If you could go back in time to when you were a new trader

[TheGreatGorilla]

Quote from siki13:

Correct me if i`m wrong but i think what you are trying to say and i would agree with, is that if the whole plan is defined with strict rules its gonna fail ,in other words, you cant just sit in front of a screen and read from a paper on what to do next.

Also looking briefly at dbphoenix thread it seems to me that we have quite a similar approach to trading
and it has a lot to do with waiting for the right moment and you cant defined that right moment with rules ( or i am to dumb to achieve that ).
So maybe you are both right and are just arguing about different things .

You're right.

 

[bighog]

Quote from dbphoenix:

There's no reason why a trading strategy based on the movements of a moving average can't work as long as it's thoroughly tested and consistently profitable. Ditto with a strategy based on phases of the moon, which someone in another forum follows religiously. But to suggest all one has to do in order to succeed is plot and follow a moving average is inadequate.

As to all the work you did, I'm unfamiliar with it. I've never seen your plan nor have I seen any of your trades. I'd love to see both.

So you do admit trend following of a moving average can be consistently profitable. I only bark at the moon, sorry.

Well, look, if there is more needed to succeed than simply plot and follow a moving average is inadequate. (your words) Why would a belief in "supply/demand lines" be the end all?

Aside from what we all know as elementary elements to a business plan, I indeed gave you the whole gist of my plan (method). What are you missing in how to follow a MA and stay with a trend?

My trades are none of your business, to suggest I display them is a "VERY WORN OUT" dodge because you know it will never happen and hope it discredits me and all others. Is that your best shot?

You did not inform me how you can take the process to the NEXT LEVEL after calling a simple trend line a supply or demand line. Do you feel honest enough to admit that so called "supply/demand lines" are nothing more than a traditional trend line? but, I agree, that would be an admission that TA and TL uses are not so mysterious and useless after all, correct? To suggest classic TA does not work or even understood is the old "bait and switch" method to get others to follow the new and improved TIDE, correct? how about another old tried and true saying: "if it walks like, looks like, quacks like......... LOL!!

Forget the fluff and frilly stuff, what is the step to reach the next level, you know, after the elementary place cards.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lag22Hl2RQw

 

[TheGreatGorilla]

Quote from bighog:

So you do admit trend following of a moving average can be consistently profitable. I only bark at the moon, sorry.

Well, look, if there is more needed to succeed than simply plot and follow a moving average is inadequate. (your words) Why would a belief in "supply/demand lines" be the end all?

Aside from what we all know as elementary elements to a business plan, I indeed gave you the whole gist of my plan (method). What are you missing in how to follow a MA and stay with a trend?

My trades are none of your business, to suggest I display them is a "VERY WORN OUT" dodge because you know it will never happen and hope it discredits me and all others. Is that your best shot?

You did not inform me how you can take the process to the NEXT LEVEL after calling a simple trend line a supply or demand line. Do you feel honest enough to admit that so called "supply/demand lines" are nothing more than a traditional trend line? but, I agree, that would be an admission that TA and TL uses are not so mysterious and useless after all, correct? To suggest classic TA does not work or even understood is the old "bait and switch" method to get others to follow the new and improved TIDE, correct? how about another old tried and true saying: "if it walks like, looks like, quacks like......... LOL!!

Forget the fluff and frilly stuff, what is the step to reach the next level, you know, after the elementary place cards.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lag22Hl2RQw

Thank you, I was beginning to lose my patience.

 

[dbphoenix]

Quote from bighog:

So you do admit trend following of a moving average can be consistently profitable. I only bark at the moon, sorry.

Well, look, if there is more needed to succeed than simply plot and follow a moving average is inadequate. (your words) Why would a belief in "supply/demand lines" be the end all?

Aside from what we all know as elementary elements to a business plan, I indeed gave you the whole gist of my plan (method). What are you missing in how to follow a MA and stay with a trend?

My trades are none of your business, to suggest I display them is a "VERY WORN OUT" dodge because you know it will never happen and hope it discredits me and all others. Is that your best shot?

You did not inform me how you can take the process to the NEXT LEVEL after calling a simple trend line a supply or demand line. Do you feel honest enough to admit that so called "supply/demand lines" are nothing more than a traditional trend line? but, I agree, that would be an admission that TA and TL uses are not so mysterious and useless after all, correct? To suggest classic TA does not work or even understood is the old "bait and switch" method to get others to follow the new and improved TIDE, correct? how about another old tried and true saying: "if it walks like, looks like, quacks like......... LOL!!

Forget the fluff and frilly stuff, what is the step to reach the next level, you know, after the elementary place cards.

Yes, following an MA can be consistently profitable. Just about anything can be consistently profitable. Whether it is or not is another matter. Without knowing the details of the trading plan, it's impossible to say. Plot an MA and follow the trend is not a thoroughly-tested and consistently-profitable trading plan as it stands.

Supply and demand are not necessarily the "be all", but the law thereof is the basis for price movement.

As for the "next level", whatever that might be, and how one might distinguish between supply/demand lines on the one hand and trendlines on the other, you'd have to read my journals. The information is all there, available to anyone, for free. If you'd rather not read them, that's your choice. But that doesn't mean that the information is not there.

As for TA and TLs being useless, hardly. But discussions of them, of which there have been many, that do not begin with definitions are rather pointless. "Classic TA", as you call it, is the study of price behavior, and it existed long before indicators. I've never suggested that classic TA doesn't work. It's the basis of my trading.

As to your trades, I don't particularly care, though it would be nice to know that you actually do. All I know of you is that you laugh a lot and shout a lot, but as to whether or not you trade, I have no idea. Nor does it matter. What anyone else does or does not do should have no bearing on what one himself does. That is an outgrowth of the research, study, and testing he does.

 

[dbphoenix]

Quote from siki13:

Correct me if i`m wrong but i think what you are trying to say and i would agree with, is that if the whole plan is defined with strict rules its gonna fail ,in other words, you cant just sit in front of a screen and read from a paper on what to do next.

Yes and no. It depends on how damaged the trader is, and if he's been at this for three or five or ten years and still can't show a consistent profit, much less make a living at it, then strict rules that are derived from thorough testing -- back, forward, and real-time -- are necessary, and the stricter the better. Once he has begun to gain or regain his confidence, he can then begin to soften the rules a bit. But without that confidence, he will never be able to trade size, and without size, he will never gain traction.

 

[R. Raskolnikov]

You keep using examples like this when others are talking about intra day traders. Apples and oranges....

Quote from TheGreatGorilla:

So Warren Buffet is a supply and demand trader?

 

[TheGreatGorilla]

Quote from dbphoenix:

Yes, following an MA can be consistently profitable. Just about anything can be consistently profitable. Whether it is or not is another matter. Without knowing the details of the trading plan, it's impossible to say. Plot an MA and follow the trend is not a thoroughly-tested and consistently-profitable trading plan as it stands.

Supply and demand are not necessarily the "be all", but the law thereof is the basis for price movement.

As for the "next level", whatever that might be, and how one might distinguish between supply/demand lines on the one hand and trendlines on the other, you'd have to read my journals. The information is all there, available to anyone, for free. If you'd rather not read them, that's your choice. But that doesn't mean that the information is not there.

As for TA and TLs being useless, hardly. But discussions of them, of which there have been many, that do not begin with definitions are rather pointless. "Classic TA", as you call it, is the study of price behavior, and it existed long before indicators. I've never suggested that classic TA doesn't work. It's the basis of my trading.

As to your trades, I don't particularly care, though it would be nice to know that you actually do. All I know of you is that you laugh a lot and shout a lot, but as to whether or not you trade, I have no idea. Nor does it matter. What anyone else does or does not do should have no bearing on what one himself does. That is an outgrowth of the research, study, and testing he does.

What the hell is your point?

Seriously this argument has been going on in circles, and now your picking a fight with someone else?

Do you just like to argue? I honestly think you feed off of this attention because no one else will give you the time of day.

 

[dbphoenix]

Quote from TheGreatGorilla:

What the hell is your point?

Seriously this argument has been going on in circles, and now your picking a fight with someone else?

Do you just like to argue? I honestly think you feed off of this attention because no one else will give you the time of day.

The original point? That some trading approaches do last. But it's neither an argument nor a fight.

 

[R. Raskolnikov]

Some people really take offense to this for some reason (my guess is jealousy)

Quote from dbphoenix:

The original point? That some trading approaches do last. But it's neither an argument nor a fight.

 

[dbphoenix]

Quote from R. Raskolnikov:

Some people really take offense to this for some reason (my guess is jealousy)

I don't think jealousy is an issue. More likely that whatever one has tried hasn't lasted. This is often the case with formulas of one sort or another and automated trading. It all requires attention, like an old boiler, and if one has been doing it for years and has yet to gain any traction, much less earn a living off it, one can become extremely frustrated and even angry, which accounts for most of the hostility one encounters on message boards.

I said earlier that I had encountered O'Neil, Dow, Wyckoff and a few others at the beginning, so I never had to go through years of struggle. But I can understand the fallout from doing so. Everybody understands frustration of one sort or another.