Richard, thanks.
What you say about Metastock is true, in one sense, but
in another I know my own learning methods. Going through
procedures in detail by hand gives me a feel for them
that I can't get in any other way. I'm not actually
busy testing systems by hand; I just did a few manual tests
to see what questions would arise in the process.
Sure enough, the question of how to enter and exit was
a major one. I concluded immediately that the next day
was the only reasonable test, and first went to closing
prices, then to opening, then to the daily high (entry)
low (exit). I don't consider this time wasted. Once
I'd generated a list of questions and understood other
aspects, I abandoned manual testing -- haven't done one
for weeks. In the last couple of days I have had most
of the questions answered here, as a matter of fact.
I'm still looking at lots of charts trying
to see patterns, etc. Sure enough, it's occurring through
a slow osmotic process, helped immensely by continuing
background reading.
On the other hand, I'm often guilty of trying to figure
out too much for myself when getting some aid or expert
advice would be more efficient. In this respect your
point is well taken. I could probably use metatstock to
good advantage. However, I haven't begun to reach the
limits of QP yet, and I'm reading constantly and my
understanding progresses daily; so it's a matter of resource allocation and priorities.
Thanks again,
Spots
PS. Didn't miss thie points about win/loss amount, drawdown,
and time in trade. |
