hi all is formula training teaching formula primer? if yes then great. pls reply thanks navneet

[size=24:5055eca98f]NAVNEET I THINK YOUR[/size:5055eca98f][size=28:5055eca98f] CAPS LOCK KEY [/size:5055eca98f][size=24:5055eca98f]IS STUCK ON PERMANENTLY AND THE OPEN IS NORMALLY NOT THE SAME AS THE PREVIOUS CLOSE.[/size:5055eca98f] #-o [size=28:5055eca98f]HEY... [/size:5055eca98f][size=25:5055eca98f]WHY [/size:5055eca98f][size=22:5055eca98f]IS [/size:5055eca98f][size=19:5055eca98f]IT [/size:5055eca98f][size=16:5055eca98f]SUDDENLY [/size:5055eca98f][size=13:5055eca98f]SO [/size:5055eca98f][size=11:5055eca98f]QUIET [/size:5055eca98f][size=9:5055eca98f]IN [/size:5055eca98f][size=7:5055eca98f] HERE[/size:5055eca98f][size=10:5055eca98f] ?[/size:5055eca98f] :eek: [size=9:5055eca98f]jose '-)[/size:5055eca98f]

hi mr jose i am sorry, i didn't knew about this thing that caps lock means yelling. also stockman sir u r formula has one more fault left the formula should have been divided by previous days close. so it should have been ((c-ref(c,-1))/(ref(c,-1)))*100 i think this is the right formula to get roc between two days exactly any mistakes then pls corect and inform me. thanks

hi again while readin formula primer i have found some mistakes there. earlier also i noticed one error and informed and now again i found one error. hope that i am correct this time too. the error is in formula number 16 and 17 of formula primer. the error is formula 16 :oops: If(RSI(14)>70 OR ROC(C,3,%[color=red:c7fb57d6da])<-5[/color],1,0) rather it should have been =D> If(RSI(14)>70 OR ROC(C,3,%[color=green:c7fb57d6da])>=5[/color],1,0) formula 17 also same sign problem with ref function. if i am wrong then pls keep me informed as i am new to formula writing and reading formula primer for first time and really enjoying to learn this very good and easy language of metastock. also i would like that whatever mistakes we are finding and they are really mistakes then they must be corrected and new formula primer must be made with errors removed. thanks and reagrds always navneet :D

Navneet, the convoluted puzzle that you have kindly presented us, reminds me of one of those Zen stories that have an impossible solution - they are designed to quieten the mind. :eek: Fortunately we happen to have a Zen specialist right here that may be able to help you. Mr Turtle, can you be of any assistance please? jose '-)

Somewhere in the stack of posts, Wabbit wrote a mini-intro into logic. You'd have to mine through his posts to find it. (true OR false) AND true true or false evaluates true. Then, (true) and true evaluates true (true OR (false AND false)) AND (true OR true) Complete the inner most parenthesis statements first. false and false evaluates false. Then you have (true OR false) AND (true OR true) left. true OR false evaluates true; and, true OR true evaluates true. Finally you have true AND true remaining. This is also true.

hi again while reading further i must appreciate and thanks to the person who made(formula primer) such a easy way to learn language of meta stock. but while studying i have found some errors in it, kindly correct me if i am wrong. error 1 if we have to found that closing price has fallen from previous close then i think roc must be negative, if i am right then formula 26 page 47 is not doing that. rather it is finding both ways whether up or down but our requirement was roc is negative. so here it is (ROC(C,1,$)>=1) it should have been (ROC(C,1,$)>=-1) error 2 formula 27 page 48 if i know then ref function uses data array and periods. but in formula 27 we forgot periods in mov average see that. (Ref(C,-1)< Ref(Mov(C,40,E))it should have been (Ref(C,-1)< Ref(Mov(C,40,E),-1)) forgive me and pls guide me to right path if i am wrong. thanks as always in advance Navneet singhal

Howzit Folks?

I appreciate this thread is very old but the Formula Primer hasn't been revised since 2002 so it's probably still relevant. I concur with HappySingh that it makes it very easy to learn the Metastock language, many thanks to the author. I also came to the same conclusion as HappySingh in Formula 27 error i,e, -1 missing in the Ref clause not erroneous Ref clause.

@StorkBite, shouldn't the Ref be included in the 1st Mov function so that yesterday's close is compared with yesterday's moving average not today's?

Please feel free to correct/educate me if I'm wrong, I'm still learning.

Any help appreciated.

cheers
aztrix

Hi Az, [:)]

See? MS forum has a magic power: you can ask a question and then reply to it to yourself 10 minutes later ... [:)][:D]

With regards to your request, here are a few thoughts:

Metastock formula primer (MFP) has not been updated since 2002 and is still not corrected at the present.

You must also know that many ideas could be encoded in several ways. 2 comes from 1+1, but it also comes from 3-1, 6:3 or 2x1. A code that is opaque to some folks, is clear to others.

MFP is more for learning and less for copying & pasting formulas in Metastock for real trading.
Just do some paper trading for 3-6 months with any new code in parallel to your actual trading with your previously well-understood concepts.

One has to play quite a bit with MFP & MS software to get the hang of programming.

To delay or completely avoid programming nightmares, just do Point & Figure, Kagi, Renko, 3-line Break or buy trustworthy ready-made mechanical trading system(s). Amateur private traders suffer from overdoing things or getting into study areas reserved for full-time money managers. Programming is just one of such BIG temptations.
Remember: you trade for profits, not for writing codes.

HappySingh's posts show that a beginner to programming sees mistakes which people calling themselves "pros" in these forums did not see.

If you lose money because of faulty code from cowboy programmers here in MS forum, what recourse do you have?
The solution is to set some money aside, and hire a professional firm or MS staff to write the code for you.

How do I know all this? I myself started a thread asking a question and got a zombie indicator (one that shows some numbers but in fact means other numbers) along with nasty attitudes.
A zombie indicator is worse than Zigzag which re-desings itself in the past.

When the programming bug bites you, as the non-programmer you are, just go quickly back to moving averages or you'll waste a lot of time for doubtful results. If you can't make profits using MAs, what demon in your head makes you believe that you will be rich using complicated formulas, secret methods, sophisticated software or advanced programming language?

Here is some food for thought: nobody makes any money in the markets simply because Mother Nature has not hardwired anybody to be a money magnet. The markets collect dollars from many speculators to give them all to a few chosen ones, based on mysterious criteria, but not based on your computer, charting software, indicators, broker, trading platform, Internet service provider, age, experience or on how handsome you are.
You do not trade the markets; you trade your beliefs about the markets (Van K. Tharp). You do not take profits out of the markets, you just get the profits from the markets.
If somebody had the real power to make money, why does he not take US$7.48M out of Microsoft stock this week, go on a long vacation and come back when he needs another lump sum of cash? [;)]

PS: by the way, I wonder how HappySingh is doing. Is he happy? [;)]

Hello Had, [:)]

Long time don't see ... [:D]

Yes, successful traders use their own system(s) which they developed with experienced programmers.
One does not have to learn programming. No multibillionaire money manager (50+ of them on Forbes list) does programming. They hire talent.

High profile traders make money in the markets, find time to write & sell books, do research, compile & sell trading systems, employ staff, participate in money shows, give interviews, appear on TV, keep a family going, play golf, sail when needed, etc. etc.

PS: one such maverick is Martin Pring, (www.pring.com) who is a money manager (http://pringturner.com), wrote several books including one which is recommended reading at industry exams, publishes his newsletter, authored Metastock add-on, gives seminars, private lessons, etc. He even used to be a Metastock reseller. What is important is the fact that he was THE FIRST ONE IN THE WORLD who came up with the book & CD format for newbies in 1997. http://www.pring.com/products/taecd.htm

See it at Amazon. com http://www.amazon.com/Martin-Prings-Introduction-Technical-Analysis/dp/0070329338/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1363531637&sr=1-1&keywords=introduction+to+technical+analysis

There are many more technical analysis stars and they are the guys you learnt from, directly or indirectly. If it weren't for them, today you would be taking the night shift at the s[censored] factory wondering when you would be getting a pay rise.

On the other hand, small traders, because of their small mind, hide at home thinking they are smart but in reality they are the broker's cannon fodder: they use small codes which they keep secret dear to their small heart, they own small computers, they use stolen or cheap, small software, they make small profits from small ideas, take small vacations where they rent small cars, live in small apartments or small houses with small patios and small jacuzzis, they are small account wasters, small fry, smallish everything. [:D]

Sorry, the truth hurts but it will build character.