Quote from taowave:
Longterm studies of the value of TA are pretty pitiful. Quoting your resume does not change this. It is not about credentials and belief. It is about the validity or not of TA. You have said little so far that has pushed this forward.
"Rcanfeil,
Do you honestly think the studies you are finding are worth the paper they are written on??? "
Well, should I take the opinion of an anonymous poster compared to pretty much the mainstream research on TA, performed over decades by a large number of institutions?
"Wake up...Go to the major Hedge Funds,especially market netural,and see how much the partners will divulge regarding their traders.If its a successful strategy,you get absolutely nothing from them,and I can assure you there are no "LONG TERM" studies..."
Well, should people take the opinion of those from who "absolutely nothing" can be understood regarding their methods, or others who openly post exhaustive research that shows little value of TA?
"I have managed long short traders who have at most 5 losing days per year.Their trade is 100% automated,and positions are not carried overnight.It is technical in nature,but not as you naively think T.A is.But it is technical."
You seem honest, but this is too nebulous. Few of the people here in ET land work on a trading floor for their bread. I worked on a large IB trading floor, but ET folks claim to be mostly home traders. But the problem remains, that only testimonial evidence ever seems to get into this to defend TA. And as I posted several times before, the fact that testimony cannot be examined to eliminate for many other factors limits this. Large financial institutions have many advantages, as I suspect market making, arbitrage and other things are involved in a company's profitability. Not to mention wealth management, brokerage and other things adding to the pot.
[/B]