W.D. Gann System Does Work

[wdgannlive]

Hi Folks,

I would just like to show W.D. Gann's Trading Method/ System does work and many traders had over looked it.


Below are some of the trading logs/forecasts made back on 2nd April:

Actual Market Movement:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Forecasts made back on 2nd April:

Actual Market Movement:

amazing, isn't it?

There is an ebay item selling at:
[url]http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=180498161372&ssPageName=STRK:MESELX:IT[/URL]

and I will make a series of trades below so that everyone could take a look on how simple wdgannlive 's strategy does work.

1st Trade: Sell Euro (at market price 1.2753) till 8th June
2nd Trade: Buy Gold (at market price 1207.8) till 8th June






From the Famous W.D. Gann Interview:
The Ticker and Investment Digest
(Ticker and Investment Digest, Volume 5, Number 2, December, 1909, page 54.)

"I soon began to note the periodical recurrence of the rise and fall in stocks and commodities. This led me to conclude that natural law was the basis of market movements. I then decided to devote ten years of my life to the study of natural law as applicable to the speculative markets and to devote my best energies toward making speculation a profitable profession. After exhaustive researches and investigations of the known sciences, I discovered that the law of vibration enabled me to accurately determine the exact points at which stocks or commodities should rise and fall within a given time."

"The working out of this law determines the cause and predicts the effect long before the street is aware of either. Most speculators can testify to the fact that it is looking at the effect and ignoring the cause that has produced their losses."

 

[fugly]

Found Gann's secret (btw there is no secret he died a pauper and made a living selling his fraudulent courses) and is begging us to buy it for $35

.......hahahaha classic

 

[alimostofi]

WD Gann used Astrology extensively. In those days it was very bad to talk about Astrology, and so he did not come out in the open with it. But he had a copy of an Ephemeris always with him.

 

[Splitlink]

I cannot believe in astrology so, if Gann was successful, I must find something else that he was doing right, with or without his knowledge. You may be able to give us some light on that, so I hope that you will continue.

Your charts showed him to be correct on those occasions, but so many other methods and theories are, too. Showing us how to look in the right place, at the right time, is what we need from you-

Interesting.

 

[rathcoole_exile]

W.D. Gann's Trading Method/ System does work

mate, as has been shown time & time again, with the correct money management and approach to risk management, flipping a coin "works"

 

[DionysusToast]

mate, as has been shown time & time again, with the correct money management and approach to risk management, flipping a coin "works"

Actually - that has never been shown. It is a myth in my opinion.

There was a thread on it a while back from some Pedro chappie... http://www.trade2win.com/boards/general-trading-chat/71472-money-management-mystique.html

Whilst I admit the guy is slightly schizophrenic, I do agree that this oft stated trading truism has not at any point been proven by anyone.

 

[BSD]

mate, as has been shown time & time again, with the correct money management and approach to risk management, flipping a coin "works"

Exactly.

I can't remember how many times I've had to post Market Wizard Tom Bassos findings here during my tenure:

"TRYING TO BEAT RANDOM ENTRY

I was doing a seminar with Tom Basso (see his sections in Chapters 3 and 5) in 1991. Tom was explaining that the most important part of his system was his exits and his position-sizing algorithms. As a result, one member of the audience remarked, “From what you are saying it sounds like you could make money consistently with a random entry as long as you have good exits and size your positions intelligently.”

Tom responded that he probably could. He promptly returned to his office and tested his own system of exits and posltlon sizing with a “coin flip”-type entry. In other words, his system simulated trading four different markets and he was always in the market, either long or short, based upon a random signal. As soon as he got an exit signal, he’d reenter the market again based upon the random signal. Tom’s results showed that he made money consistently, even using $100 per contract for slippage and commissions.

We subsequently duplicated those results with more markets."...
http://www.trade2win.com/boards/mec...90182-random-entry-systems-3.html#post1085832

Corroborated by fellow market wizard Lindas research:

http://lbrgroup.com/index.asp?page=DailyCharts&date=2006-01-24

(Scroll all the way down)

Trading ain't rocket science like I keep saying !

 

[Splitlink]

Hi Markus,

This retired pensioner with some time on his hands has just got interested. I haven't got arthritis in them so this is a case of "idle hands make mischief"

The trouble is that I have to do this on my own. My wife would definitely take a dim view of me flipping coins before entering a trade because, up until now, I've always been able to impress my trading abilities upon her. Always being in a trade, though, means spending too much time at it and I'll get caught, sooner or later.

 

[BSD]

Hi Split my friend I hope life is treating you well

We're melting here at the moment, 30 degrees

Your wife sounds very sensible btw

 

[Pat494]

There is another Gann course seller called Gunner 24. Who uses an overlay grid.

I started a thread with no responsefrom the co. and then notified Herr Eduard Altman and company . I did get an email back saying they would have a look.

I didn't buy the course. It may be useful but not so sure

 

[rathcoole_exile]

Actually - that has never been shown. It is a myth in my opinion.

There was a thread on it a while back from some Pedro chappie... http://www.trade2win.com/boards/general-trading-chat/71472-money-management-mystique.html

Whilst I admit the guy is slightly schizophrenic, I do agree that this oft stated trading truism has not at any point been proven by anyone.

rumour has it that Pedro is your gay lover......

(of course, I started that particular rumour)


do you still visit him in Bang Kwang ?

 

[DionysusToast]

Exactly.

I can't remember how many times I've had to post Market Wizard Tom Bassos findings here during my tenure:

"TRYING TO BEAT RANDOM ENTRY

I was doing a seminar with Tom Basso (see his sections in Chapters 3 and 5) in 1991. Tom was explaining that the most important part of his system was his exits and his position-sizing algorithms. As a result, one member of the audience remarked, “From what you are saying it sounds like you could make money consistently with a random entry as long as you have good exits and size your positions intelligently.”

Tom responded that he probably could. He promptly returned to his office and tested his own system of exits and posltlon sizing with a “coin flip”-type entry. In other words, his system simulated trading four different markets and he was always in the market, either long or short, based upon a random signal. As soon as he got an exit signal, he’d reenter the market again based upon the random signal. Tom’s results showed that he made money consistently, even using $100 per contract for slippage and commissions.

We subsequently duplicated those results with more markets."...
http://www.trade2win.com/boards/mec...90182-random-entry-systems-3.html#post1085832

Corroborated by fellow market wizard Lindas research:

http://lbrgroup.com/index.asp?page=DailyCharts&date=2006-01-24

(Scroll all the way down)

Trading ain't rocket science like I keep saying !

Rath - it's a myth and your post does nothing to counter the myth. Some guy saying "he probably could" doesn't do it. Nor does this 'test' that is described in very little detail.

The myth is similar to the concept of perpetual motion. Physics always gets in the way.

Same here. If this was true and you knew how to do it then you yourself would be trading full time and rolling in cash. I know I would. in fact, if you could prove this to me (despite it being impossible), I'll put $200k to work on it & we can split the profits.

It's a myth. You can reply with all the jokes and sarcasm you like. The bottom line is that this is an oft repeated trading truism that has never been proven.

 

[BSD]

Lol complete, utter and total denial is the state you are in, just like that other moron George Bush, you guys must be twins lol...

Basso didn't only say he probably could, he went on and did it !

How stupid must one be to pretend to not comprehend that.

I have quite honestly never seen or heard you post anything but ignorant BS that completely ignores all evidence to the contrary that doesn't fit in your narrow-minded view of things.

Ignoramuses like you could get the detailed tests from Linda and Tom, Market Wizards both of em, and still continue spouting some mindbogglingly nonsensical BS like, hey guys, it's just a myth.

What's no myth is that you have taken on the role of resident clown here who has absolutely zero value added on offer.

 

[DionysusToast]

Lol complete, utter and total denial is the state you are in, just like that other moron and fellow country man George Bush lol...

Basso didn't only say he probably could, he went on and did it !

How stupid must one be to pretend to not comprehend that.

I have quite honestly never seen or heard you post anything but ignorant BS that completely ignores all evidence to the contrary that doesn't fit in your narrow-minded view of things.

Ignoramuses like you could get the detailed tests from Linda and Tom, Market Wizards both of em, and still continue spouting some mindbogglingly nonsensical BS like hey guys, it's just a myth.

What's no myth is that you have taken on the role of resident clown here who has absolutely zero value added on offer.

I didn't read from that quote that anyone went away and traded like that. I read that someone 'tested it' - he probably ran a computer simulation. There is a huge difference. It is easy for a flawed model to appear to work. In my field, I see this time and time again with 'young pups' doing stuff, seeing results that appear right and taking that as evidence that the model is incorrect. The correct approach when seeing the results you expect is to consider it flawed until your analysis yields no further flaws.

First, let's appreciate a simple fact - it is impossible for more money to be taken out of the markets than is put in. Over time, it is simply impossible for all players to take out more money than is put into the system. This is akin to perpetual motion and physics - you can't get more energy that you put in plus that which may be stored in the machine already.

Why spend all that money on co-location and HFT algorighms ? What a total waste of time when you can just enter at random and have the right money management approach. Why bother with the risk of making the market when you can just flip a coin and apply money management ? Why do investment banks pay traders hundreds of millions in bonuses when all they need is a set of darts and todays newspaper ? You could train a monkey to trade this way.

Now - onto the myth. It is amazing don't you think that 99.9% of people here use
directional trading strategies. Even Rathcoole himeslf says he simply draws a line in the sand and then decides what to do if the price reaches that point. He does not say draw a line anywhere and hit any button when it reaches that point. Why would Rath do that if he knew that it was unecessary because money management is the key and not the combination of the percentage of times you are right and the size of your winners in proportion to the size of your losers ? Is R_E some sort of masochist ?

You yourself talk about TA and support and resistance and how valuable it is in terms of helping you decide how to trade. Why do that when it is unecessary ? Why bother getting excited that the Bund is reacting well to pivot points ? Why would anything like that matter - why not just wake up, pick a market and apply your money management mystique and make money effortlessly ?

It is obvious why you and others do not do this it is because
1) You don't know how to because
2) It is impossible

If you want to argue against common sense - why not lay our here how it's possible that random entry + money management can make money.

Of more interest though - why aren't you trading like that it it's possible ?

Why not lets boil this down. No pictures of Ferraris, no guys standing in front of other people's yaghts. Just tell us what experience you have of trading like this and why you use directional strategies yourself.

 

[DionysusToast]

PS BSD - if you want to get personal with me, then please keep up with the 'moron' comments. I don't mind going that route if you want.

Also - I am not American. You jump to conclusions. Just because the software on this board puts an American flag up if I choose not to enter personal details does not mean I am an American.

Jumping to conclusions is not a good sign in someone attempting to debate an emotive issue.

 

[BSD]

Nobody said it's a great system, just that it's possible to end up net profitable that way.

And since good is better than merely or even barely ok why not go ahead and improve the system by adding fundamental filters if you're so inclined, or TA which is my cup of tea.

Like that Tony Oz chap, if you can get a hit rate of almost 70% with R/R ratios of almost 4 to 1 via his style of trading then you'd go down that route wouldn't you.

http://www.amazon.com/Stock-Trader-Living-Trading-Stocks/dp/0967943507

I remember Curtis Faith did a random test and the results weren't even remotely close to Tony's, think he had a hit rate of 20 or 30% instead.

Now of course we know hit rate ain't all, but if you can improve that without the net profitability suffering heck why not.

 

[DionysusToast]

So BSD - just to clarify.

You do not know how to do this but you still think it can be done ?

Your counter argument is that it doesn't make enough money. How do you know that without knowing how it is done ? If you do know how it is done - why not prove the theory correct ? Is it a secret ?

Can you be specific about the technique, why it works and why it produces a low return ?

I can provide details of the EXACT tests done by associates of Basso if necessary. I presume it wont be necessary because from your posts, it appears that you already know the techniques.

 

[BSD]

Lol you really are the biggest fruit cake here since your moronic buddy the_expert and before him socrates departed these shores...

You made the moronic claim without zero evidence to back that up that that trading net profitably on random entries was a myth...

I posted that market wizards Basso and Raschke both have backtested proof across yonks of years and markets demonstrating that it absolutely works...

But then again you have an agenda against all evidence to the contrary that TA is humbug too, lol, don't you !!!

Like I said you add zero value added here, and serve no other role than acting as resident clown replacing your predecessors whose gibberish you suitingly admired, the_expert posting nothing but smoke and mirrors had no bigger fan than you did he.

You are nothing but a total waste of time !

 

[DionysusToast]

In another thread - I will show how the work of Basso and his associates was flawed. I won't do it here because to be honest, I don't want to embarrass you.

As for me being a waste of time - it is interesting that I bother you so much if that is the case. There is an ignore feature. Is it because I actually make a point ? Perhaps it's because I analyse things that you took on face value and see flaws that you didn't.

Maybe it's just that I have an opinion counter to your own and you don't seem to have any skills when it comes to debating issues.

You have not once managed to counter a single point I have made with your own analysis. Instead what you do is to pluck a name from a long list of system vendors/book writers and repeat their claims and say "it must be true".

Anyway - here you are again, saying that something works but with NOTHING to back it up in terms of explanation/evidence. Instead you choose to attack me personally. You know from my prior post that I have looked at the results of this 'random entry' system, you know I am already aware that it is flawed so now we see you attacking the messenger because you know you won't get anywhere with the message itself.

Your signature line should be "Markus - replying without thinking"

 

[BSD]

lol you make an unfounded claim that net profitable trading on the basis of random entries is a myth...

I post the findings of TWO Market Wizards who claim the contrary.

Who is the total moron here.