Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Gorilla and King Portfolio Candidates -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tekboy who wrote (32749)	10/3/2000 2:18:13 AM
From: tekboy	Respond to of 54805

lest it be thought that I am dissing the Fool, here are a couple of posts showing what the community can do... WIND boards.fool.com CREE boards.fool.com On Switches boards.fool.com Fisher vs. Moore boards.fool.com tekboy/Ares@backtoburping.com

To: tekboy who wrote (32749)	10/3/2000 8:28:26 AM
From: Mike Buckley	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 54805

tekboy, Thanks for taking the time to evaluate the evolution of the Foolish Four. Though I disagree with your interpretation, I'm not going to debate you about the points that cause you to think there was data mining going on. The fact that there is a lot of interpretation needed to come to a conclusion about that leads to the possibility that either (or I guess both) of us could be wrong in our interpretation. My intention isn't to focus on whether or not data mining is taking place in the evolution of the Fool's methods of mechanical investing. That's mostly because I think there are a lot of reasons to seriously doubt the validity of using back-testing as an indication of how dynamic (as opposed to static) models will perform. And in the case of the Dow strategies in particular, the relatively recent addition of Microsoft and Intel to the DJIA is a change that the model doesn't address. Instead, my intent was to focus on the shoddy, irresponsible writing by Mark Hulbert. He never explained why the newsletter ceased publication but I think he wants me to infer that it was due to lack of success which in turn was due to data mining. He admittedly only mentioned "signs" of data mining and only in two of their models, never documenting any of it. And when he used a short quote from Ann Coleman, he ended the piece saying "it sounds like data mining." Sounds like? Gimme a break. The really sad point for me is that if Hulbert's implications are absolute fact, his piece was so shoddy that there'd be no way to know it. --Mike Buckley