Sorry, personally I can't do anything with this, as MA has told numerous times, dailies are noise. It's scraping instead of trading.
Sure you have made some money now, well done. It might look like Socrates really works but most of us here have tried trading dailies and it's like flipping a coin, as data on this blog has proven.

He did not say the dailies are noise.  He said dailies are more affected by noise than the other timeframes.  

Debunked? Hardly... There is so much inconsistency across the multiple portals on the Socrates website. Indeed reversals would appear/disappear in the Reversals section, the textual commentary, and the main dashboard.

I had emailed Socrates support about this NUMEROUS times and they had no explanation nor could they suggest which one was correct. Which is exactly the reason why historical study of reversals is not adequate. Indicative perhaps. But for useful analysis it has to be future tested... Which takes us back to the same point that's been highlighted consistently... Someone just needs to show the evidence!

Sorry, personally I can't do anything with this, as MA has told numerous times, dailies are noise. It's scraping instead of trading.
Sure you have made some money now, well done. It might look like Socrates really works but most of us here have tried trading dailies and it's like flipping a coin, as data on this blog has proven.

What I am interested in now is what MA thinks of Government Bonds (and Bond proxies).
MA has stated many times yields going up and that we've seen the low.  But so far new lows have been made almost every week for the last few months. And looking at the macro side (rate of change) we might go a lot lower as we get closer to a possible recession.
I was hesitating to go in bonds as I think MA had a good point there but luckily enough a friend and investor convinced me otherwise so I bought some bonds (various time levels) early in the year and it's now one of the better macro investments YTD (also because of the low volatility). And I do think we still have a long way to go regarding US yields (we might go negative as well)

Does anyone has any insight if MA's opinion has changed?
I do think that in some places like Turkey yields could blow up leaving the government with no other decision than delaying payments and/or extending durations (ie 10yr becomes 20yr/30yr).
I just don't see it happening in the US or Europe. So if we are talking about a huge rise in worldwide yield levels, as MA has been doing, you need the yields to go up on a broad basis.
Of course if we go lower, at some point negative yields are not sustainable and things will change but we do not need a supercomputer to predict that.

Weekly Bearish or Daily?

Please note that it's not the table near the Stochastics, Indicating Range or Energy indicator widgets. This has the same data then the one in the Reversals tab.
Look further down in the Analysis text.

there is says:
Daily/weekly  REVERSAL TABLE
MINOR | MAJOR
BULLISH | BEARISH | BULLISH | BEARISH

This is the one I meant.

I appreciate your putting up live trades for testing purposes with the criteria. In spite of the rally, the market still dropped. First day since election shows a profit, it seems. It is my understanding that the trade needs to be exited within 3 time units as long as it tests the next Reversal.

This I absolutely agree with, Trumps big mouth drove the market to 180 degree turn. I wanted to ask olegrey, how can he say that his trade is valid with market news, especial trump, coming out and scaring the crap out of the market. That would mean that the reversals knew in advance that trump would open his fat mouth, sorry can't buy that.

IMO, first, a winning trade is always good but today's action was luck of the draw and trump bailed out the shorts.

Sorry, I am finished with he whole subject. Everything has to come to an end somehow. I have wasted years of my life with this, and I have my own conclusions which are now more valuable to me than ever before. One is that the deeper you dig into the Armstrong data, the more confusing it gets.

The simple reason is that ALL data, be it reversals, forecast arrays, energy, pivots, whatever you call it, comes from the same time series. This is very primitive, and far from what Martin Armstrong claims about his computer which is that it correlates everything with everything. No way. That is a lie. Armstrong is really a simpleton and he does not have an understanding of scientific methods. He just uses certain words like a good salesman.

If I provided more data then I would just encourage people to do the same thing that Armstrong does, trying to derive more information from this single dimension, his data that was derived again only from a single time series, taking this ridiculous process even further to the next level. It would be crazy. There is only so much information in a single piece of data and re-processing it over and over through different filters once again will not make you any wiser.

In other words, there is no way that the history of a single time series of a stock market index can possibly predict that the FED does not cut interest rates enough so the market declines, then recovers, and then later Trump tweets that he will impose another 300 Billion of China tariffs, therefore driving the index lower once again. Someone who claims that this can be done is a liar, and we know who that is.

So, I hope that you appreciate that I am not sharing any more data. In order to put an end to this nonsense at least from my end because people will waste time trying to get something useful out of it for their advantage which I know is not possible.

And I am fairly confident that you are not going to get the data from anywhere else because Armstrong will do whatever it takes to avoid it because it would reveal what a scam Socrates is. Well as far as he can because as a programmer he is incompetent. Otherwise, being a complete outsider, I would not be allowed to develop the means to get all the data I want from that "system". I am gone.

Read this blog starting at page 273 to find out more about computerized fraud

See https://armstrongecmscam.blogspot.com for a more compact view of major findings posted in this blog

The problem is now: It is very obvious that "evaluating" costs serious subscription money which people like me have already spent, and that money is down the drain for most people anyway because what they get is STILL not enough. And who has years of time to come to a conclusion which will inevitably be similar to mine?


I have given assistance on different levels. Answering all questions  except sharing my entire data cache which is what olegrey insisted on. That is not possible for some reasons.

I have seen where olegrey challenged the data I have provided by simply changing the trading period - effectively curve fitting it. People are free to do that, but they inevitably pay a price. If people still think they can get some profit out of a "system" sold by an outfit that is run by a charlatan with a criminal record, they deserve my sarcasm.

Read this blog starting at page 273 to find out more about computerized fraud

See https://armstrongecmscam.blogspot.com for a more compact view of major findings posted in this blog

@olegrey, since you did NOT state what's your time unit, and you took your trade not at the CLOSING of the week, and you are using DAILY reversals, I'm assuming that your time unit is DAY for your trade.

You also need to post the reversals, for people to evaluate your entry/exit criteria.

CLEAR trading rules respect to buy/sell CAN be evaluated and tested.  Armstrong NEVER posted any complete set of trading rules can be evaluated, since he simply intends to claim excellence through muddy water.

I'm assuming that the ABOVE trading rules apply to EXIT.  And your ENTRY was based on the ELECTED bearish reversal ON July 31st for Dow's closing at 26864.27.

Based on your first/second/third counts above, and the elected reversal was less than 1%, I assume that you will be EXITING the trade within 3 days according to your rule.

Once you close your trade within 3 days, please explain which of the above rule was selected.

Then we can repeat your experiment for more times to see how well it works.

In addition - below is extracts of one of my email exchanges with support.

----

On Sat, 6 Apr 2019 19:29:45 +0700 <XXX>  wrote ---- 
#original_sender {XXX}
From: XXX
Email: XXX

Topic: Bug or Error

Message: Hello, I'm writing to ask about the use of data and commentary. I'm finding that there is either missing or contradictory information between the commentary and reversals. This is more prominent in the daily commentary and reversals however also present in the weekly commentary/reversals occasionally. For example, the current market commentary (Fri 5th April) for the DJIA currently lists daily and weekly reversals which are NOT showing in the reversals segment. There have also been recent occasions where a reversal was listed on the Reversals segment (was elected) then subsequently disappeared from the segment. 

----

Their reply was generic and was more or less "data is accurate, trade when time and price meet, data is getting synced"

----

On Sun, 7 Apr 2019 6:24:13 +0700 ""<XXX>  wrote ----
#original_sender {XXX}
From: XXX
Email: XXX

This (you didn't) doesn't answer my question... WHEN should we expect the data to be accurate across all segments?

In the interim I don't have any idea which set of data to trade with confidently. You don't seem to appreciate that unless the data points are consistent across all segments then there is a foundational issue with your system.

I would like to see forecasts made where the criteria is set in advance, OR live trades with entry and intended exit posted. If an Armstrong proponent does not wish to do so, that is fine. But no other method of proof will be acceptable, so if they wish to prove something, please use that method.

Debunked? Hardly... There is so much inconsistency across the multiple portals on the Socrates website. Indeed reversals would appear/disappear in the Reversals section, the textual commentary, and the main dashboard.

I had emailed Socrates support about this NUMEROUS times and they had no explanation nor could they suggest which one was correct. Which is exactly the reason why historical study of reversals is not adequate. Indicative perhaps. But for useful summary it has to be future tested... Which takes us back to the same point that's been asked consistency... Someone just needs to show the evidence!

You are going to fail.

I think I can say that because I provided the data in that spreadsheet.

But you are not going to fail because of that. You are going to fail because it is Armstrong's data.

And Armstrong's data is bad because he does not know what he is doing.

Martin Armstrong does not know what he is doing and that is why his trades are losing trades

And because Socrates suggests losing trades, that is why it is on the web making money by getting subscription money out of your pocket. THAT IS THE REAL TRADE AND IT IS A WINNING TRADE

I really laugh my head off how after so much intense reporting and in-depth analysis of this phenomenon some people still cannot resist.

Read this blog starting at page 273 to find out more about computerized fraud

See https://armstrongecmscam.blogspot.com for a more compact view of major findings posted in this blog

I am holding according to these rules:

Trading Rules:
Stop loss is set at the nearest opposite reversal, but only a closing basis for the selected timeunit

If elected reversal is less than 1%:
•   Sell on second timeunit closing if true
•   Sell on third timeunit closing if second is false and third is true
•   Sell on third timeunit closing if all three timeunits are false
•   Sell on first timeunit closing if true and the corresponding opening to closing is opposite the elected reversal (bearish for an elected bullish and
        bullish for an elected bearish reversal)

If elected reversal is less more than 1%:
•   If first timeunit is true, sell on second timeunit
•   If first timeunit is false and second is true, check if the first closing is above the reversal for bullish or below for bearish.  If so this is a "successful
        retest" of the reversal.  Sell on third timeunit (second after the "retest")
•   If all three timeunits are false, wait unit the closing is above the election of a reversal, a "successful closing", for the corresponding timeunit, (ex.
        Monthly closing for elected monthly reversals, weekly closing for weekly reversals, daily closing for elected daily closing) Sell two timeunits after
        the "successful closing"

For all elected reversals:
•   If the first timeunit is a doji candle but true, sell
•   If another reversal is elected on or before the "sell timeunit", then the time is reset for the previous elected reversal, add to position and follow the
        rules for the latest elected reversal for all positions.  This signal overpowers all other signals
•   If multiple successive reversals are elected and the closing of the first timeunit of the latest reversal is a doji candle that closes very close to the
        election closing, sell all positions (works for bullish to bullish, bearish to bearish, bullish to bearish, and bearish to bullish)

I hope the market shows a lot of volatility in the coming weeks. My multi hit price point system generated a buy signal  near the bottom of the second lowest candle of the day today. That last candle did end up giving a lot of drawdown though, more than I had expected, but it bounced nicely. The volume on that low candle was absolutely beautiful. And I missed the whole thing busy at work. Don't want to post too much on that- mods did take down a live trade due to it being unrelated- but the point is that support/resistance based on past price does work.

Olgray, options can generate greater returns, but your leverage may vary. We'll see how it goes. Alex, although the private blog posts do not give frequent updates, the posts are there since I think 2016. So that should provide ample material to work with and thus give a large number of calls to use. But again, I don't know if he changed any of the posts. The chart posted was retrospect so it cannot be used. Armstrong is not exempt from the same criteria as anyone else, so they need to be real time or in advance. If you look at some of my old posts, I'd given numbers in advance with clear criteria- if X hits price Y on the same 5 min candle as A hits on price B, then a reversal trade is generated. I actually did this several weeks in advance with a list of numbers to be used when I was on a trading forum- price actually his some on the same 5 min candle much later on. Armstrong has Reversal numbers where there are other numbers above and below. So his system should be able to do the same thing as far as forecasting price is concerned.

I would like to see forecasts made where the criteria is set in advance, OR live trades with entry and intended exit posted. If an Armstrong proponent does not wish to do so, that is fine. But no other method of proof will be acceptable, so if they wish to prove something, please use that method.

Are holding your short for three days now because you concluded that this should be the trading period?

Read this blog starting at page 273 to find out more about computerized fraud

See https://armstrongecmscam.blogspot.com for a more compact view of major findings posted in this blog