Surf's Special Situation Journal

[marketsurfer]

Quote from Xspurt:

What does majorly mean - most or least? You are disputing 3 out of many. Doesn't that mean you are majorly mislead

I guess if you keep saying the same thing they will all stop using TA and those with outstanding records will recant heehee.

Come on Surf, show me an example of failed TA. I have asked you on 3 threads for some time - let's nail down a great example of a powerful TA signal that doesn't work. According to you that's easy - it's getting one that works (like JCP) that is hard.

Huh? Examples of failed "powerful" TA signals are everywhere. Every longer term chart has both failed and correct TA signals. Your logic is flawed.

 

[Fah Q]

Quote from marketsurfer:

Huh? Examples of failed "powerful" TA signals are everywhere. Every longer term chart has both failed and correct TA signals. Your logic is flawed.

i think he asked about a trade of YOURS using ta. a trade you had in the past that failed

 

[marketsurfer]

Quote from Fah Q:

i think he asked about a trade of YOURS using ta. a trade you had in the past that failed

What? I haven't used TA since 2005 as a trading tool. You want me to dig up trades from back then? I don't get it.

Why do FX dealers who win when you lose, promote the heck out of TA? Some even offer free TA courses etc--- Why would they do this if TA worked? Clearly, they know it does not work.

Why do prop shops like Bright not teach TA as a primary trading tool? Because it doesn't work.

surf

 

[Fah Q]

Quote from marketsurfer:

What? I haven't used TA since 2005 as a trading tool. You want me to dig up trades from back then? I don't get it.

Why do FX dealers who win when you lose, promote the heck out of TA? Some even offer free TA courses etc--- Why would they do this if TA worked? Clearly, they know it does not work.

Why do prop shops like Bright not teach TA as a primary trading tool? Because it doesn't work.

surf

does anyone teach price drivers method? so far, that isn't working.

 

[Xspurt]

Quote from marketsurfer:

Huh? Examples of failed "powerful" TA signals are everywhere. Every longer term chart has both failed and correct TA signals. Your logic is flawed.

Great - it's very easy then. Show me my failed logic by posting such an example of a great TA signal that failed. No, it doesn't have to be one of yours - any example will do.

 

[marketsurfer]

Quote from Xspurt:

Great - it's very easy then. Show me my failed logic by posting such an example of a great TA signal that failed. No, it doesn't have to be one of yours - any example will do.

It's impossible. Even more difficult proving God exists to an atheist.

The pattern would not, could not exist if it failed. Therein lays the one of the logical flaws of your thinking and the other TA proponents. The only patterns that you can see are completed patterns--therefore everyone one has "worked". surf

 

[Fah Q]

Quote from marketsurfer:

It's impossible. Even more difficult proving God exists to an atheist.

The pattern would not, could not exist if it failed. Therein lays the one of the logical flaws of your thinking and the other TA proponents. The only patterns that you can see are completed patterns--therefore everyone one has "worked". surf

what about something as simple as double bottoms or double tops? those are easy to see and one can easily see if that pattern fails or succeeds. and one can also place a trade BEFOREHAND once seeing the pattern in anticipation of a move.

im not saying i use this type of ta, just using an example.

 

[Xspurt]

Quote from marketsurfer:

It's impossible. Even more difficult proving God exists to an atheist.

The pattern would not, could not exist if it failed. Therein lays the one of the logical flaws of your thinking and the other TA proponents. The only patterns that you can see are completed patterns--therefore everyone one has "worked". surf

Fair enough - there is thus no evidence that TA fails as every pattern shows a success.

Ok I am going to show one that has to fail according to you and in my opinion it might, because I know TA patterns do fail - it's just that more often it is bad TA that is the cause of perceived failures. However I sure wouldn't like to bet against this baby.

Here is a monthly build up of buyers outweighing sellers. Not once. Not twice. But three times and on the last time they absolutely hammered at the selling pressure but with one problem: they couldn't drive prices lower.

Weekly and daily charts show accumulation supporting this monthly view. Follow the money - as a rule it's a good mantra and if you break that rule, it's like stepping in front of a freight train. This is as basic as it gets in TA.

The real move has not taken place yet - this is just the warm up routine...

 

[Xspurt]

When you see they bear traps line up, see the buying volume, you want to look to see if the insiders are buying. Then look to see if there is a reason that the market has over looked that counters the negative word on the street. In this run up the insiders are buying into JCP and the appeal of having an ex. Apple "retail guru" is a winner in many peoples books.

Are These J.C. Penney Insiders Telling You to Buy?

Famed money manager Peter Lynch told us executives can sell their stock for any reason, but they typically buy only for one: They think the price is going to go up!

Today I'm highlighting department store chain icon J.C. Penney (NYSE: JCP ) , which saw the COO buy more than $100,000 worth of stock. A director also bought $33,000 in stock. These aren't option grants, but rather people who are putting their own money on the line, buying shares at market prices just like you and me.

http://www.fool.com/investing/gener...se-jc-penney-insiders-telling-you-to-buy.aspx

Tilson said various factors—from the company's improved cost cutting to the influence of new CEO, former Apple retail guru Ron Johnson—influenced his decision. Tilson said he had bought JCP in the high $27 to low $28 this morning.

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/whitney-tilson-jc-penney-2012-5#ixzz26CI6nkeg

Now in Surf's favor he has price drivers that are way in advance of TA and he has the knowledge that TA should be discounted so there is no concern about any of this.

I hope it is not Surf's money at stake, and if it is I hope I am wrong in my outlook.

 

[Brass]

Quote from Xspurt:

...Now regarding your points, if you discover a low risk trade area, it can only be low risk if the balance of probabilities is in favor of your trade. If it has no meaningful value in quantifying the probability of the future outcome, for my style it is not low risk...

The term "balance of probability" does not imply numeric specificity:

http://www.answers.com/topic/balance-of-probabilities

It is more of a "go or no go" type of thing. You can assign all manner of probability to your setups and such, and you can go build castles in the sky. But that doesn't make it real. If you could legitimately assign a proper probability distribution to future outcomes in the market price, then you could employ the Optimal F or Kelly Criterion to the letter and have a high chance of maximizing your returns. HOWEVER, anyone who tries to follow these sizing methods to the letter in the markets is destined to become a smudge on the trading landscape sooner rather than later. You need to ask yourself why that is. Directional trading is much more about uncertainty than it is about probability. That's why Optimal F enthusiasts warn people to use small fractions of the calculated value. Because your probability distribution is, for all intents and purposes, illusory. Uncertainty requires larger margins for error than does probability. However, that doesn't make TA unusable. Far from it.

I don't know anything about your trading. You may or may not be a good trader. And if you are, then that's great. But you are kidding yourself about numeric specificity.