TA - Objective or Psychological Skill?

In your defense Market Surfer. I do believe you are sincere in your beliefs.

With that being said. Sorry for attacking your beliefs in a non constructive manner. With previous posts here and on your open topic discussion.
 
look what I told surf in 2009



http://elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=2634648&highlight=moving+average#post2634648



"
11-09-09 03:41 PM
One question - have any of you taken a daily chart of the dow and put a 20 ema and 50 ema on it.

Look at it for the last two years.

If that is random - I guess that fact that I closed out a trade up 8 percent instead of down 85 was due to the fact my brain tricked me into see a pattern that has been working for years.

I really enjoyed reading about the brain and how we interpret signals around us - but I think you all a refusing to see that patterns which do exist.

seriously put up the 50 ema - look at all the times the market bounced at tell me that market is random.

Please - use your very best argument.

I would love to read it."




Quote from NoDoji:

Surf, I'm curious about something. If you believe there's no way to predict the odds of a directional price move based on the technical analysis of what price has been doing, then why do you think certain patterns repeat so much more often than they fail?

I'm looking at a daily chart of the ES going back to June 2012 and I see price pull back down to the rising 50-day moving average on 6 consecutive occasions and result in a directional move of 50 handles or more without closing below that 50EMA, meaning very low risk for significant reward.

How is it a pattern can repeat that often without a fake-out or "ambush" or outright failure?
More...
 
NoDoji, I would like to look at the charts you mentioned that you have posted, but where to start looking in over 8000 posts! Are they in a particular thread?
 
Quote from Mr Super Trader:

In your defense Market Surfer. I do believe you are sincere in your beliefs.

With that being said. Sorry for attacking your beliefs in a non constructive manner. With previous posts here and on your open topic discussion.
More...



No need to apologies brother. I have deep respect for anyone who makes a living trading. I am only attacking ideas, not people as I consider all market players friends. With that said, I want my ideas attacked and challenged. It's the only way to further our knowledge. Best, surf

PS-- same respect to you ms doji.
 
Quote from jack hershey:

Hi rask and corn.

Please consider logic.

It is a good idea to restrict proofs to what is logically possible.


I sometimes imagine what ET could be like if there was a rule set for participating in a cooperative manner.
More...
not logically possible,that would be like everyone getting long at the right spot and selling and turning short again at the right spot all in unison like a school of fish

as far as this thread,if you used the ta data across a few correlating ( djt ,djia and spx for example)markets and got the same signals ,it would remain objective
 
Quote from marketsurfer:

No, it's not and can not be predictive. Even the MTA disagrees with you ( to the best of my knowledge). If it was predictive, why wouldn't the super computers that search non stop for such patterns, find them, exploit them and cause them to cease being predictive?
More...
Surf, you crack me up. :D

You hear "super computers" and you immediately think "artificial intelligence."

Sorry, bub, AI is still a long ways off.

The mundane fact remains is that computers, including supercomputers (it's one word, surf, and so is nonstop), are no smarter than their programmers. The rule Garbage In Garbage Out is still large and in charge. Supercomputers don't "make connections", i.e., recognize patterns that the programmers are not smart enough to make and successfully code themselves.

Stop worshipping at the altar of supercomputers, they are false gods.
 
Quote from kut2k2:

Surf, you crack me up. :D

You hear "super computers" and you immediately think "artificial intelligence."

Sorry, bub, AI is still a long ways off.

The mundane fact remains is that computers, including supercomputers (it's one word, surf, and so is nonstop), are no smarter than their programmers. The rule Garbage In Garbage Out is still large and in charge. Supercomputers don't "make connections", i.e., recognize patterns that the programmers are not smart enough to make and successfully code themselves.

Stop worshipping at the altar of supercomputers, they are false gods.
More...

The predictors was written in 1991 and UBS believed there was enough validity to the predictive power of supercomputers way back then to purchase the firm/technology. Imagine how far things have progressed.

What about genetic evolving predatory algorithms that are able to morph depending on the market nvironmnt? Sounds pretty impressive to me.
 
Quote from marketsurfer:

The article was deemed not even worthy of comment. I believe TA is useful to design a context from which to make decisions, not as a decision making tool itself. TA is illusitrative not predictive, therefore, if is not predictive, why would random entries have any less of a chance for success than non predictive TA entries? There is a major fatal flaw in the "logic" behind TA. Think about it seriously, you know i make sense>

surf
More...

Surf,

I know your debate tactics. I've never debated with you about science versus art (your typical past replies). I don't debate with you about illustration versus prediction. My statements have been the exact same each and every year here at ET.

* There are profitable traders that has TA as a key component of their trading plan.

* There are profitable traders that have shown verification that they are profitable while using TA. You have verified such yourself via T. Sykes. A trader that has never stated in any of his videos he uses TA for illustrative purpose only.

* There are traders that say they use TA and nothing else. I do not believe such is possible.

Therefore, please stop replying to me with the same junk argument that you have with others as if I walk around here saying I use TA all by itself. Simply, you do not make any sense to me because your replies do not involve anything I've debated with you about.

Losing traders try to use TA all by itself and nothing else. Tons of journal threads here at TA involving such. In the end, the trader eventually admits he/she was either not properly capitalized, no discipline, poor trade management, poor money management, no trading plan, didn't backtest their trading plan that has TA as one of the components or some other typical blowup reason.

Profitable traders that us TA have other components in their trading plan that on any given trading day...will be more important than TA or less important. Yet, the components work well together in the decision making process. Sports Analogy, disrupt the chemistry of any successful team and you'll have a losing team, mediocre team or a team that doesn't achieve its goals (e.g. take a look at the collapse of the Oklahoma City Thunder NBA basketball team in the playoffs).

Can a trader be profitable without TA ?

Yes, I know such is possible because I have close personal trading pals that do not use TA. I also have friends that use TA and they are profitable but TA is just one of their tools...on some days its not the most important tool behind their profits and on other days it is the most important tool behind their profits.

Regardless, your debates or arguments should be aimed at automation traders. In fact, I've never seen you debate here at ET with any automation traders about TA...did I miss something. :confused:

Yet, ironically, you still debate with discretionary traders that obviously isn't using TA and nothing else...why. :confused:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top