![]() |
Chrome
What's the US liquidity like these days? Last time I looked it was pretty poor - similar to the NZ markets. Can you make a decent buck there? |
Quote:
Isn't this why we use a confidence intervals. The larger the sample the less the interval (+/-) |
Quote:
Liquidity is fine except for the outsiders, or those outside the top few prices. |
Quote:
Not too sure about any of that Vortech, never really looked at it - personally I don't proceed with any method/system until I have a substantial result set that passes a chi-test & plots a positive bell curve. |
Do you have an example of how the chi-test works?
|
Quote:
Here ... http://www.propun.com.au/racing_for...74&postcount=30 |
Using my test sample
You have 30 winners from 50 selections 30 winners, 20 losers. Avg Dividend $4.00 Expected number of winners is 1/4 = 0.25 Normalise the market to from 115% is 0.25/1.15 = 0.21739 50 Selections so multiply by 0.21739 to get the expected winners Gives 10.87 winners expected Expected losers is 50 - 10.87 = 39.13 Observed winners = 30 A1 Observed losers = 20 B1 Expected winners = 10.87 A2 Expected losers = 39.13 B2 Put this into excel as CHITEST =CHITEST(A1:B1,A2:B2) on get something like 0.0000005% Are these the chances of the system continuing? :) I'm very interested in hearing others thoughts Even making the Avg Dividend like $3.00 more realistic is still giving a very very low % |
Quote:
No it's the chance that the observed results where not due to luck. Frankly though you don't need a Chi-Test to tell you that 60% winners at ave div of $4.00 isn't due to luck ;) |
So what is a punter trying to achieve from these results. More confidence in a system long term with a higher % from the Chi-Test?
|
More confidence with a low %. The lower the % the less chance the results were due to luck.
|
All times are GMT +10. The time now is 08:03 PM. |
Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.0.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.