Does Technical Trading Really Work?

[marketsurfer]

TA by definition excludes all nonobjective analysis. Many who try to use TA are unable to remain objective but TA is inherently objective. It can't by it's nature be anything but objective.

I decided not to respond to most of the naive and truly ignorant statements made on this thread. However, the above wins the prize for the dumbest, most naive and truly idioticstatement ever made on elite trader.

If TA is objective , then why when 3 technical analysts look at a chart u get 4 interpretations?

TA is nothing other than subjective on every level.

Only a joker would think otherwise.

 

[marketsurfer]

Let's see what Surf's win ratio is so far with his superior Price Drivers that doesn't incorporate any technical analysis:

1 loss CMG
1 loss SHAK
1 SHAK trade still open
1 win in YM
1 loss YM
1 AMD trade still open

Yes, i have losses. Does anyone else on this site post before the fact calls consistently?

The year is not over yet --



Furthermore, no one has ever made before the fact calls since 2002.

 

[marketsurfer]

A model is a date and time where price and various components or rudiments interact in a way which enables understanding why price is moving the way it is. The model enables illustrating how the bars and the components must interact and how that interaction differs from other dates and times. This enables determining what aspects of price and which components are important.

Then strict specifications can be written and those specs enable writing a system, strategy or trading plan. Without a specific date and time which precisely models behavior which should be understandable as a viable logically based reason 'why' the model captures the behavior and thus predicts the next move then all the effort to make TA work or write a trading plan isn't much better than guessing.

Man. Where do you get this material? Beyond wrong ---

 

[marketsurfer]

It's not information until it's applied to data. Before that, it's a set of tools.

I get it. You want TA to be treated with respect so you claim it's all objective. That's a nice lovely fiction but a fiction nonetheless. TA is a messy hodge-podge of mostly adhoc techniques that were independently developed over centuries. As such, it is a collection of the Good, the Bad and the Ugly. Pretending there is only Good isn't historically factual, and it damages your credibility. I can easily reject a great deal of TA without rejecting all of it. Perhaps that is a nuance too far for some but I'm comfortable with it.

It's their religion---- frightnening but true.

 

[Redneck]

it damages your credibility.

Like I care

It's not information until it's applied to data. Before that, it's a set of tools.

I get it. You want TA to be treated with respect so you claim it's all objective. That's a nice lovely fiction but a fiction nonetheless. TA is a messy hodge-podge of mostly adhoc techniques that were independently developed over centuries. As such, it is a collection of the Good, the Bad and the Ugly. Pretending there is only Good isn't historically factual, and it damages your credibility. I can easily reject a great deal of TA without rejecting all of it. Perhaps that is a nuance too far for some but I'm comfortable with it.

You obviously cannot separate (your) self from the information

Good.., bad..., ugly - are terms people assign..., all subjective


There is only information..., it either useful..., or useless

Deny / reject all you like

=======================

I want the craft treated with respect

I also do not want my mentor disrespected - he is dead..., and no longer able to speak for himself



RN

 

[romik]

Yes, i have losses. Does anyone else on this site post before the fact calls consistently?

The year is not over yet --



Furthermore, no one has ever made before the fact calls since 2002.

This goes to show the stats of a superior system that doesn't implement TA. It's not aimed to discourage you from posting your trades, you are the one that suggests not to use TA on the other hand.

You are into maximising your profits by entering into trades prior to price confirming the analysis, but surely another way of looking at it would be saying that by entering early you are also maximising your losses, no?

 

[dartmus]

It is simply information - objective information at that - for those who are / can remain detached

TA makes it easy to remain detached.

I suppose with enough work in other areas of my life guiding principles could be found which would enable 'being' detached there also. I should know that lesson already because I've experienced it in various forms repeatedly ...the least of them being not to say anything when I don't have anything good to say. Others I can't tell you about but basically they involve stopping interacting with others the v first time it's clear they don't get what I say the 1st time I say it.

 

[dartmus]

I agree. no other business allows you to make money like this -- it's like being a cheater in a casino, kind of...and not being asked to leave.
(but of course, it's easier said than done.)

Correct on both accounts. Wish I could double like this post.

 

[wrbtrader]

Nonsense. Almost everything I've read about PA is subjective. Candlesticks: subjective. Classical patterns: subjective. "Cup and saucer"? Seriously? This stuff is tea-leaf reading and highly subjective. Almost any part of TA that can't be quantified is in all likelihood subjective.

Do you mean that if a user codes or programs or automates a PA pattern...its not objective because it was done by the user personal interpretation of that pattern and that process of personal interpretation is via subjectivity because another user of the same name pattern may have coded it completely different than another coder/programmer because their personal interpretation was different.

Wouldn't such also be a flaw in backtesting patterns because it originated from personal interpretation (subjective analysis) before its coded/programmed in an effort to simulate objective analysis...an effort to quantified it ???

Therefore, the trading results of lets say the "Cup and Saucer" pattern will be different from one coder to the next coder unless they use the exact same code...essentially one coder not using his own subjective analysis to design a code and has instead decided to use the code of another programmer.

Simply, you're saying all PA is subjective in the beginning but if someone wanted to code it and make it objective...that's possible but be aware that another programmer may not use the same original subjectivity.

Did I get that right ???

 

[dartmus]

It you going to trade well, you have to learn to program is bottom line, you have to know the stats,

If they gained nothing else from trying to learn how to program ...those who insist on discretionary trading would at least learn enough about logic structures to improve their trading ...but many (incorrectly imo) simple don't see any need for it.