4x,
I'm focusing on trading and developing my systems, so the "
discretionary vs. objective trading" flamewars are no longer in the center of my interest
"Objective" means repeatable based on the same input data.
Objective trading works for me and that's a sufficient reason for me to employ it. Indeed, I gain nothing by urging anyone to use this or that particular style of trading. Everyone should decide on his or her particular style of trading by himself.
Just a brief reaction to your post:
>It's like playing a guitar, but with one hand programming on a computer to
> tell a robot how to finger the chords.
Not at all! It's beneficial for the guitar player to be emotional. But for a trader, it's
disastrous.
> I would also like to know why hunches should not be a basis for trading,
> yet hunches are a viable basis for the strategy that is to be programmed
> into a robot.
It's clear why: at the beginning of every new discovery or invention, there is a
human with a bit of luck, a bit of hunches and lots of work. The nuclear power plant is
not built upon hunches - there's a lot of work, testing, calculating and so on before one is engineered and built, even if it's clear that at the very beginning, there was only an idea - a hunch, if you please - that the atomic nucleus might be the source of energy. It's the same with trading systems.
Michal