry and offer a version of prorealtime charts. Prrealtime is OK but clunky compared to MT4 imho. (its a java in the browser affair). A couple of the spread betters have there own standalone platforms I have used CMC's and tried out touch too. They get the job done. Really you are probably better off writing a check list of what you really need and what would be nice to have. It is perfectly possible to trade FX with a free MT4 demo account for charts and a separate spread bet/FX 'bookies' account. Depending on what you are doing you might want to investigate real (DMA) direct market access brokers. If you search around you will find out what the difference is.

Yes and if you like that, it is worth considering MultiCharts. (Though there manual order entry and management stuff is beta status). I guess a lot depends on exactly what you want from the platform? The mentioned choices all have strengths and weaknesses in particular areas, however if all you need is order entry and some basic charting + maybe a few potted studies then any will do, it is largely personal preference (look & feel UI etc.)

Didn't you get an answer on the other thread? Bulls-eye broker seems to be the package of choice for 'serious' P&Fers from what I have heard.

Nice to see a few new posts from you UB. I guess you caved in since you wrote I offer no product or service to anybody and neither does Trade Point Technologies. It is not a company, we are a small private association of of tech and market afficianados. We advertise nothing and offer nothing to anybody but an elevation of the otherwise bleak technical discussion on this forum. I'm certainly not going to knock you for it but, just noticed that you are leasing some of your indicators now. I guess that's good for those that wanted to play along at home bud did not have the wherewithal to work out what you where doing and how to do similar for themselves:).

Are you looking at very long range charts? I wonder why you would want different box sizes for each level? I wonder what happens if you select a logarithmic scale with a fixed box size? Maybe that will help?

Depends what you mean by 'back testing' if you mean computerised back testing I have to respectfully disagree. Anyway none of that is germane to this thread. It is up to each individual trader to thoroughly test their trading premise, without doing so it is unlikely they will have the confidence to trade it. All of that says more about you than Phantom or his method. Why do you want to prove him a fake so badly, who gives a flying fig? If you think his method is no good by all means indicate why. If and when he asks for money he will be asked to be a sponsor or shut down. Simple as that. What you are doing is engaging in a witch hunt, to repeat myself it says more about you than phantom or his method. If you want to engage in that sort of activity Ellite Trader is a better venue. Incidentally your posts not only 'prove' nothing they don't make the slightest attempt to try to. Post some back test results (as you threatened to earlier) or at east post some charts indicating why this is unsound. I also think it rather sad (not to mention insulting) that you have to deride people that won't join your witch hunt. In short post some tangible proof or it would be best for all concerned if you "keep your ethical mouth shut". No disrespect meant to you but this seems to have got under your skin. Hell, just drop the matter and start a thread "how to back test properly". You could even use this approach as an example!

Random thoughts on testing. My uncle was an engineer he taught me the scientific method when I was... I dunno about 8 years old I guess. In my view (fwiw) though pretty simple it is very useful in many aspects of life for acquiring and integrating knowledge. Computerised back testing is just a tool. Nine times out of ten people draw un-reliable conclusions from it. There's a whole bunch of reasons for this that go beyond the scope of this thread. For most things I far prefer testing 'by hand/eyeball'. Performance analysis has its place too (to call that statistics is a bit grand for what is essentially keeping a tally). Market generated statistics have there place too but this thread is not one of them This is one of those areas where expertise in other walks of life can be detrimental to your outcomes if you expect trading to 'work in the same way'. DBPhoenix in his blog here (the journal section) outlines an iterative process to find test and refine an edge/pattern/idea. If memory serves he has talked at greater length if forums.

Glad you are going to continue. The principles underlying your approach seem sound to me (though what do I know?) You can happily quote me fwiw, always wanted to see my name in lights! :cinema: haha It's some while that we have seen a new thread at TL by someone talking in reasonable detail about how they approach the market. Personally I greatly prefer them to the 'never trade whilst water skiing' type threads. So, again, good that you are continuing TL needs threads like this (whether one agrees or disagrees with the content) if it is to remain a première destination for traders.

It's an OK rule of thumb but if you really want to understand how much to risk you want to look at RoR (Risk of Ruin). TradersCALM - Calculating risk of ruin explain it all fairly well, nice little freebie site focused on how really understanding RoR can free you from a lot of the negative feelings that can hamper effective trading.

I wondered if anyone would (bite). If you break an impulse into 2 you get essentially an ABCD type formation An impulse wave now becomes two 'bullish' ABCD's in a row and a correction is a single bearish ABCD. Image attached ,,,marvel at my paint skills I just think that these building blocks are much more flexible (though you might loose some predictive aspects).

He was obviously an inveterate researcher, lets not forget his swing charts that completely eliminated time ( a bit like Kagi charts .....not sure on that).

Back in the day it was great playing IPO's. When I heard that the stock price had doubled within minutes it brought back warm memories. It would be great if those days returned roll on the dot social network bubble!

Got a few more minutes. What do you mean by ALGO? It's another wishy wash term, lots of people use 'algorithms' nowadays. Really you need to know a bit about market microstructure it's kinda hard to discuss this sort of stuff without. Market microstructure deals with the different types of participant why they trade and how they go about about achieving there goals. Computers (and 'algorithms') are used pretty much at every stage of the game nowadays the motivations of the players remain the same however. You might be surprised that some of the very largest participants are not profit motivated. Well not through speculating in the market they are trading in. This is why markets move these guys must trade there is real underlying demand/supply. A lot of 'algo' use is about modelling risk, portfolio optimisation, simulation etc. I guess you are talking more about 'algos' that trade? Again there is a lot of mis information about things like HFT (which is actually largely used for market making) algos also allow arbitragers to work much more effectively. As one of the greatest risks to arbitrageurs is execution risk algos allow even smaller inconsistencies to arbed away. Arguably these things actually dampen long term price movement (though can cause 'ripples' shorter term). Anyway I have rambled a bit, I guess that's what happens when you ask questions whose answers would fill multiple textbooks

It does, we are probably on the same page (my hunch was we where not, just goes to show hunches are wrong sometime ) More to add about participants but pushed for time.

I am no Elliotician (though have a decent grasp of the principles). One thing that occurred to me when I looked at it is that he did not select the smallest building block to base all his stuff on. If you re-start everything with a more appropriate smaller 'wavelet' 'block' you can pretty much model price in a consistent fashion without having all the special rules and cases that EW requires.

Awwwh I do hope you keep posting to this thread. Some people have such different terms of reference it is very hard to approach stuff with a completely open mind. That's no bad reflection on you or them, its just how it is. There will be just as many that do get it....hell you wouldn't believe the accumulated nonsense I have buzzing around my noggin but I think I have a good idea of where you are coming from (an imho it's not a bad place).