Quote from clambill:
Well, excuse me for being an extreme idiot. My tiny little brain that can barely even process a thought has only been looking at technical analysis for a bit over a year. I continue to make various observations from looking at charts and doing "virtual" trading on a demo Forex platform. I noticed today that another way to filter is to use different time frames depending on whether the market is trending or in a trading range. I believe your disgust with math-based indicators might be the result of the angle at which you decide to view them.
Mostly anyone can learn to trade successfully.
Often, however, the learning environment can slow one's progress down.
Beginning with a foundation and adding bulding blocks can be a very helpful approach simply because it assures that the mind is growing in a critical path manner.
I recommend math based indicators to everyone as I said in my post to you. I posted to you so that you could consider those people who invented the original indicators so long ago a used them successfully.
Using indicators leads to great financial success and it also leads to being able to consider many of the other successful appproaches that abound.
In building a foundation or creating the building blocks that sit in the foundation level by level must be done very scientifically and rigorously.
Using a multi fractal approach as you suggest above is really helpful too. The faster fractals "telegraph" signals or contexts to the slower freactals. Having this is an advantage for trading a slower fractal whereby looking at the signals from the faster fractal gives youadvance warning as the future comes into the present on the slower traded fractal.
You opinion and mistaken conclusions on my post to you are just temporary failures ,probably. There is a chance that when other information comes to you, you will get a wake up call or an aha or AHA.
But it is also true that dummies abound in the learning to trade process so easily seen in ET.
Some mistaken people are actually unkind. Others are very difficult to understand because of their cast-in-stone irrationality.
A crossover of two lines of an indicator is dscribed in the contxt of the role of each line as designed. The absolute indicator MACD's designer made this very clear at a time when the ticker tape still operated just as the telegraph operated electro-mechanically, both in an alpha-numeric tape output context.
Convergence crossover divergence as a three part sequence applies to the beginning of channel overlap. Usin two fractals to see this, you get to observe the faster fractal context unfolding before the slower fractal context.
During this trending other difffernt kinds of crossovers (as yet to be differentiated by you and your kind and lesser functional kinds) occur. All crossovers, no matter what kind are isolated from each other by intervening phenomena in two clesses of differentiation (signal and contextual). Don't even try to go there since your mind is a blank canvas in this arena. Maybe you could consider as possibility however. what if you were simply given the ATS which handles all of these things? what if you were working on a team of people who created this ATS and who were working on other things all muchmore sophisiticated.
This is not even a possibility for the run of the mill person who embarks on learning to trade or who embarks on "backtesting" anything. The landscape is continually being strewn with people who are learning failure and ultimately bet the house on their mistaken beliefs.
The bottom line in trading is that the market offers unlimited opportunity. Unlimited capital is available for the taking all the time these days. The proof of this is a priori and not debatable.
Most people excuse themselves fron this opportunity. You continue to do so because it is your nature. A lot of others do so as well.
What is the purpose of those who debate another's success in trading? Usually it is that person's preference to prove to others something or other. They are often satisfied they have accomplished that task. Of if not, they continue to dwell on succeeding in achieving that eventuality. Some people I have heard a bout have at least a decade into proving something is not possible. Their dilemma will never go away as we all know.
The fact that you failed you probation at a prop firm is not unusual; your were unsuitable for fitting into their profit making routine. This proof you provided is common.
What is nice about continually taking the market's unlimited offer is the consequence of being rich. to decide not to do that is a choice that many many people have made. Those I have colleagual relations with get to experience the opposite.
