...
I appreciate what you are doing! I understand this undertaking is a big ordeal that will take a lot of time. My only ask i's that you make it publicly available so that we can analyze your findings for ourselves. I mean what's the point of posting findings if we can't go through the data and come to the same conclusions.
I make my claims based on logic such as saying that the Socrates system does not tell the user what to trade, for how long to trade it, with what stop loss and so on. So even if we had all the data, we would still not be able to test it because there are no objective test criteria.
If nobody has historical data because the Socrates system does not provide it, then the Socrates system is flawed because it hides the historical data from us.
The burden of proof is on the Socrates system not on us.
If I do not provide the data now then that does not prove that the Socrates system is correct. If I provide the data then anybody could say my data is flawed because it cannot be corroborated because Socrates does not provide it. I could have just made it up. And as I said, it provides an attack surface where Armstrong proxies can come forward with their well known beat around the bush forecast array method where they will perhaps say that this and that weekly reversal should have been traded only for a day because there was a strong turning point on Monday.
Obviously socrates should provide historical data, but that isn't happening. I just want to test what Martin says that the reversal system will produce the expected result within 3 time units, nothing to do with the forcast arrays. Also, did you buy 10+ premium subscriptions for the purpose of collecting reversals? If I could buy this many subscriptions I would, but I don't have the funds. But you have this great dataset that is going to waste because you are afraid of some criticisms from "Armstrong proxies". It sounds like you are trying to take a scientific approach with your experiment. Well this is how science works, you provide your results WITH underlying data so others can scutinize and design further experiments based on your results and data. I'm trying to do this because I see a flaw in your methodology. The methodology I am proposing fixes your flaw, and can bring further understanding to this whole reversal system