hmm.no edges in the markets

Quote from newwurldmn:

I think you can make money using technical analysis.

It's no different from fundamental analysis. It takes intuition to know which lines are important and which ones aren't.

I don't trade technicals, but i have seen people who do.
More...

Well intuitive TA is an entirely different story than the automated objective TA spoken of by NoDoji. Although I have never witnessed a real intuitive TA artist-- It certainly may be possible. My beef is with the objective, TA, price action crowd exemplified and articulated best by NoDoji. That stuff really cant' work as claimed.

surf
 
Quote from marketsurfer:

Yes, TA is the wrong road for everyone I have ever known in the real world.

Just one man's experience.

surf
More...

Well, that WTS video I posted the screen shots from sure does appear to be traders analyzing a chart which has indicators, volume, and dotted lines on it. Most traders would probably call that technical analysis, but since you are strongly promoting this prop firm as a firm that teaches noobs how to trade properly without TA, then I guess the screens with candlestick charts and indicators are just props set up to appeal to what a noob imagines trading to be like.

The trading setup at WTS actually looks like this:

attachment.php
 

Attachments

Surf, when you say this sort of thing you are saying that those that claim to be profitable using price (as Al Brooks does) are simply losing money year after year yet claiming to be profitable.

I think many of us would be more comfortable if in plain English you said what you seem to believe: Every human being that claims to be consistently profitable using PA or TA is simply lying. My question for you is -- you know this how? Is your knowledge so extensive that you can claim an entire discipline is invalid no mattet how skilled the trader is at execution, MM etc.? Have you simply met dozens or even hundreds of first rate traders who gave up on PA and the became profitable another way?

Give us a glimpse behind the curtain mighty OZ as to how you know these things to be true.


Quote from marketsurfer:


My beef is with the objective, TA, price action crowd exemplified and articulated best by NoDoji. That stuff really cant' work as claimed.

However, I think the truth in the matter is self evident that you really are not as succesful using TA, but simply don't know what else to do.

surf
More...
 
Quote from satchel:

What's a price driver edge again? Seriously. Don't have to give the edge away. So many threads on classic TA and none on P.D.s.

The sun is flipping it's polarity soon, north and south poles. Is that it?
http://www.foxnews.com/science/2013/08/07/sun-will-flip-its-magnetic-field-soon/

S/R Clusters of planetary aspects?
Spinning the Gann Wheel?
Arch Crawford? (He uses solar electrons)
The Schumann Resonance?

It must be something distinctively anti-TA?
More...

Yeah, I heard about the solar shift-- happens every 11 years.

PD is the quantification of fundamental factors that move price. It assigns a numerical significance to over 100 variables of a fundamental nature, weighs and quantifies these variables to determine what price is likely to do.
 
Quote from marketsurfer:

No, you can be profitable without an edge it's just a matter of how long. The bigger your edge, the less need for money management. I don't promote random entry but I believe reasonable random entry is equivalent to or better than TA price action type entries. For me, the only price action that matters is the price action that occurs after I enter the trade.

TA based entries are not statistically relevant, you and others are misusing this term--- if they were your system wouldn't need you to operate and could be automated.
More...

Entry is everything for me and what happens in the days/weeks before. Exit is irrelevant, static. Could be automated, yes, but automation is never easy when dealing with multiple instruments/equities. One small error could be extremely costly and I'm not willing to test it for years until every possible workaround is in the code.

Random entry has no edge. This topic has been tested thoroughly years ago, every imaginable money management strategy put to a real test. Not talking about anyone's claims here either -- which are worthless.

TA encompasses all what you sometimes exclude from this category. Eyeballing a chart of using code to determine entry are the same thing, just different ways of achieving it as long as objectivity is honored.
 
Quote from marketsurfer:

PD is the quantification of fundamental factors that move price. It assigns a numerical significance to over 100 variables of a fundamental nature, weighs and quantifies these variables to determine what price is likely to do.
More...
You have also demonstrated that the PDs are useless and no better than random entries. They are actually worse than random entries since in your belief system all you need is money management to profit from a random entry.
 
Quote from marketsurfer:



PD is the quantification of fundamental factors that move price. It assigns a numerical significance to over 100 variables of a fundamental nature, weighs and quantifies these variables to determine what price is likely to do.
More...

All of those factors (good grief!!) are what forms opinions to the believers of economic numbers and the timing of their usefulness. Once that decision is made it translates to the believer making a market decision and to act upon that decision or not.

If that decision is acted upon by placing orders in the mkt, the orders placed now become public knowledge and is no longer proprietary, secretive.

TA is a synopsis of all those decisions, right or wrong, actually placed in the mkt for all to see.

Then the beauty of TA takes over as the decision process because TA is actually nothing more than intelligent interpretation of everyone's fear/greed after their orders are in the mkt. What drove them INTO the mkt is now a mute point.

A chart is the footprint of all prior decisions placed in the mkt's. Charts clearly show where the LONGS in the mkt will be happy or sad, the same applies to the SHORTS. Knowing the previous sup/resist levels and making decisions based on those levels which DRIVE fear/greed supersedes those 100 variables derived from fundamentals and gibberish from talking heads and astrology or a taxi driver.

Reading the charts is a whole new can of worms, but there is nothing better to use in making decisions once all the orders are displayed for all to see. With all that in mind, is it any wonder why the fundamental users look at charts as a final word to view their prior decisions to see how they are performing?

:cool: :p https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/...5Z-ORI9eB-OXHbagD1FJKn0WzMSjYlP2yc1oTdht0QIYD
 
Quote from bighog:

All of those factors (good grief!!) are what forms opinions to the believers of economic numbers and the timing of their usefulness...
More...

Damn, Hog, that post is a thing of beauty! :cool:
 
Surf does not believe that a system based on the technical analysis of price can be objective, therefore a profitable system based on it cannot be automated. He believes that such a system only works in the hands of a gifted intuitive trader, who uses something other than the technical analysis of price action to make it work.

Surf is basically saying that there are no automated profitable systems based on the technical analysis of price (this would include analyses based on trend lines, channel lines, moving averages, or previous swing highs/lows; MACD; stochastics and other ob/os indicators; fibs; relative strength; multiple time frame/bar interval confluence; and other methods of technical analysis).

He has claimed they do not exist. The fact that many traders (institutional and retail) have automated systems based on some form of price analysis and the systems are profitable is irrelevant to Surf. He has a strong belief to the contrary and when a person has a strong belief s/he will likely discard any evidence that runs against that belief.

Technically derived positive expectancy systems based on a profitable combination of win rate and risk:reward ratio can be developed around all sorts of price-based technical frameworks.

The ability to trade these systems consistently or to let an automated system trade them without interfering is the hurdle that keeps the 95% in their place.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top