On March 18, 2018 a contributor to this forum named Xela claimed that the foundational propositions on which Numerical Price Prediction was and is predicated (that the best barometers for forecasting price direction are painstakingly selected moving averages; that generally speaking, exchange rates will distance themselves only so far from said moving averages before being compelled to return to more typical deviation levels; and that by correctly interpreting the relationships between said moving averages and correlated price ranges, it is possible to pinpoint where exchange rates have greater statistical odds of reversing direction) were: (1) not true; (2) just wrong; (3) rested on a lack of understanding; (4) mistaken; and (5) basically nonsense.
When I pointed out that simply claiming something is “just wrong” is a weak argument, and asked for proof, Zela replied that s/he wasn’t offering proof because it was not realistically possible to do that in a forum.
(Personally, I believe that if one truly understands something clearly and definitively, in all its various aspects, one can probably sum it up in a single sentence.)
Zela suggested it would be more productive for me to read books by Chande, Tharp, and Ciana.
Now that I have finished the compete development of my system, I’ve taken the time to look at some of the ideas expresses by Chande and Tharp, and to be honest, I am very thankful I did not allow myself to be sidetracked down either of those rabbit holes since nothing I read that they had to say convinced me that my observations from over a year ago were basically nonsense, and nothing useful I read among the thoughts they offered would have been at all helpful in seeing me arrive at my final destination any faster or with any greater ease.