You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Technical Analysis Doesn't Work
- Thread starter rcanfiel
- Start date
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
Quote from Landis82:
You are sadly mistaken my friend.
I, as well as many others have used simple fib retracements for the past 25 years and found them to be most significant, and helpful in providing support/resistant levels.
It is called buy the dip, sell the rally. Fib retracements have been tested as no more useful than other retracement levels.
If you wish to publicize proof to the contrary, be my guest, but I suspect you will be unable to follow through with other than more anecdotes.
But for some bizarre reason, you don't believe that PRICE has anything to do with TA.
The only conclusion I can come to with this statement is that you don't really like to grasp what you read.
Quote from Thunderdog:
Excuse me? Do you think I am looking to learn here?
Why would anyone ever accuse you of trying to learn anything? You think you already know everything
Forgive me, and kindly permit me this observation: you have come across as entirely oblivious to the salient issues of the exchange you are referring to. Coupled with your dismissive arrogance, you present yourself as an asshole.
I imagine you looking at your lexicon to extract multisyllabic semantics, the majority of which I remain suspicious that your reach exceeds your grasp. In conclusion when frenetically stringing similars together, kindly tip the temporal lobe of your apparently limited cranium, with the resultant motion of thermogenic, crystalline silicates groundwards towards the opposing side (ie, You appear to be thumbing through your dictionary to pick words that you falsely think give you an air of knowledge; In future attempts, will you kindly tip your head and let the hot sand run to the other side)
Quote from rcanfiel:
Now, would you consider this as slinging mud, or is this another academic witticism that spares you from being guilty of the thing you accuse others?
If you are going to quote me at least have the decency not to alter my text. You added the italics for emphasis which is despicable.
This statement was not made to you or concerns you. It isn't "slinging mud" it is a simple question? I know that communication is hard for you to understand but statements made with your name at the beginning are for you.
You sound very intelligent. I am a believer in Technical Analysis. I have seen its application make traders TONS of money.
For me TA gives me tendencies, high probability opportunities. That is all I can hope for, situations where the odds are shifted into my favor. And those tendencies professional traders have been profitably exploiting for a long time.
I'm not a smart as most, but I equate it to Football. The masterful coaches, the Bellicheks, the Parcells, the Dungys, they are masters of tendencies and probabilities. And they react accordingly to their opponent.
Bellichek is the guru of measuring tendencies of the opponent's offense, and taking away their bread and butter. He puts his players in positions to be successful on the field better than anyone in the game, in my opinion.
Parcells is the ultimate field position and possession manager, basing his decision making on years of historical data and probabilities of success based on time of possession, field position, and turnovers. Dungy, and all his disciples, brought back the Cover 2 defense into prominence and brought a Championship to Indy by making the Defense better and toning down the offense.
I got off the topic a bit, training camp is around the corner and this year I'm ready with the NFL Network.
My point, the goal is to make money in trading. Whatever works for you works for you. Hopefully whatever it is it gives you the advantage necessary to make money consistently.
For me Technical Analysis is the way for me. It has worked for me dabbling in personal investments and I intend to have it work as I enter full-time trading.
I will not criticize anyone else's system. As long as it works, go for it. That's like trying to convince you that my religion is better than yours. Whatever works, I'm open to discussion and new ideas.
For me TA gives me tendencies, high probability opportunities. That is all I can hope for, situations where the odds are shifted into my favor. And those tendencies professional traders have been profitably exploiting for a long time.
I'm not a smart as most, but I equate it to Football. The masterful coaches, the Bellicheks, the Parcells, the Dungys, they are masters of tendencies and probabilities. And they react accordingly to their opponent.
Bellichek is the guru of measuring tendencies of the opponent's offense, and taking away their bread and butter. He puts his players in positions to be successful on the field better than anyone in the game, in my opinion.
Parcells is the ultimate field position and possession manager, basing his decision making on years of historical data and probabilities of success based on time of possession, field position, and turnovers. Dungy, and all his disciples, brought back the Cover 2 defense into prominence and brought a Championship to Indy by making the Defense better and toning down the offense.
I got off the topic a bit, training camp is around the corner and this year I'm ready with the NFL Network.
My point, the goal is to make money in trading. Whatever works for you works for you. Hopefully whatever it is it gives you the advantage necessary to make money consistently.
For me Technical Analysis is the way for me. It has worked for me dabbling in personal investments and I intend to have it work as I enter full-time trading.
I will not criticize anyone else's system. As long as it works, go for it. That's like trying to convince you that my religion is better than yours. Whatever works, I'm open to discussion and new ideas.
Quote from rcanfiel:
Do I come across as though I know everything? Hardly. I'm the first to admit when I'm wrong. However, I have contempt for those who exhibit both ignorance and arrogance. It is you who claims to know everything with your blanket pronouncements, not I. And as for your nonsensical diatribe that followed, it only confirms my initial assessment of you: asshole.Quote from Thunderdog:
Excuse me? Do you think I am looking to learn here?
Why would anyone ever accuse you of trying to learn anything? You think you already know everything
Forgive me, and kindly permit me this observation: you have come across as entirely oblivious to the salient issues of the exchange you are referring to. Coupled with your dismissive arrogance, you present yourself as an asshole.
I imagine you looking at your lexicon to extract multisyllabic semantics, the majority of which I remain suspicious that your reach exceeds your grasp. In conclusion when frenetically stringing similars together, kindly tip the temporal lobe of your apparently limited cranium, with the resultant motion of thermogenic, crystalline silicates groundwards towards the opposing side (ie, You appear to be thumbing through your dictionary to pick words that you falsely think give you an air of knowledge; In future attempts, will you kindly tip your head and let the hot sand run to the other side)
Quote from ProfLogic:
If you are going to quote me at least have the decency not to alter my text. You added the italics for emphasis which is despicable.
you find someone italicizing the portion which is ? "Despicable" Are you that fragile?
This statement was not made to you or concerns you.
You claimed I sling a lot of mud. I am pointing out you do the same thing. I guess I will have to continue doing it, as you seem so oblivious.
It isn't "slinging mud" it is a simple question?
yea, right
I know that communication is hard for you to understand but statements made with your name at the beginning are for you.
Was that more mud-slinging?
Now about your errors earlier which you continue to ignore and which you said point them out and to which I did and to which you continue to ignore.
Since apparently, you don't consider it slinging mud when couched in "Professor Logic" academic terminology, I can only say that you are severely lacking in spite of the puffery you attempt to gather into your nest.
If you are going to quote me at least have the decency not to alter my text. You added the italics for emphasis which is despicable.
you find someone italicizing the portion which is ? "Despicable" Are you that fragile?
This statement was not made to you or concerns you.
You claimed I sling a lot of mud. I am pointing out you do the same thing. I guess I will have to continue doing it, as you seem so oblivious.
It isn't "slinging mud" it is a simple question?
yea, right
I know that communication is hard for you to understand but statements made with your name at the beginning are for you.
Was that more mud-slinging?
Now about your errors earlier which you continue to ignore and which you said point them out and to which I did and to which you continue to ignore.
Since apparently, you don't consider it slinging mud when couched in "Professor Logic" academic terminology, I can only say that you are severely lacking in spite of the puffery you attempt to gather into your nest.
The Premise of the Title of this article "This is a thread dedicated to the principle that Technical Analysis (by and large) has little to no value. " is wrong?
Who decides the value of the TA? What is the value based on? Supposing I love Technical Analysis and just want to have fun analyzing whatever I want using TA, then it is very valuable to me because I am having fun doing what I want to do.
If your point is that TA has little or no value in Trading, you are more specific but your premise is still wrong. Who decides the value? How do you decide the value? And what is the value based on?
If your reason for starting this thread is that TA alone cannot make you profitable in your Trades, you have a valid point which very few on this Forum will argue with. Trading is very simple but has many variables that make it complex.
The simultaneous culmination of these variables ....... Self-Management, Money Management, Risk Management, Portfolio Management (which may include TA) and Ruthless Discipline leads to successful trading and profits.
In conclusion, I'll state the following. TA and Fundamental Analysis have their places in Trading for those who love to use them. The psychological uplift of using them alone can give confidence to a Trader. That is why Placebos work in place of medicine.
Your beliefs create your reality. Let's not condemn what other's believe.
Who decides the value of the TA? What is the value based on? Supposing I love Technical Analysis and just want to have fun analyzing whatever I want using TA, then it is very valuable to me because I am having fun doing what I want to do.
If your point is that TA has little or no value in Trading, you are more specific but your premise is still wrong. Who decides the value? How do you decide the value? And what is the value based on?
If your reason for starting this thread is that TA alone cannot make you profitable in your Trades, you have a valid point which very few on this Forum will argue with. Trading is very simple but has many variables that make it complex.
The simultaneous culmination of these variables ....... Self-Management, Money Management, Risk Management, Portfolio Management (which may include TA) and Ruthless Discipline leads to successful trading and profits.
In conclusion, I'll state the following. TA and Fundamental Analysis have their places in Trading for those who love to use them. The psychological uplift of using them alone can give confidence to a Trader. That is why Placebos work in place of medicine.
Your beliefs create your reality. Let's not condemn what other's believe.
Quote from Thunderdog:
Do I come across as though I know everything? Hardly. I'm the first to admit when I'm wrong. However, I have contempt for those who exhibit both ignorance and arrogance. It is you who claims to know everything with your blanket pronouncements, not I. And as for your nonsensical diatribe that followed, it only confirms my initial assessment of you: asshole.
I have contempt for a knothead who goes off into a rage that need to try and scrape out every long word he could think of to try and impress. It rather showed your stupidity in spades...
Regarding my appendix, I was afraid you wouldn't grasp it, so thus the simpler form in parentheses. Since my master's thesis was based in linguistics, I know it was quite well-formed. Your response is akin to a child sticking out its tongue.
You portray yourself as reasonable, but you are little better than the other ET netizens...
- Status
- Not open for further replies.