Bitcoin Forum
October 16, 2019, 01:13:42 PM *
News: If you like a topic and you see an orange "bump" link, click it. More info.
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 ... 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 [279] 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Martin Armstrong Discussion  (Read 615360 times)
etoimene
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 56
Merit: 0


View Profile
June 19, 2019, 09:49:30 AM
 #5561

, if a bullish reversal is at 100 and we close at 100.05 then we have elected it.
.. not exactly 1 point ...



With currencies it often turns within a pip, so ...
With indexes, it is not so precise.

100% precision, forget it! Even he wrote that you have to know when you are wrong.

BTW, I feel very lonely here. Sad
1571231622
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1571231622

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1571231622
Reply with quote  #2

1571231622
Report to moderator
1571231622
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1571231622

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1571231622
Reply with quote  #2

1571231622
Report to moderator
1571231622
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1571231622

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1571231622
Reply with quote  #2

1571231622
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1571231622
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1571231622

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1571231622
Reply with quote  #2

1571231622
Report to moderator
1571231622
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1571231622

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1571231622
Reply with quote  #2

1571231622
Report to moderator
luckyplate
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 46
Merit: 0


View Profile
June 19, 2019, 11:51:06 AM
 #5562


We are supposed to discuss his private blogs .why do this website keep blabbering about those side topics that don't benefits anyone
??

Martin cannot be right all the time because he does not use the time factor    ..but he is right generally on the broad side .major reversal signal.  That should give traders an edge. Big trades are made only a few time a year. 



, if a bullish reversal is at 100 and we close at 100.05 then we have elected it.
.. not exactly 1 point ...



With currencies it often turns within a pip, so ...
With indexes, it is not so precise.

100% precision, forget it! Even he wrote that you have to know when you are wrong.

BTW, I feel very lonely here. Sad
bikefront
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 428
Merit: 21


View Profile
June 19, 2019, 01:19:06 PM
 #5563

Quote from that article: A computer will not be able to learn all scenarios if the data does not cover all scenarios. Plain and simple. Just ask – SHOW ME THE DATA and WHERE DID YOU GET IT?

Hmm, I'd like to ask him the same thing.

For the Superposition Reversals, I think it'd be best to take it as the system making a loss from the initial trade and avoiding taking another trade until after another directional Reversal is elected. As having multiple is ambiguous.

And luckyplate, this is for Armstrong discussion, not necessarily just his private blogs...or it would have been titled as such. And also no, his long term forecasts have been failures too, as we have demonstrated here.
AnonymousCoder
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 140
Merit: 2


View Profile
June 19, 2019, 01:57:26 PM
Last edit: July 02, 2019, 07:00:40 AM by AnonymousCoder
Merited by vapourminer (1)
 #5564

Quote from that article: A computer will not be able to learn all scenarios if the data does not cover all scenarios. Plain and simple. Just ask – SHOW ME THE DATA and WHERE DID YOU GET IT?
...

I have done a fair bit of neural network and evolutionary programming to predict time series and to optimize trading strategies. Stuff that far exceeds in complexity what Martin Armstrong is doing with his disaster code.

True, if you had all the data in all dimensions, a few supercomputers and hordes of programmers and analysts, you would be able to make some predictions with that. But in comparison with the pattern matching machinery in a single human brain, it would still be lacking. The human pattern matching ability is absolutely unmatched in quality. Just try. Look at thousands of charts and keep trading - you will get better and better. If you are still getting frustrated, and you will, guaranteed, then there are reasons for that: Mainly unpredictability and greed. It is as simple as that. There are events that come out of the blue, market manipulation, insider trading, just market participants trying to out-smart each other. That's the game, and it is unpredictable, random to a large extent. It is similar to getting sea-sick in a ship.

Martin Armstrong keeps telling his audience in his blogs that only his computer can manage the complexity. I do not believe it. First we know it can't be true based on the experience that has been documented here in this great blog. I have demonstrated here that Socrates is dumb. It does not even try to consolidate multiple conflicting signals. Second, we can't believe Martin's statements because he has a clear motive to sell his computer- based Socrates junk, the reports and the conferences. Third, and most importantly, all his models look only at a single time series, the market under study. The future price movement is just not hidden in the past price history as he wants us to believe. It does not matter how far back that time series goes - we know that it does not work.

And now I am going full circle. If the future price movement was in fact predictable from past price movement, then with the human pattern matching ability available to thousands if not millions, this would have been discovered long ago.

And then what? Everybody wins with that knowledge? Question: Who takes the other side of the trade?

Read this blog starting at page 273 to find out more about computerized fraud
etoimene
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 56
Merit: 0


View Profile
June 19, 2019, 02:57:16 PM
 #5565

if the data does not cover all scenarios.
AI and machine learning doesn't have all possible data, but identifies the patterns in old to recognize new.

For the Superposition Reversals,

These are rare. Stop loss is enough to handle this, I think.
etoimene
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 56
Merit: 0


View Profile
June 19, 2019, 03:06:30 PM
 #5566


It does not even try to consolidate multiple conflicting signals.

True. Socrates is not a trading system. It does not provide buy/sell signals.

Some trading strategies are provided on AE site/blog but I think it is not even near

And then what? Everybody wins with that knowledge? Question: Who takes the other side of the trade?

Obviously, you are not using it, so it's not everybody. He wrote there will always be enough skeptics.

BTW, I did try a few trades with currencies which bounced precisely of reversal without using any arrays and that seems to work good. Trick is to be patient and wait for bounce (look for pin bar or similar pattern). Very low risk trades. Profit was 5-10 times the risk, so I am fine with that.
AnonymousCoder
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 140
Merit: 2


View Profile
June 19, 2019, 04:47:25 PM
Last edit: July 02, 2019, 07:00:56 AM by AnonymousCoder
 #5567

...
Socrates is not a trading system. It does not provide buy/sell signals.

Give me a break. Sounds like Martin Armstrong's support person. True Armstrong style.

Here we go:

Last sentence in a Socrates report:

We have generated a sell signal, so some caution is required.

So either this is a sell signal, or if it is not then it is garbage.


Read this blog starting at page 273 to find out more about computerized fraud
bikefront
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 428
Merit: 21


View Profile
June 19, 2019, 05:35:43 PM
 #5568

Armstrong/StrikeEagle also said that Reversal elections are buy/sell signals, so it does provide buy/sells. Let us not forget the arrays that predict highs or lows.

I've also noticed those mass of conflicting signals. If it isn't something that is meant to be used to trade, then it should not even be in there. Additionally, one can't then claim credit for it if it was never meant to be used that way, something Armstrong loves to do.

I do agree with Armstrong that the past can accurately be used to predict future price movement- but analyzing the past is complex and has so many variations that there will always be bulls and bears. Give an image to 1000 people to draw and you'll get 1000 different images back. But this is just technical analysis. Most of the market movement appears random and we cannot predict in in any case- but for me, I only try to catch the eye of the storm- certain points in the market that if they follow a particular scenario, I'll be able to make sense of that portion for a few moments in time.
DanB1
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 56
Merit: 0


View Profile
June 19, 2019, 06:19:02 PM
Last edit: June 19, 2019, 06:31:34 PM by DanB1
 #5569

Would be interesting to see what gold does at 1362.
MA has been yelling for a long time that that is an important monthly bullish.

Gold is now trading at ~1354

MA_talk
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 189
Merit: 10


View Profile
June 19, 2019, 06:34:51 PM
Last edit: June 19, 2019, 06:56:14 PM by MA_talk
 #5570

Socrates and AI (Artificial Intelligence)

Martin Armstrong mentioned in his public blog numerous times, that his computer uses AI.

However, when someone reported to him another trading method actually using AI (neural networks), he dismisses the concept, saying he tried it unsuccessfully.

https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/armstrongeconomics101/ai-computers/true-ai-and-fake-neural-net-forecasting-programs/

So is he the father of a new otherwise unknown AI concept (true AI) far too complex for other people to understand?


I'm familiar with neural nets, and what he said in that post actually showed his inability of using it.  If anything, it is his Socrates that is rudimentary.  You need huge farm of GPU to do neural nets on financial markets, and he most likely has no understanding.  He also said that GMW had
Quote
The GMW has now exceeded 150,000 possible patterns each day and counting.

As I have said in previous posts, having 150000 "possible" patterns (and counting) is TOTALLY LUDICROUS.  NOT even a single pattern he can trade off that to make a profit, when you don't even have some probability distribution that shows any profitable opportunities.  I believe his "pattern recognition" is probably something like forming patterns of up/dn/up/dn (or adding percentage), along with different timeframe on daily/weekly/monthly.  That's like forming rubbish English sentences with A-Z, and call them as patterns (without any probability forecasting ability).

And Armstrong said at the end, "Show me the data".  Well, when trulycoined questioned him during WEC on the data accuracy and source, what did he respond???

Armstrong is a person with double-standard.


MA_talk
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 189
Merit: 10


View Profile
June 19, 2019, 06:55:41 PM
 #5571

On the talk about how rich MA is, it turns out he LOST his appeal over the forfeiture of his personal assets back in April of this year. If he did acquire those assets legitimately, then I do feel for him.

Those assets, mainly ancient coins by the sounds of it, were valued at US$80m:
https://www.law.com/newyorklawjournal/2019/04/23/ex-trader-armstrong-loses-appeal-over-personal-property-liquidation/

Curiously, those assets may have been worth a lot more than that, since US$80m was the precise amount of his restitution that was ordered back in 2007:
https://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/11/business/worldbusiness/11iht-contempt.1.5226724.html


So he clearly does have a lot of wealth, and who knows how much more was hidden away?

Related to that restitution order, Armstrong was also banned from "trading, applying for registration, engaging in any activity requiring registration or acting as a principal of any registered entity or person". That ties into my theory about him now tapping up the retail market with reports and conferences. He might be banned for life offering financial consulting services to institutional investors. That might also explain the cultist hype and clever ambiguity of his ECM - there isn't anyone in authority or with experience to question it.
https://www.hedgeweek.com/2009/08/25/martin-armstrong-and-two-firms-pay-usd27m-anti-fraud-action

Also found this as an interesting read into what MA was up to back in 1999. There is a detailed description that I have not come across:
https://www.businessinsurance.com/article/20040523/STORY/100014712?template=printart&template=printart

I still theorise he made some terrible gambles with the tobashi scheme his was running, in the hope those gambles would come good. He then walks off a billionaire, and the investors get their money back. Instead, when it all started going wrong, he then fell into gambler's fallacy and started making bigger and bigger losses. Maybe those losses would have eventually turned good, but it was too late. His brokerage bank found out about the losses/fraud as part of their due diligence before being sold to HSBC. Were it not for that perhaps MA really would be the world's richest man. As he always reminds his readers, it is just a matter of timing.

The following of my opinions assume that the government version of Armstrong story is correct:

Based on SEC lawsuit, Armstrong ran a Ponzi scheme, and incurred huge losses to their investors.  Why would Armstrong blamed on the traders who executed the trades for him?  That in a way already admitted that there were ACTUAL LOSSES.

Armstrong obviously set the management fee on the phantom gain of client's portfolio.  When you do that, you can obviously be very wealthy, since you're just stealing from clients.  And so ANY assets acquired (or not) should be used to repay the investors.  80 million is most likely not sufficient to repay the investors.

He is obviously BANNED in the institutional services.  But no laws against anybody who publish their opinions about stock market, since it is protected by the first amendment.  The only huge problem that I have is that Armstrong is just NOT HONEST (like many other stock newsletter writers, except that he is the best liar).  In all likelihood, his "AI" spits out unusable rubbish, but he call his system "legendary".

For certain, he stashed away something.  He was selling his Roman coins on his own website.  No one would know how much more, but as far as I could understand from reading all the legal docs, that is the part of his contempt of the court, unwilling to produce the assets for the court.
etoimene
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 56
Merit: 0


View Profile
June 19, 2019, 09:47:55 PM
 #5572



Give me a break. Sounds like Martin Armstrong's support person. True Armstrong style.



Wish I was. I would probably be able to find someone to clear the fog around arrays for me.

You did choose nicely what suits you and gave reference to the reversal system (which I referenced as trading strategies).
Socrates manual says you should combine the info, but not exactly how.
That's why I think it is not a system. System should be clearly defined, and Socrates use definitely isn't.

I just realized this.
Check clause 14. of https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/about/terms-and-conditions-of-use/ !
Have you ever thought that giving clear buy/sell signals - investment advice would jeopardize the company. It is probably not licensed for such purpose.
I don't know all the details in the USA, but I definitely would not want to go through this compliance pain in my country.


How about commenting the other part of my post?

MA_talk
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 189
Merit: 10


View Profile
June 19, 2019, 09:52:25 PM
Merited by vapourminer (1)
 #5573


We are supposed to discuss his private blogs .why do this website keep blabbering about those side topics that don't benefits anyone
??

Martin cannot be right all the time because he does not use the time factor    ..but he is right generally on the broad side .major reversal signal.  That should give traders an edge. Big trades are made only a few time a year. 


Since the latest post from ArmstrongEconomics.com is on Wolrd War 3 (Again), and he happened to put out a Cycle of War report which I got from my friend in 2013/2014, let us review his long-term forecast record:

https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/world-news/war/world-war-iii-2024-2027/

I'm taking just snippets from his report from 2013.  Most of the timeframe covered has already expired, and so there is no longer any viable value in whatever I put out here:

First and foremost, Armstrong said that the wavelength for the cycle of war is about 25 years.  This is available on his public blog, where he shows 25 years between WWI (1914), WWII (1939), Tonkin Guilt (1964), China Tienanmen event (1989).  From the last event, he added 25, and he got to 2014.

And then, giving himself quite some leeway, he said that the intensity of war/civil unrest will pick up from year 1 (2014) to year 6 (2019), peaking at the final two years.  That covers 6 years out of 25 years of the cycle length of war.  I could kind of understand his year 1 to year 6, since he kind of mimic the timeline from past WW, which is kind of over by then.  Below is the quote from his report:

Quote
As the economy declines in Europe, we will see this anti-foreigner atmosphere spread among Eurozone members against other members.  The year 2016 should be the start of a nasty economic decline.
....
We could see things get real bad during the 2016-2020 economic decline as capital flees public
sectors and we face serious local defaults on debts both in Europe and the United States.
The peak of the next 8.6 Year Wave on the ECM is lining up with the possible 26 year low in
the Euro where we could see also the high in gold.

The above boldface is mine.  So where is the NASTY economic decline, when we are in year 2019?

This year is supposedly the final year in the highest intensity for Armstrong's war cycle.  Just tell me how it feels from 2014 to 2019 in terms of civil unrest & war?

But amazingly, charlatan Martin Armstrong continues on his War Cycle in the latest post:
Quote
The War Cycle is turning up and we are looking at a possible peak "as early as" 2027. This is why I have been concerned about the economic crisis in 2021-2022. Once the economy turns down, it will be the fuel for the war.

We must also respect that this particular cycle is the combination of both civil and international unrest.

So let's analyze a little bit.
1. He said "as early as" 2027.  That means if in 2027 nothing happens, he is not wrong.  He doesn't say how late it will be, but we all know that war cycle length is 25 years, which is basically from 2014 to 2039 for a full cycle.  SUPPOSEDLY based on his War report, the most intense year is 2019, starting from 2014.  WOW, I mean, that is quite OFF, especially for a cycle length of just 25 years.  Why is he changing to 2027?  He thinks nobody remembers?

2. Then he repeats about "THE economic crisis".  But he SAID the economic decline was from 2016.  Now it's 2019, and stocks are near all-time high.  Euro didn't collapse.  But he again push the time-frame further into future to 2021-2022.  Did you know that if you repeat the same thing over and over again, you will eventually get it right?  But TIMING is the key to profitable trades.

3. At last, he tries to cover more ground by mentioning that it's both civil and international unrest.

The War Cycle report was 72 pages long, with 0.5 page of incorrect "forecast", and 71.5 pages of past history.  That low percentage is always true for all of Armstrong's pricey "historical" reports.


In any case, apparently, Armstrong does NOT understand what it means by CYCLE.  A cycle has a HIGH and a LOW.  Once the cycle completes, if it started at the HIGH, it goes back to HIGH.  That's a completed CYCLE.  Since his war cycle is 25 years, and he pins it at 1914/1939/1964/1989/2014, by the time that you are HALF-WAY through the cycle, the war intensity should be at the LOW side.  Assuming the the LOW happens exactly at mid-way, that will be 2026.5.

But charlatan Armstrong is saying that 2027 as the peak, when in his War Cycle Report, he clearly stated that it's from 2014 to 2019, peaking at the 6th year.

HOW CAN the war cycle low becomes the HIGH intensity?Huh

Oh, that is just another cycle inversion that he forgot to mention, I tell you.  Anytime that Armstrong is WRONG, he always has a term for it.  Don't worry.  That is his "great" forecasting record.
psp777
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 73
Merit: 5


View Profile
June 20, 2019, 01:07:25 AM
 #5574

Well, GOLD is making new highs today above the monthly reversal number. The most recent blog post hinted at another pullback, but did say it could go up (both sides covered) Remember the mid 1360s is a monthly close number so you can sit on your hands and miss a breakout or jump in with a stop under the reversal.

My TA shows negative divergence with the RSI and MACD ...so is this a fall move? Bull trap?

However, there is a nice inverse correlation between Gold and USDJPY. JPY is breaking down so this may indicate that gold has lots of room to move up.
bleachberu
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 9
Merit: 0


View Profile
June 20, 2019, 01:12:57 AM
 #5575

Would be interesting to see what gold does at 1362.
MA has been yelling for a long time that that is an important monthly bullish.

Gold is now trading at ~1354



Gold broke the magic $1,362....now $1,383...Asian hours.
psp777
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 73
Merit: 5


View Profile
June 20, 2019, 01:15:18 AM
 #5576

Would be interesting to see what gold does at 1362.
MA has been yelling for a long time that that is an important monthly bullish.

Gold is now trading at ~1354



Gold broke the magic $1,362....now $1,383...Asian hours.

Yes so the weekly number is 1365 and the monthly is 1362.50. Armstrong said he was preparing the Gold report ...may have missed this one unless we give a sell off this week based on the divergence in a few indicators.
psp777
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 73
Merit: 5


View Profile
June 20, 2019, 01:18:56 AM
 #5577

Boom

bikefront
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 428
Merit: 21


View Profile
June 20, 2019, 01:19:35 AM
 #5578

Armstrong's calls do not have objective basis. As per the scientific method, they need to be falsifiable. But he will not tell you where he will be  wrong except on the rare occasion...and he ends up being wrong when he does (Dow 25100). Add subjectivity to nonmarket calls (peak in government, turning point in confidence, etc) that are not falsifiable, then those calls are useless. If it is not falsifiable, then his calls should not even be allowed anywhere near the 'is it true or not?' debate table and actually should not even be discussed. They need to pass the first gate first. I ask again, is there anyone out there willing to post live trades to demonstrate consistently that Armstrong's calls are the real deal? This silence has been going on for a long time. The closest we got was when someone entered a short based on a Bearish Reversal but we did not get any numbers, only that it had been elected. Nothing more.
AnonymousCoder
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 140
Merit: 2


View Profile
June 20, 2019, 01:22:15 AM
Last edit: July 02, 2019, 07:01:18 AM by AnonymousCoder
 #5579

...
But he again pushed the time-frame further into future to 2021-2022.  Did you know that if you repeat the same thing over and over again, you will eventually get it right?  But TIMING is the key to profitable trades.

Thanks.

And here is how to profit: Crude oil price predictions based on his war model:

https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/uncategorized/crude-oil-the-future/


Crude Oil & The Future
Posted Jul 9, 2014 by Martin Armstrong
Nevertheless, oil peaked intraday in 2009 but the highest yearly close came in 2011. It is poised to rally into 2017 and it appears this is lining up with our war models.


Crude oil was at around USD 100 in 2014 when he wrote this and it declined to USD 30 from there.

Armstrong is a Crackpot


Read this blog starting at page 273 to find out more about computerized fraud
psp777
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 73
Merit: 5


View Profile
June 20, 2019, 02:16:17 AM
 #5580

Okay case closed on Armstrong LOL.

I cancelled services last week actually. More confusing than anything...not helpful with trading unfortunately. It was like being married to a bad trade. Hoping and wanting Socrates to work, but I didn't.  Nothing should be that difficult to understand with "what ifs" and "inversions" and whatever...Anyways thanks to this board I can now save $200+ USD a month to invest in other methods. There are more trader mined cyclical analysts and highly effective services out there. Some will argue to not trade other's systems...well, what was everyone goal with Socrates?



 
Pages: « 1 ... 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 [279] 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!