Search results

At least my post wasn't intentionally obscure. What, exactly, is unclear to you?

The tide moves about a constant level. Not so with market prices.

Well stated. I would be specific: Future price action can't be predicted solely from past price action using standard methods. This phraseology addresses why such a large majority of traders fail.

Another argument for not attempting to follow imaginary trends.

Number three could be true if you believe number one and continue to trade.

If price action after a given point in time can be predicted using standard methods based on price action beforehand, then, according to efficiency theory, it won't happen.

There's no inconsistency there. Mine describes the conditions (more competition). Yours describes the result (uselessness of the system).

Thank you for being logical. To put it another way: If every trader's market data is the same, for a given system Input (market data) .... System (processing of data) .... Output ("buy", "sell", etc.), use by more traders will lead to more traders attempting to execute the same trade at...

Trend is the imaginary friend of many.

Without change, even money can be boring.

There will always be people of the right side of any "trend" by random distribution. The point is to reliably predict the trend before it happens, which is what so very few people do. And none of them does it reliably using standard methods, which they soon find out.

The trend that takes place before position entry is not where the money is made. Whatever price trend is going to follow position entry is not usefully predictable based on price trend before that point, using any standard method. If it was, efficiency theory says that the difference...

Trend is determined within a timeframe between beginning and ending points. Regarding the P/L of a trade, these two points are 1) position entry and 2) position exit. The trend between them is what counts. Any previous or following trends are only worth looking at insofar as they can be...

Predicting the direction of price, with or against whatever trend is actually there or not, is most of what the trading game is all about. The sweet spot is a good thing.

It's not enough to know that there has been a trend, without knowing to what extent, if at all, the trend will continue.

Without an edge, the market can't be a source of appreciation.

Y'all come back now, ya hear?

I'm beside myself with anticipation.

I haven't read the discussion to which you refer.

Where have you demonstrated that the changes that occurred in the cited experiment are otherwise than the result of the loss of genetic information? Meanwhile, "Unmet Condition of Evolution #1: A modification, beyond the mere loss of information due to mutation, in the genetic composition...