Cornix's TA Performance

This thread is becoming confusing now.

You and surf are responding as if this thread is about OPM, comparing your performance against others, introduce multi-millions to strategies, source to meet productive communication and so on.

You two serious...why not just use one of the professional verification sites designed for such or enter into any of the dozens of professional trader competitions designed for such ?

In contrast, I was under the impression via the very first message post by cornix that this was a thread to prove to someone (others) that a demonstrated performance was achieved from a few simple TA signals although the simple TA signals are not disclosed in this thread unless I missed that specific message post that contained such details.

Is it possible this thread is an extension of a prior thread that had specific details about the simple TA methods and specific details by those that argued against those disclosed simple TA methods. :confused:

Thus, I'm sorry guys, I must disagree with you two about the purpose of this thread and its goal in comparison to your most recent commentaries (e.g. OPM) because of the following...

Quote from cornix:

After multiple arguments on the matter I decided to bring a bit of objectivity to the field of continuous holy war and demonstrate some of the actual performance achieved with use of a couple simple TA signals...
More...
 
Wrbtrader:

This thread is a journal used to track performance of a particular approach based solely on TA. So it serves two purposes: create ET history of trades using this method and provide evidence of TA method working (or not) and beating (or not) the infamous 20% annually figure.
 
Quote from cornix:

Wrbtrader:

This thread is a journal used to track performance of a particular approach based solely on TA. So it serves two purposes: create ET history of trades using this method and provide evidence of TA method working (or not) and beating (or not) the infamous 20% annually figure.
More...

cornix,

Please correct me if I'm wrong. You are not an automated trader and your performance record in this thread is not via automation of TA signals. Therefore, is this performance record via automation trading of simple TA ?

I don't think you're using automation because you would have mentioned such an important detail. Also, you've used statements in this thread like baby sit trades...quick with entry and management...

Simply, you're a discretionary trader. That alone implies you're not using "solely TA" and nothing else. Therefore, its impossible for you to prove TA all by itself works. In contrast, you will only be able to prove that you're a profitable trader that uses TA as one of your trading tools...the latter is something surf and others aren't really interested in knowing because they're only interested in those that can show that their trading results was 100% via TA without any input from the below mentioned trading tools.

Your other important trading tools that works with your TA is trading experience, trade management, money management, discipline, proper capitalization and so on. All of the latter are critical trading tools for a profitable discretionary trader. Therefore, if the other mentioned tools of the trade had no impact on your trading results...you will "solely be using TA".

P.S. I'm confident you'll prove that you're a profitable trader that uses TA. Yet, you will not be able to prove you use TA and nothing else.
 
You made an interesting point here Wrbtrader, because that's exactly what I'm trying to do here: trade as objective as possible, not automated in the sense of machine code, but "self-automated" to a possible degree (and test the possibility of it as a whole).
 
Cornix,

Surf's definition of TA is not very clear. Sometimes, I think he means well to speak out against retail indicators. For the most part, I believe he is right about most indicators. But then he goes too far when he generalizes against TA and says that all TA sucks, and to the point to where he starts speaking down on specific traders and their style. Often, he does it in the name of "wisdom" and "experience", both of which are not clearly evident from his calls. That pisses people off and thus he gets feedback, negative and positive. It seems he's come to enjoy that.

Maybe Surf can chime in and clear up his definition of TA, before you go on a quest to prove against his idea, that is different than your own. Otherwise, you could end up spinning your wheels here. But then again, maybe you would enjoy that...
 
Quote from 4PurposeLiving:

Cornix,

Surf's definition of TA is not very clear. Sometimes, I think he means well to speak out against retail indicators. For the most part, I believe he is right about most indicators. But then he goes too far when he generalizes against TA and says that all TA sucks, and to the point to where he starts speaking down on specific traders and their style. Often, he does it in the name of "wisdom" and "experience", both of which are not clearly evident from his calls. That pisses people off and thus he gets feedback, negative and positive. It seems he's come to enjoy that.

Maybe Surf can chime in and clear up his definition of TA, before you go on a quest to prove against his idea, that is different than your own. Otherwise, you could end up spinning your wheels here. But then again, maybe you would enjoy that...
More...

Well, he mentioned "chart reading" more than once. And my definition of TA in the current thread is: all signals are entered/exited based on reading price charts.
 
Quote from 4PurposeLiving:

Cornix,

Surf's definition of TA is not very clear. Sometimes, I think he means well to speak out against retail indicators. For the most part, I believe he is right about most indicators. But then he goes too far when he generalizes against TA and says that all TA sucks, and to the point to where he starts speaking down on specific traders and their style. Often, he does it in the name of "wisdom" and "experience", both of which are not clearly evident from his calls. That pisses people off and thus he gets feedback, negative and positive. It seems he's come to enjoy that.

Maybe Surf can chime in and clear up his definition of TA, before you go on a quest to prove against his idea, that is different than your own. Otherwise, you could end up spinning your wheels here. But then again, maybe you would enjoy that...
More...

He has specifically stated in other threads exactly what is TA to him via his own words or in agreement with someone's else definition.

1) Against technical indicators (e.g RSI, CCI, Stochastic, Bollinger Bands)

2) Does not consider chart reading as TA.

3) He uses chart reading himself but say it has no impact on his trade decisions or trade results.

4) The trader T. Sykes that he advocates as someone with proof of profitability...that trader uses basic TA and chart reading as a tool with his other trading tools for trading penny stocks.

5) Those he has agreed with in the past (e.g. Traderzones) do not see s/r analysis, chart reading without indicators as technical analysis and do not consider traditional chart patterns (e.g. double bottom) as TA. They have specifically stated its useful for "visualization purpose" only. :D

Anyways, most traders do eventually spin their wheels with surf and others because majority of the time they generalizes TA. Further, I think they generalize TA or have these strange definitions for the purpose of debating. They also casually dismiss their own chart reading analysis as not technical analysis. This is something cornix already knows about surf & gang from prior warnings by others.

By the way, he seem to have stepped away from saying that its only TA if its coded or can be automated...something once mentioned as part of the TA definition in the past but I haven't seen him say such lately.

Quote from Lord.Maushi:

We have a semantic problem, considering whatever his definition is, he has no TA understanding.
More...

Exactly especially after I notice his constant promotion of T. Sykes...a TA user that doesn't talk much about the specific details of TA beyond saying "I use basic TA".
 
Quote from wrbtrader:





Exactly especially after I notice his constant promotion of T. Sykes...a TA user that doesn't talk much about the specific details of TA beyond saying "I use basic TA". [/B]
More...

Please, no promotion of sykes, more like a defense of sykes. Regarding TA and sykes-- Tim has INFORMATION that a particular penny stock is a pump and dump, that's why he trades it---- TA combined with real INFORMATION can be useful in timing entries and exits, but certainly not on its own as most use it. In addition, TA works as a descriptive tool, I use it like this, as does sykes, to describe what happened, NEVER to predict what will happen enough to actually make a trade based on it.

surf
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top