Prudential shutters TA dept and......

Quote from hcour:

Folks who try to "test" and "quantify" TA show their own ignorance of what most successful traders actually do, which is discretionary TA.
Not necessarily. People cannot really test TA per se because TA is not a trading method. They can only test methods incorporating elements of TA. I think that the problem is two-fold. First, most, but not all, of TA is BS. Second, the stuff that gets tested is the lame generic crap that no one in their right mind would trade anyway. And guess what? If the testers came across a method that actually performed well, do you really believe that they would publish both the method and its results?
 
Quote from Thunderdog:

You miss the point. I only trade ES intraday and do not use fundamentals at all. However, I would not necessarily discount the additional use of fundamentals for FX trades of a longer duration. What I am saying is that TA is a closed set and is self-contained. If you use it and cannot see it for yourself then you are screwed. However, if your trading has any fundamental basis at all, then there are always additional outside variables that can play a role in your decision making, and other people's input can potentially (albeit not necessarily) have some value in this regard.

I'm rather surprised that I should have to explain this to a newsletter writer.

This discussion is getting a little too academic for me - closed set, add'tl outside variables, context-specific, etc. And I'm not sure what you have explained to me.

You could replace fundamental with technical and your statement still makes perfect sense. Other's technical input can, but not necessarily add value to your gameplan. The addition of longer term technical analysis to a beginner's daily trading is an invaluable step. FA is used in a separate context from TA and vice versa. Simply by trading in the direction of the bigger trend you are alining yourself with the fundamental climate. So unless you're doing extremely indepth fundamental analysis to detect a change in the cycle, just glance at the weekly chart and trade with trend. Bingo, you are in aligned.

I'm not trying to discount fundamental analysis or for that matter your opinion.

I know my limitations and they include not being able to compete in a fundamental context with the best minds in the business.

I do trade with regards to the fundamentals, but often by fading the fundamental players against solid technical levels. These often create the highest reward, lowest risk trade scenarios to make money on a daily basis. And that's our job, to make money everyday we can.
 
Quote from Thunderdog:

Not necessarily. People cannot really test TA per se because TA is not a trading method. They can only test methods incorporating elements of TA. I think that the problem is two-fold. First, most, but not all, of TA is BS. Second, the stuff that gets tested is the lame generic crap that no one in their right mind would trade anyway. And guess what? If the testers came across a method that actually performed well, do you really believe that they would publish both the method and its results?


i certainly can't argue with that, dog.


mostly correctamundo


:D
 
Quote from Covertibility:

Chart readers..lol... do they have stargazers too? Voodoo priests?

Yeah, there have never been any profitable chart readers. Ever. None of the successful guys who claim to have based their entire trading careers on chart reading were actually chart readers. They were just saying that they were chart readers. It's all part of a vast conspiracy designed to sell TA software and to make Jack Schwager a ton of money.

Amazing how credulous some people are. Isn't it?
 
Quote from traderNik:

Yeah, there have never been any profitable chart readers. Ever. None of the successful guys who claim to have based their entire trading careers on chart reading were actually chart readers. They were just saying that they were chart readers. It's all part of a vast conspiracy designed to sell TA software and to make Jack Schwager a ton of money.



a vast conspiracy to keep feeding cash to the market infrastructure, perhaps.

:D
 
Not necessarily. People cannot really test TA per se because TA is not a trading method. They can only test methods incorporating elements of TA. I think that the problem is two-fold. First, most, but not all, of TA is BS. Second, the stuff that gets tested is the lame generic crap that no one in their right mind would trade anyway. And guess what? If the testers came across a method that actually performed well, do you really believe that they would publish both the method and its results?
Well said. Indeed.

H
 
What do these funds have to to with Murphy?

I do not see anywhere that he has anything to do with the funds, the management or marketing of the funds.

Or am I missing something?

As for TA? It is a broad subject and TA are only tools. The tools of TA and tape reading skills can help manage your trading approach and discipline. Depends how you use it all I guess.

TA Analysts at firm like Prudential were part of the sales arm, just like all Analysts. Their job is to find a story to trade, wherever the story might be -- in TA or a fundemental outlook.

Ralph was great at that job and had an often insightful market view where others saw nothing.
 
Back
Top