"Marketsurfer is correct: There is no Trends!" --- There are only Turns!

[OddTrader]

The best answer so far! That's why traders are also called Timers (of Turns)!

When looking backwards after turning, we then know whether the previous move was a down trend, an up trend, a range bound, a flat market, etc. (in hindsight)

No you cannot pass.
You always forget 1 small word. For you probably not important but you should first understand that it is nevertheless important. That word is WHEN.
WHEN long
WHEN short
WHEN no trade
And maybe also WHEN take profit. Can be useful too. Because one day you should close your trade.

 

[ExperiencedJoe]

The best answer so far! That's why traders are also called Timers (of Turns)!

When looking backwards after turning, we then know whether the previous move was a down trend, an up trend, a range bound, a flat market, etc. (in hindsight)

You are making the same mistake as marketsurfer to believe that trading is about being a hindsight jokey. The following trade demonstrates mastery of foresight. The real time call out for the trade is here: http://www.elitetrader.com/et/index...risk-in-the-sp500.85694/page-470#post-4077318

 

[i am nobody]

You are making the same mistake as marketsurfer to believe that trading is about being a hindsight jokey. The following trade demonstrates mastery of foresight. The real time call out for the trade is here: http://www.elitetrader.com/et/index...risk-in-the-sp500.85694/page-470#post-4077318

Probably a surprise for you but i agree with you. It has nothing to do with hindsight. I take a position because I know with very high probability what the market will do in future (that's why i trade futures !! ). Mostly correct, seldom wrong.

 

[ExperiencedJoe]

Mostly correct, seldom wrong.

But since you can't talk about it, I guess it's no use to ask you for proof. Why, you might even have to open a new ET account.

 

[i am nobody]

But since you can't talk about it, I guess it's no use to ask you for proof. Why, you might even have to open a new ET account.

I proved in past already some trades but even then bashers find explanations why i was lucky or some other reason. Besides what is the advantage for me to post?

I trade purely intraday.

 

[ExperiencedJoe]

I proved in past already some trades but even then bashers find explanations why i was lucky or some other reason. Besides what is the advantage for me to post?

I trade purely intraday.

The advantage would be I wouldn't have to ask you again. I generally size people up to see where they fit in. If I don't see anything, they don't fit in anywhere.

 

[i am nobody]

The advantage would be I wouldn't have to ask you again. I generally size people up to see where they fit in. If I don't see anything, they don't fit in anywhere.

I am nobody, i don't fit anywhere.

 

[marketsurfer]

The problem for someone like surf is that he doesn't understand the constraints his PhD acquaintances are working under. Classical statistics has no clue how to measure trends, so they make assumptions like linearity, stationarity, a Brownian component, etc. Being off by just a little can lead to very wrong conclusions. We saw a good example of this recently where the weather models that predicted NYC would be completely blanketed by the blizzard were off by tens of miles and most of the city was spared the worst of the blizzard. Classical stat has assumptions that just don't apply to the markets, which is why most statisticians aren't rich.

I dont completely disagree with you. However, given statistics vs anecdotal or surviorship biased results--- ill bet on the stats.

With that said, i believe one can still make money regardless of statistically valid trends.


surf

 

[marketsurfer]

What the math types don't get is that the market is not a mathematical phenomenon, but an economic one. Math is inadequate to represent the market in that it doesn't take into account of the motivation of those who can move markets. These people do it for specific reasons and math cannot constrain them. This is why the market can go beyond statistical extremes and continue in that direction indefinitely until everyone has lost their shirt. In such instances the the market movers are specifically out to defeat the math, and the math loses every time. When real money clashes with math, it's a one way contest. People who focus solely on math are doomed to be poor. It makes no difference how many PhD's they have.

Thanks. This is very well stated. However, HFT proves quantatative models make mince meat out of nearly everything else. Otherwise, i thnk the evidence shows you are correct.

 

[lucysparabola]

The advantage would be I wouldn't have to ask you again. I generally size people up to see where they fit in. If I don't see anything, they don't fit in anywhere.

i am nobody, how can you not give proof now with the offer of this overwhelming advantage? lmao.