Search results

Apparently not too comfortable as long as those personalities listed above touch you so much... :D But I hear you, thanks. Having said these words about reason you probably understand why I share exactly as much as I do and never more. :)

Think it's not that linear: more losses = learns the most. But one definitely needs practical experience to really understand or more importantly accept some trading realities, such as losses. With those additions I absolutely agree with you, trading better be developed on a solid logical base.

Problem here is you need experience to understand. Thus stage one is achieved through stage three. And by the way, avoiding bitter only leads to even more bitter and is a weakness.

Been discussing objective vs. subjective trading with some other traders yesterday and thinking over it... What is the most important question for me now in the topic of this thread: how do we distinguish objective, algorithmic decision making from intuitive decision making in trading...

You've never mentioned your level of expertise in trading. What are your achievements in this field? Are they practical or purely theoretical? :)

Sorry for what? :)

Never claimed to be a good teacher. But some people consider what I shared with them of value.

I just share what works for me. In delusion or not, it works and that's all I need to know. :) I view charts not as charts, but as a history of what humans did. And humans tend to repeat what they do.

Yes, there are quite many delusions related to reading charts indeed. Some people preach indicators or certain patterns like a Holy Grail forgetting it's the trader who is the grail him/herself and that's why this thread is so interesting for me. Agree on past results. Trading is like sports...

When it comes to trading somehow he seems to neglect the fact our past is the basis for literally all our actions in the future. :)

Never black or white in my world. Leave that simple bi-color reality to Surf. :D

Must confirm that I never could explain Xspurts abilities (which I had chance to witness for years) by anything but amazing skill definitely up to the level of intuition used in full. He's extremely detailed in his trading.

Well, I trade relatively consistently. Quite a few people are witness to that. I use charts/volume/DOM. So only two outcomes are possible: 1) Those tools contain an edge. 2) Some of the subliminal abilities create this edge and not the tools. Probably the only way to check is try...

Here's an example: you drive a car and someone cuts you off. You quickly evade and slow the car down simultaneously. Did you act based on the past (action, which already took place) or did you read another driver's mind prior to the action? How do you think what is more realistic and thus...

Did I ever say "alone"? But what's the most interesting is: Order book is also past. Because when you see limit orders, are you sure they are going to be filled or maybe flipped in the last millisecond? So "pre-trade" is also effectively just small part of the picture and even more...

Surf, don't you think it's time to stray from youthful maximalism in your age already? :) There is no need to oppose order flow and past price/volume. Everything contains analytical value and Dr. Maestro pointed it out perfectly. You miss large part of the picture, but neglecting traded...

"Quote from MAESTRO: I am sorry, but in my point of view H/L points by themselves cannot be very efficient reference points as they only partially represent the points in event-time space. However, H/L points combined with their timing characteristics and other attributes like volume, size...

Sounds ambivalent... is it independence from wealth? :D

Here I feel a bit uncomfortable with intuition, because it's relatively difficult to objectively distinguish "valid" intuitive calls vs. "random"...

Yes, Dr. Maestro already elaborated that H/L points in combo with other (purely technical) market information are valid reference points. What you have to say about it? :)