Apr

2

Quarters Down More Than 10%, from Russ Sears

April 2, 2008 |

16 Comments so far

1. steve leslie on April 2, 2008 11:23 pm

   I would like to add a little historical perspective. The market peaked in March of 2000 corrected and then made a rally that failed in fall of 2000. From there it fell like a Led Zeppelin. 2002 was just a brutal year. So discouraging and depressing because all it did was go down. It finally hit its nadir in October of 2002 made a relief rally and sucessfully retested the low in spring of 2003. Then it was off to the races from nearly a double from spring of 2003 to fall of 2007.

   Thus when looking at the 7/02 number to 10/02 realize that this was a complete capitulation. So although the quarter after the quarter ended July was bad, this was the end of the end.

   What is also interesting to look at is the federal funds rate and that the Federal Reserve lowered rates after 9/11 to a ridiculous level of 1.25% or so over a period of a few years. Where are we today? Not too far from those numbers.

   Just one more point. There were 80 calender quarters but it might be helpful to look at rolling quarters to see how this thesis holds up against a larger set of data.

   Faithfully submitted,

   sl.

2. Lon Evans on April 3, 2008 2:49 am

   Russ,

   I’ll be gentle this time, and mainly because I wish to learn. I don’t embrace this counting thing. It is always so beautiful in hind site, but how often does it pay off in the heat of the battle?

   Imagine the runner, who has been assured that his opponent has no kick. In the last 180, suddenly the SOB is channeling Carl Lewis. Does our hero go back to the ‘numbers?’ Or does he reach down deep, suck up the pain, and sacrifice a bit of his heart?

   We both, being competitors, know the answer. Are markets really that different from the track or the road?

   Look for me at the Master’s National Meet in August. I’ll be taking on John Hinton in the 1500. It will be an interesting race.

   Best,

   lon

3. Russell Sears on April 3, 2008 5:02 pm

   Lon,
   I wish you well in August. Especially if I goaded you into racing again.

   Have you verified that John Hinton is going to be there? If so I suspect the 1500 over 45 will be much faster than it has in recent years, at least from the times he was running as a new master (over 40).

   http://www.athlinks.com/search.aspx?search=Athlete&term=John%20Hinton
   Several of these obviously aren’t the John Hinton you are talking about, but serveral are, based on times.
   I have always tried to find out what my competitors numbers were like, with splits if possible and ask around. But this has never intimidated me, rather inspired me.

   Further, given my numbers, I developed a stratgy that is flexible to respond to the race and conditions. Knowing their weaknesses as well as their strength can only increase your realistic expectation. Of course they can surprise you, but I would much rather be the one surprising them.

   Perhaps you have more talent than me, because I’ve always had to stretch myself and look for any edge I could. Your lack of recent numbers, however, suggest to me you better have a good plan to overcome his more recent expierence.

   If nothing else, counting gives you a disciplined plan to train, realistic goals, and allows you to give yourself a realistic post mortuem of your results. As my coach always said, “have a plan, stick to the plan, believe in the plan let me adjust the plan.” Beats shooting in the dark and bs’ing and excuse making after the fact. I’d say this is why I often outperformed many that obviously had more natural talent than me.

4. Russell Sears on April 3, 2008 5:51 pm

   Steve,
   Nothing significant if you use overlapping quarters.
   The average does not change much, if you use overlapping quarters, it is 5.4% the successes does go down a little (success >0) to 71% (10 of 14). But this goes up to 13 of 17 if you count the dismal 4th quarter crash of 87.
   There are no others for several years beyond 87.
   April needs to bet 1378.55 to be positive for prior quarter ending Jan 08 next quarter starting Feb. ending April to be positive.

5. Lon Evans on April 4, 2008 2:41 am

   Russ,

   No, I’ve no idea that Hinton will show. But the man has rarely failed to do so. He is awesome.

   I begin to understand what this site calls counting. I’ve done, what I believe to be the same, all my competitive life. Mr. Hinton, recently, took the American mile record (45 and over) at 4:18 and change. One hell of a challenge.

   Yes Russ, your challenge demanded that I cease to find comfort in being ‘a big fish in the small pond.’ Now I’m invested, training hard, and loving every minute. Thank you.

   As I opined, it will be an interesting race. Hinton possesses more speed than do I. I work for strength, and hope to hurt him in the initial three laps. If I can do so, I just might take him, but he is awesome and has my total respect.

   I appreciate your reply.

   lon

6. Russell Sears on April 4, 2008 11:37 am

   Lon,

   I was hoping you were going to say you had the better kick, but he had the strength. His longer distance numbers look very solid to me.
   I don’t see an obvious weakness. But if you think your best chance is in your strength versus his. I would suggest that you start the kick early, after trying to control his pace the first couple of laps.
   It has been my experience that the best always have the fifth gear, even after an exhausting 3 laps. But the mile was not my race. A hard 3 always hurt my kick more than it did my competitors, even though the longer race implied I had more endurance.
   But this is the kind conventional wisdom that turns out to be hokum (at least for me), counting your own stats reveal. Of course this also applies to trading.

   But on the plus side, your strategy probably would give you your best time if executed perfectly. Yet, I predict he would set a 1500 record, an beat you by 5-6 seconds, which still would be a great race.

7. jim on April 4, 2008 1:50 pm

   Lon:

   Run! Forrest, Run!

8. Lon Evans on April 5, 2008 3:05 am

   Russ,

   No, if I have my way there will be no kick. It will end in a desperate slog. I plan to take the man through the 1200 at a pace he hasn’t touched since a few years past. Will I survive the final 300? I don’t know, but it will be a hell of a race. If either, or, better yet, both of us is available for the finish, we’re looking at a possible record. If not, then it will have been a good day to die.

   My personal opinion is that it will be won by the last man standing. It will be one hell of a race as I’ve nothing to lose and neither does he.

   I’m a fan, no, an acolyte, of Lydiard. So you most likely understand my approach in preparing for this contest.

   Hinton is the best opponent I could imagine. Bring on the best.

   lon

9. Anonymous on April 5, 2008 4:55 am

   Russ,

   Just one more thought, and this pertains to counting. How is it that you come up with a failure of 5 to 6 seconds, ‘giving me my best time?’

   I won’t discount your evaluation. If I fail during the final 300, yes, a 5 to 6 second gap is not only feasible, but probable. What I find curious is the tendency, and I noted this in the declarations of the Chair, himself, for those addicted to the count to demand a result without having access to all the information. What sticks most in my mind is the Chair”s declaration a bit back that a particular result “was inevitable.”

   Russ, you’ve no idea of my best times. Yet, you extrapolate an opinion based upon conjecture and call it some sort of science. The world record for the 45 year old mile is 4:16. If Mr. Hinton were to best me by 5 to 6 seconds while I achieved a personal record, he would be realizing a sub-4 minute mile, while I achieved something in the low 4:00s. Even Jim Sorenson, the world’s current best 40 year old middle distance runner, has yet to achieve such. In fact, the only human in history to break the storied 4 minutes after turning 40 was the King of the Boards, Eamon Coglin.

   I don’t take offense at your assuming my P.R. to be something in the 20’s (I achieved that as a sophomore in High School), but I am offended that a statistician would be so presumptive regarding core numbers. This is but an example of why I exhibit such contempt for many of the opinions postulated on this site. There appears more an existence of conjecture demanding ‘truth’, than hard fact.

   Do I believe a record possible in August? Oh, yeah. I’m counting on it. Who will take it home? I don’t know. I do know that I intend to carry the race for the first three laps. After that, it will be the last man standing.

   Please reply with justification for your assumption. I am interested, and might learn something.

   lon

10. Russell Sears on April 5, 2008 6:37 pm

    Lon,

    It very simple how I came up with 5-6 seconds. I used my times when I was at my best in the mile, college. Looked at his times.

    Assumed you were still capable of doing the 3 quarters fast ( sub 3:00 ), as you claim. But also assumed you had been training much longer distance than ever, like you also stated. Finally, I assumed you didn’t have a kick.

    When I was running my best miles and 1500m, in college, I was doing everything you stated. But I was only winning 10k’s and 10 miles, a few 5ks off of the Pre method, who ever has the most guts wins. If you recall even the fabled Pre lost his one shot at olympic medals, due to being out kicked in the 5k. He to assumed nobody would be standing after a sub 3:00 for 3 quarters before the final lap.

    I ran several sub 3:00 for 3 quarters, before I wised up. Most would cave-in but there was always at least one that had the whole package and could kick no matter how hard I took him. The ones with the kick got me usually by 5-6 seconds the last 300. These races I always lead (at least after 300 into it), pushed the pace the first 3 laps. They broke 4, (or 3:45 for a 1500) I didn’t. These race did however, give me my best times, but not the win.

    I finally assumed he was one of those guys that past me at the bell.

    I learned you don’t let them know you are their competition, till 600-800 meters in the race. This still give you enough time to use your superior endurance.

    If you can’t run a sub 2:00 the last 2 laps, you don’t stand a chance to beat someone that has the whole package, kick and endurance.

    Counting applied to a model.

11. Lon Evans on April 6, 2008 3:27 am

    Russ,

    I won’t go more into detail as to my objections to your analysis, this thread has become too much a particular conversation. I will opine that you were susceptible to fading.

    You attempted a strategy that demanded your opponent comply with your analysis. Such a strategy (relative to what I’ve observed in your posts) does seem your weakness.

    I do my best to evaluate (count) those situations that I intend to contest. After this, I am amenable to all natural mutations demanded by life. What I judge to be your weakness is that you fail to consider exogenous circumstances. I, on the other hand, look for them as unceasingly as I breath.

    Different perspectives, different approaches, and beautiful lessons available to each party should he choose to consider the possible worth.

    I’ve enjoyed this dialog. And by the way, I’m a bit more speedy than I choose to crow about (oh hell, I think I’ve done just that).

    lon

12. jim on April 6, 2008 6:30 pm

    Lon: Did you get your speed from getting chased by guys who wanted to kick your butt because of your extreme anti-social behavior?

13. Russell Sears on April 7, 2008 10:45 am

    Lon,

    As a 45 year old athlete myself, still trying to race. Your certainty of your August race is naive beyond belief for someone that has as much experience as you claim. A over 45 athlete knows, tomorrow race is never certain.

    Your, refusal even consider that your bet on the “black swan” may turn out to be really a playtpus. Strange, totally unexpected, not accepted by prior knowledge, but still not a “black swan”, speaks volumns about whose models cannot adjust to unexpected events.

    Someone that can’t respect another opinion, even if they believe they are wrong, can’t learn from others.

    If you had been paying attention, you would see that this site and much of the commetary, is not a rant against the “black swan”. The impossible, by normal distribution assumptions, happens are well accepted here. My thesis (an perhaps the sites) is that rather than betting on these random outliners, then betting for a long term nuclear fusion meltdown. Its better to wait for them and then wait them out, for these present the best times to take out the cane.

    Of course my final assumption in the 5-6 second prediction was that you were not coachable.

14. Lon Evans on April 8, 2008 3:20 am

    Russ,

    Put simply. Your attempting to lead, and its resulting in being out-kicked by 5-6 seconds (apparently repeatedly) speaks of a certain narcissism.

    Your weren’t racing the eventual winner, you were pacing him. He used you as a rabbit, allowing you to do a majority of the work, and then utilizing a superior talent to take the prize. The narcissism (your Achilles heel) lay in a belief that you could take a sub-4 miler, when your talents lay in longer distances.

    I discount your analysis as I well know Mr. Hinton’s earlier times, and my own (past) are equivalent. I’m not biting off more than I can chew, but challenging a like talent. As to naivety, I have knowledge of my current training, and the results it begins to suggest. I never claimed that I could take Mr. Hinton, but rather that I was capable of punishing him in the initial 1200. That would require a pace during the first three laps resulting in a 4:09 - 4:12. Doable.

    Our first conversation resulted from my challenging your optimism for 2008. I suggested your position to be Polly Anna (naive), and questioned the validity of your numbers. Your reply was as brittle as is the one above. This was when the SnP was above 1400. I offered that we should talk again when the SnP neared 1300. You weren’t available for such conversation when it eventually did, nor were you available as it plunged into the 1260’s, and again into the 1250’s.

    Proof is in the pudding Mr. Sears, not the numbers. I’m a pretty good cook.

    lon

15. Russell Sears on April 8, 2008 3:36 pm

    Lon,

    You are half right, the 2 times I ran an actual mile and ran fast 3 quarters, I was asked to be a rabbit to help someone break 4:00. Even Bannister needed one. Few can, and few do it well. Still both times I tried to win, but didn’t. You may not understand but, friends and teamates success meant more than maximizing every chance I had to win.

    The other times I ran 3 quarter fast were “time trials” where the whole point was to run a qualifying time, not win. I find it strange a 1500 runner didn’t assume such.

    Our first conversation was you trashing a one year forecast on a short term basis.
    After the fact, where you claimed to have made lots money in a couple of days.
    Implying that you knew, what you couldn’t possible know, what my short term position was. Yet, what the actual implication were that short term (”1st quarter”) was to be tough, but the negative would be overblown and rebound.

16. Lon Evans on April 9, 2008 2:48 am

    Dear Russ,

    Go back, and look at the record. I never claimed to have made “lots of money.” I stated that I was short at 1460. I’ve been quite clear that I expect a cover at 1220. As we’ve yet to realize that, I’m perplexed as to where your assumption comes from. My short is still active.

    I’ve ridden every whipsaw to date. I’ve suffered every false rally, and done so with conviction. Just like a race, isn’t it Russ? You know the pain, you know the doubt, and you know to never give up.

    It’s not about being right, or wrong. It’s about the effort, and the commitment.

    lon