RandyCandles - Information - page 55
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
Does anyone have the chat room details for this method ? Thanks..
Dont Go
Radatats & SummitFX - dont give in to one negative idiot. We have to let positive energy triumph over negative energy - otherwise the world ends up in a mess (!?).
You have both contributed to our learning on this thread, perhaps more than any other I have seen.
Please stay - you are appreciated. As for the multicollinearity fool - you know where you can go!
I agree that it would be sad to see Summit and Rads walk away. But what they left in this thread is SOLID. No matter how you trade (big moves or 10-15 pips) there is enough info in this thread to become a success. It has been pointed out several times here that it's up to the individual. We have been spoon fed a method (for free) that kicks any guru, 5k systems ass. I for one am grateful for that. Thanks Guys!
Chris
Make a Ea. that would be great. And add some other indicators and stuff and will be good.
Ego
I have read this thread over and over again. I know both systems that are being worked..the original randycandles and Radatats method...I personaly believe that they are both great if you choose one and stick to it. Or perhaps combine the 2 together to come up with what ever makes you happy.
Summitfx and Rad....sorry for saying this but you guys chose to post here, not the newbies like me who come along and asked questions and tried to make some sense of YOUR systems. Now you guys are running off to go and tell mommy that kids are messing with your bat and ball. What gives?
Do post..... don't post....Personally I think your egos are getting the better of you. You both will always be better traders than me or others that come along to post and ask the same old stupid questions. Summitfx you pointed out that my confidence was low and thats why I would not do well until I gained confidence..did I run and hide and basically go tell you to F@#* off..no....I took it as constructive and I respected you for that...
This bull shit about not posting any more is just plain old crap ass ego ....
So I hope you do stay around both of you, but if you decide not to, then I wish you both well and I thank you for teaching me a great deal...and even though I am one of those who use the original method, I have and do look at rad's method and I have and still do learn from it.
Many thanks guys and I hope to see you around some day.
Regards,
Vegas
Damn I've only just found you guys
Rads SummitFX
I'm a lurker more than a poster as this is a new game to me. Having only recently discovered this thread, having seen GE's earlier posts, I was so pleased that the idea had been revived and there had been so much positive imput and such a successful system put together.
I would love to learn from you guys as I am sure many others would and it would be great if you would re-consider.
If not, thank you very much for everything you've done as I know you will certainly make a huge difference to my trading. (95 pips positive as I type(demo)). I would also like to thank ITGuy for his great explanation and indicators.
Gavin
i watched this one but didn't get in cause i was eating sausage. can it really be this easy?
about 50pts in 10 min. everythings live btw
Rads & Summit...
Hey guys, don't go anywhere. You've both contributed greatly to this thread and I appreciate both of you. Summit, I think you've misread me entirely based solely on the Steinitz thread and your distaste of that method. So, please don't judge me based solely on my desire to fully KNOW what's going on with that or any other method before I make my decision. I'm not here to defend or support Steinitz...the jury's still out for me and it has NOTHING to do with RC...
But I AM a follower and DOER of God's Word, and in King Solomon's Proverbs Chapter 18, verse 13 it wisely says:
"He that answereth a matter before he heareth it, it is folly and shame unto him."
Just understand that not everyone evaluates things in the same manner or timeframe as you do...we're all just here to learn how to prosper. I'm glad to see your chart posts and to know of your work routine. Thank you for your contributions here.
Rads, I took a good look at your system last night because I feel like I finally have a good handle on the actual RC's now. I didn't trade at all...I just watched. What I see is GREAT! Very nice confluence of indicators, easy to spot entries and nicely interwoven with RC, although I think your candles are a bit different? Either way, I like what I see and at this point, I'm not so sure you need to start a new thread yet. Just my opinion... I like the RC candles used in combination with your indys, it gives an added TRUE (non-multicollinear) third indication of the direction of price movement and THAT is what we need!!
Now, in reference to my prior comments regarding an indicator in the VOLUME category....do you think that might be a good area for added UMPH for your system? I think so, but I'm not an expert on indys....just a collector junkie (lol @ ITGUY).
I'm going to post a couple of screen shots of what I saw last night and some questions regarding the text of your rules.
70-100 pips easy....Notice how the green stochs stay buried in O/S territory, keeping you in the trade, but the red/blue pullbacks provide additional entries...NICE!
Roller Coaster.....ride the waves baby!! 40 pips UP....40 pips DOWN...yeee haawww!
If this is Multicollinearity....BRING IT! (but its really TRUE CONFLUENCE..not multicollinearity!)
And Finally....the current E/J move UP...
Rads, just to clarify something in my mind....line #4 of your rules says that if Osc is below zero, go short, if it's above zero, go long. But I see lots of nice moves where the Osc is peaking out above zero and its time to go SHORT, not LONG and vice versa. Is this where rule #5 kicks in and you drill down to the M1 and repeat the eval process?
Thanks again for sharing your system and excellent indys... If you do start another thread, I'll be following that for sure. I'll still have the RC's on my charts, but with RC's alone, I think we've gone about as far as we can go and I challenge anyone to find a better set of add-on's to the RC system than yours...
So is anyone here using the original Randy Candles other than me? I have looked at all the other improvements and honestly don't see any advantage at all to adding them to the original system. All they seem to be doing is adding a good case of multicollinearity to the system. It seems to me all the info and feedback you need is provided with HA candles, bars, and MA's.
The MA's show the trend along with the HA candles/wicks. The HA candles/wicks also show the momentum or lack there of (so do the MA line arguments). These do a damn good job of showing both and I dont see that additional indicators are providing any NEW useful info.
Multicollinearity - StockCharts.com
What we need to work on is solid exit rules and money mgt/trade mgt rules such as splitting the trade into 2 lots and TP lot 1 at 10 pips and move the other lot to BE and let it ride until we get a clear exit signal OR things like qualifying our inital trade entry by putting a limit order for entry say 5-10 pips below current market (if going long) to catch those extra pips that would have been heat as profit.
Anyway, I'm not attacking anyone, being a smartass, etc., just throwing my personal opinion out there to try to keep Randy's original system going and improve it instead muddle it up with additional pretty colors and flashing lightsHi Tracej,
The article you reference brings up a *potentially* valid issue. I've always been trained to look for CONFLUENCE amongst indicators when deciding whether to take a trade. In looking back, I can see that I have fallen prey to the trap of multicollinearity, a term I had never heard until reading your article, so THANK YOU!
Now, on the other hand, I feel your point would carry much more weight if you had actually looked more closely at the selection of indy's in Rad's system in light of the very article you've quoted. According to the article, multicollinearity comes from using a combination of indicators derived from redundant data sources, but presented in different graphical formats, providing no real usable correlative information. The article groups several indicators together into three main categories, Momentum, Volume, or Trend.
Although I'm not totally sure what "S"-MACD stands for (perhaps Rad's or someone will further enlighten me?), but I'm fairly safe in assuming it is a derivation of Moving Average Convergence/Divergence. That would place it in the TREND category. The other indy Rad's system uses is Stochastics which falls into the Momentum area. There is some redundancy with the further use of MA lines, but I can argue that a little redundancy is not always a bad thing...especially in large data centers where redundant servers and power backup supplies are employed.
Now, if we combine those two different, non-collinear data source indys (SMACD & STOCHS) with pure RC Candle price action, then we've got a winning combo that is NOT entirely redundant, and thus not multicollinear.
When I first started reading this thread, I too wanted to focus only on the RandyCandles, and rightly so. It is difficult, if not improper, to begin adding other facets until you first get a good handle on the main reason you came here to begin with. The moment when "the light comes on" varies from person to person and newbies should not be belittled for having a longer learning curve, as I've seen done in this and other threads, but that's an entirely different subject. I've had some time to look closely at RC's and they are not difficult in general to understand and spot. There's some uncertainty amongst those active in the thread about the names Golden Equity applied to which candle patterns, but that is pretty much superficial.
Having said all that, your article does bring up a potential area of improvement for Rad's system. I studied his system closely last night and will be doing so more again today. With multicollinearity in mind, I noticed that his system does not apparently include any indicators from the VOLUME category. I wonder if perhaps he might consider adding one from that section to see if it would be of benefit.
Finally, thank you again for bringing up the issue, but I don't think your argument is valid in this particular case.