Man, you just don't understand how TA works! All you have to do is add a second critter-ion that works one time out of five and that fixes everything!
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Has anybody read Technical Analysis The Complete Resource for Financial Market Tec...
- Thread starter kmgilroy89
- Start date
Man, you just don't understand how TA works! All you have to do is add a second critter-ion that works one time out of five and that fixes everything!
I posted a Noobie Reading list in another thread,
http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=3552903#post3552903
FWIW, no book will teach you how to trade, that only comes with experience... at best these type of books will make you familiar with patterns and terminology, but not how to trade them... avoid all books which profess they will...
For all aspiring traders, the books on psychology are must reads... [Douglas, Livermore, Graham] I neglected Elder in that post, and I am sure there are others...
Investopedia is an excellent resource for information. Just keep drilling down links.
http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=3552903#post3552903
FWIW, no book will teach you how to trade, that only comes with experience... at best these type of books will make you familiar with patterns and terminology, but not how to trade them... avoid all books which profess they will...
For all aspiring traders, the books on psychology are must reads... [Douglas, Livermore, Graham] I neglected Elder in that post, and I am sure there are others...
Investopedia is an excellent resource for information. Just keep drilling down links.
The amount of trolling that takes place on this site is ridiculous. I've yet to see a thread where people can have a serious discussion without someone insulting another person or hijacking the thread in some other fashion. This place is definitely detrimental to anyone aspiring to become a trader. On that note, I'm out. I'm washing my hands of this site.
Quote from Opulence:
The amount of trolling that takes place on this site is ridiculous. I've yet to see a thread where people can have a serious discussion without someone insulting another person or hijacking the thread in some other fashion. This place is definitely detrimental to anyone aspiring to become a trader. On that note, I'm out. I'm washing my hands of this site.
I try to judge each post independently. I got some good PMs and there are a few good posts here. The subject matter we're discussing is so complex that I'm pretty sure nobody actually has an exact solution to these questions. I expected the answers to be heavily intuitive. However, I was hoping to get some people who've actually read the book to respond as to what they took away from it. Perhaps mention what techniques they built upon and what they avoided. However, a significant amount of posters here are just bashing books. I simply don't understand this conclusion on their part.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I see TA as the study of the next price movement. The general theory I get from TA is that the next price movement is not independent, but partially dependent on the previous price movements. So for someone to say TA is crap it means that they believe the next price movement is independent of the previous price movements. However, from my understanding the evidence suggests that there is a correlation, hence TA.
Quote from SteveNYC:
This was a blow to the head.
The OP is so smart that he doesn't know it.
He is still hanging around taking body shots.
ET is one fucked up place.
I guess this thread gonna need another cleansing.
I don't know what so smart is, but in the IQ sense I think I'm above average. However, I highly doubt I'm a genius. Lots of people have a quicker and stronger working memory than me. There's people who can remember everything by visualizing things into shapes at birth. That is not natural for me, although I haven't seriously attempted to do that. What I have is a desire to think logically, to use as little intuition as possible, and not to take my intuition or anybody else's for that matter, for granted. If somebody wants to learn how to think this way I feel that they most likely can. I don't see why a high IQ is required.
Quote from kmgilroy89:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I see TA as the study of the next price movement. The general theory I get from TA is that the next price movement is not independent, but partially dependent on the previous price movements. So for someone to say TA is crap it means that they believe the next price movement is independent of the previous price movements. However, from my understanding the evidence suggests that there is a correlation, hence TA.
No. You conclusion is based on a notorious fallacy called "denying the antecedent". TA may be not effective for many other reasons and still there may be series autocorrelation. Let me help you to see your fallacy:
Your argument is
TA => partial dependent of next move on previous moves
This is of the form P => Q
Denying P and concluding ~Q is the notorious fallacy I mentioned. During medieval years when strict adherent to logic was mandatory, contrary to what people believe nowadays, committing this type of fallacy in public would cause inflict of great punishment.
For example, one reason that TA is not working although there is partial series dependence, is because of throwbacks that render the patterns losers.
Quote from cynic:
In time you will. ET is comprised by a majority of Trolls and misguided traders, the remaining few successful / bored traders will tell you the edge doesn't come from books. That is their experience speaking.
That's not to say that all the basher's are successful. That's just the Trolls belching...
Did you reach this conclusion in the 6 days you have registered here?
Quote from kmgilroy89:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I see TA as the study of the next price movement. The general theory I get from TA is that the next price movement is not independent, but partially dependent on the previous price movements. So for someone to say TA is crap it means that they believe the next price movement is independent of the previous price movements. However, from my understanding the evidence suggests that there is a correlation, hence TA.
The next price movement is not dependent upon price history, but upon something which no TA addresses: price movement persistence.