Lol, I have no idea how Larry's ideas might test out. The point was, any technical hypothesis no matter how simple or abstract needs to be rigorously tested to determine if there is is indeed a viable and tradable edge.
Ah yup. Something real ... like a guy in a red horned cap and gown with pitchfork.
Yep, and no doubt smart people get sucked into the black hole of mystical strategies and esoteric cycles and patterns. At least guys like Gann, Pesavento, Prechter, DiNapoli, etc. found ways to make a living off them...that didn't require profitable trading. Meanwhile some retail traders spent much of their non-working hours searching for Gann's mysterious "Square of Nine" with no profits to show for it.
Yes, it’s not the concept which pays the bills, it’s the trader. And taking concept to profitability is not for the underachiever.
Did drugs, come on lol.
I can partially agree. It's possible someone can be profitable trader using a bunch of esoteric junk--but only because they're a really good, intuitive trader who follows other rules and discipline very well. But that's only a tiny % of the retail trading population. And most of the successful ones are sharp enough to use concepts that have some statistical edge you can measure.
