Nicely stated!!
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
10 Ways Wall Street Brainwashes You
- Thread starter ShoeshineBoy
- Start date
Nicely stated!!
Quote from ShoeshineBoy:
I believe you are partially right. But the problem is that their studies cannot be exhaustive nor can they evaluate different techniques for different markets. Example: Dan Zanger simply made too much money too quickly for it to be "luck".
Now it's true he struggled post-bull from what I heard. But during the bull his technique worked unbelievably well. Winner after winner after winner and he made a small fortune.
So my point is that during certain market conditions, certain TA techniques work and work extremely well.
So TA can be used very successfully if one can determine what markets are in what state. And my guess is that that's the difference between the guys who make it and who don't imo in trading...
Dan Zanger is not your average elitetrader wannabe. They wield TA like a 3 year old wields her father's gun. Usually when I have heard people say that certain TA methods work in certain markets, it is because they lost a similar amount of money in other market conditions
Many who use TA "profitably", actually just use price action, and lump it under TA. I consider TA as separate from pure price action. When someone starts adding things to charts, I consider that as more TA. When they follow the chart, and develop an instinct for market direction without indicators and squiggles, I consider that as more price action.
And even the self-acclaimed TA followers often turn out to mix it with other things, to the point that it is hard to tell whether the TA had much to do with it.
Quote from TraderZones:
Dan Zanger is not your average elitetrader wannabe. They wield TA like a 3 year old wields her father's gun. Usually when I have heard people say that certain TA methods work in certain markets, it is because they lost a similar amount of money in other market conditions
Many who use TA "profitably", actually just use price action, and lump it under TA. I consider TA as separate from pure price action. When someone starts adding things to charts, I consider that as more TA. When they follow the chart, and develop an instinct for market direction without indicators and squiggles, I consider that as more price action.
And even the self-acclaimed TA followers often turn out to mix it with other things, to the point that it is hard to tell whether the TA had much to do with it.
Well, I agree based on what I've seen overall. But I have to add that I think it would be possible to make money with pure indicators if you chose the right markets and that's kind of my point...
I think Zanger used price patterns so that is more price action/Chart reading then using TA indicators. He also used fundamentals for screening, and max retail leverage.
On the OP wallstreet is a big game that is 98% selling and 2% wisdom. Someone else posted about it being a large group of people basicly following each other,which is true.
On the OP wallstreet is a big game that is 98% selling and 2% wisdom. Someone else posted about it being a large group of people basicly following each other,which is true.
Quote from AAA30:
I think Zanger used price patterns so that is more price action/Chart reading then using TA indicators. He also used fundamentals for screening, and max retail leverage.
On the OP wallstreet is a big game that is 98% selling and 2% wisdom. Someone else posted about it being a large group of people basicly following each other,which is true.
I would tend to agree. People who rely on indicators will not find this a longterm strategy. Goto freecharts.com and navigate to the performance of TA indicator section. You will find some popular indicators tracked in real time, and they do not work.
Quote from TraderZones:
I would tend to agree. People who rely on indicators will not find this a longterm strategy. Goto freecharts.com and navigate to the performance of TA indicator section. You will find some popular indicators tracked in real time, and they do not work.
Can you post a link to that page? I was unable to find it on their website.
Quote from ShoeshineBoy:
We create subconscious "rationales" so compelling that facts that contradict them are usually rejected. Our brains dismiss new information that doesn't fit neatly into our ideas of reality. Or we block new stuff, not even really seeing it.
I know this is something I personally have to continuously "check" myself on. Its too easy spot a potential setup you hope to see fill out then get lazy and partially shut your brain down to observing new patterns. You end up missing other setups occurring while hoping the initial pattern will complete. Same with once a position is entered... need to keep re-evaluating as to whether the PA is "normal" or if something else is developing. Its been said a thousand times over but as a trader you definitely need to be able to constantly re-evaluate and change your mind when necessary.
Quote from TraderZones:
Dan Zanger is not your average elitetrader wannabe. They wield TA like a 3 year old wields her father's gun. Usually when I have heard people say that certain TA methods work in certain markets, it is because they lost a similar amount of money in other market conditions
Many who use TA "profitably", actually just use price action, and lump it under TA. I consider TA as separate from pure price action. When someone starts adding things to charts, I consider that as more TA. When they follow the chart, and develop an instinct for market direction without indicators and squiggles, I consider that as more price action.
And even the self-acclaimed TA followers often turn out to mix it with other things, to the point that it is hard to tell whether the TA had much to do with it.
By TA I usually think of what is typically lumped into the typical TA books which includes a conglomeration of non-fundamental stuff. But I agree with what you're saying and I actually believe in "technimentals"...